Researching the History of Education

Abstract

16 Amongst non-historians in University Education Departments and Colleges of Education, the study of Educational History has, for a long time, been widely regarded as being of minor importance and of little relevance to the needs of beginning teachers faced with shortages of resources, rebellious pupils and a cynical public. Amongst University historians it has aroused great and continuous scepticism; 'a chronicle devoid of meaning', in the words of Professor Arthur Bestor (1953).' The historian of education traditionally therefore has stood uneasily between the worlds of educational social scientists and 'academic' historians, rejected by both and even now in the age of the 'New History of Education' misunderstood and judged by criteria largely inapplicable. The purpose of this paper is to indicate the origins of this traditional situation, the renewal of the subject since the late 1950s and to explain some of the problems which the Historian of Education looks at and the ways in which he undertakes his research. The basic unwitting mistake of the early pioneers and protagonists of this subject appears to have been that their emphasis lay in the History of Education rather than upon the History of Education. Furthermore Education at the beginning of the century was interpreted in a most narrow fashion. It was concerned largely with the writings of early philosophers and the legislative and administrative arrangements which led to the establishment of voluntary and state elementary schools. It was highly factual and quite unable, given its early state of development, to bridge the gap between the aims of philosophers, legislators and administrators and the actual achievements of mass schooling and its impact upon society. Furthermore it was ahistorical in distorting the historical data of education to glorify deliberately and retrospectively the early pioneers of schooling and in doing so to seek to inspire forthcoming generations of teachers. 'It imparts an exalted idea of the teachers' profession through inciting reverence for the great teachers who have left their impression on mankind; ... it displays before us principles and methods the efficacy of which has been demonstrated by the accumulated testimony of ages', wrote W.H. Maxwell, future school superintendent of New York, in 1891.2 Writing more than 30 years later another American, Henry Neumann, demonstrated what little progress had been made in formulating objectives and constructing a theoretical framework for the study and teaching of the History of Education. Neumann acknowledged the pressure being mounted by opponents of this 'time-honoured subject' to have it replaced by more 'essential studies'. He attacked the methodology of teaching the History of Education in Teachers' Colleges and acknowledged that it could not help to solve immediate classroom problems. Despite these serious objections Neumann relied upon the original justification that teachers need to be 'inspired and illuminated by high and broad outlooks, visions and ideals'. It could, he believed, add a new dimension the past to a teachers range of consultations; it was easier to isolate one's objectives by first looking at less complex societies; the past he believed explained the present; finally an understanding of the educational debt we owe other nations and other societies would help to eliminate nationalism and racialism. The History of Education' Neumann concluded 'is replete with values and especially ethical values which far 9utweigh the importance of immediate technical efficiency'. Thus not only was Neumann discounting the practical values of the subject but was also, perhaps unwittingly, perpetuating its isolation from the mainstream of historical research. Nowhere in his article did he consider philosophies of history, the nature of historical explanation, the diffi. culties of formulating research questions, or training in historical method and the problems related to the collection and use of source materials. Rather he was advocating a highly selective and assertive History of Educational Philosophy. Despite some fine pioneering writing in Britain, the position of History of Education in Colleges and U.D.E.'s was perhaps only marginally better than in North America. Professor Brian Simon has drawn attention to the writings of Professor Sir Fred Clarke in 1940.4 Clarke believed that the true role of Historians of Education should be to unravel the social and historical influences which have helped to shape both the schools and what is taught inside them. Even earlier than Clarke, Sir Michael Sadler has warned that those who were concerned with the young should be aware that educational outcomes were not synonymous with the aims of educators. 'A school is not a closed chamber shut out against all outside things' he wrote. 'Those who control schools cannot withstand the spirit of the age. Currents of outside opinion, wordless it may be, but real, pass through colleges and schools as the wind ... Many influences meet and fluctuate and recur around each one of us ... Little of this is conscious, formulated or prescribed ... Flakes of influence fall upon the mind, colour its disposition, influence its judgement ... cold currents or hot from this speculative interest or that; slow change in the standard of judging what is right and wrong in public affairs; the push upon the mind of some strong current in national feeling; a great crisis in national history'.5 While not directing his words specifically to Historians of Education, Sir Michael was unconsciously pointing towards a new definition of Education which recognised that influences outside the classroom had an impact, possibly as great or even greater than those from within, upon the development of cultural values and standards. This redefinition of 'Education' and subsequently the just concerns of Historians of the subject came not from Britain but in the wave of the American 'Great Debate' in the 1950's. Acquiring its initial impetus from McCarthyism and the technological threat from the USSR which culminated in the orbiting of Sputnik 1 in 1957, a widely-based attack was launched upon aims, subject-matter and teaching methods especially those of the so-called progressives. The skills, standards and very value of the American High School was called into question and, by association, the Colleges and Universities with produced its teachers. Historians of Education could not avoid these basic and crucial questions being raised constantly about the purposes and performances of the common school, since many had been for long isolated sycophants of the institution and as such the targets of fierce criticism from University historians. In the midst of this debate the Ford Foundation sponsored a Committee on the Role of Education in American History, on which there sat not one recognised Historian of Education. In 1957 the Committee attacked the narrow notion that the History of Education was the History of Administration and Schools. 'Any persons living in the United States is shaped by a flood of influences or forces, sweeping in upon him from nature, government, the farm, the factory, the region, family life, the periodical press, advertising, the churches, libraries, clubs, schools, etc. Of these forces some affect the mind and character only accidentally or incidentally, but others are set in motion deliberately to bring about or prevent change. Education in