EDUCATION BY WORK
By PERCY DUNSHEATH
WHEN the White Paper on Education Reconstruction appeared last year, and official intentions to remedy the disappoint- ment of 1939 regarding the raising of the school-leaving age were expressed, there were those who asked whether that magic phrase "15 at once and 16 later " really did represent the correct solution. They asked for a dispassionate study,' but political parties were committed, objectivity vanished, groups of industrialists wrote to The Times supporting the proposal, and the Bill became an Act. Compulsory schooling was extended to 15 from April 1st, 1945, and it was provided that as soon thereafter as practicable it should be raised to 16 by an Order in Council. But the inevitability of gradualness has again overtaken us, and that fateful day, April 1st, 1945, is abandoned ; the teachers cannot be found, nor will adequate buildings be available.
During the years over which public opinion in favour of raising the school-leaving age has been built up a collateral activity of great relevance has made rapid progress, and in the White Paper the principle of compulsory part-time education beyond the school- leaving age has been officially established. For the first time ih educational history continuity of education has been given the position it deserves. The Act recognises the movement which was already developing voluntarily in industry, and makes provision for the compulsory part-time attendance at an educational institution up to the age of 18 of all persons over compulsory school age not already receiving suitable instruction or exempt for other reasons. This part-time education involves attendance for one whole day a week or its equivalent, and the date of commencement is to be determined by an Order. in Council.
If we examine the many books and pamphlets on educational re- construction which have appeared during the past few years, in- cluding the official pronouncements of the political parties, we must first of all be impressed by the unanimity of opinion that the age must be raised—at once to 15 and soon to 16. If, however, we are honest we must conclude that most of the pronouncements are repeti- tion ; the claim has been pressed with conviction, and frequently with heat, but only od the basis of a limited analysis of the problem. The argument, when found, seems to rest on three considerations. (a) that for psychological reasons it is improper to bring a child of 14 into contact with the world owing to its immature mental and physical state ; (b) the need to prevent the complete severance of the vast majority of children from educational facilities on leaving school, and (c) the need' for longer time to complete what is so obviously incomplete at 14. The argument in support of conten- tion (a) is weak when we consider that children spend less than one-third of their waking hours in school, and that the experiences of vast numbers of them in home, street and cinema form such a preponderating influence. Considerations (b) and (c) are com- pletely met by compulsory part-time education after school-leaving. Many of the more desirable results of education—reliability, self- discipline, widening of interests and enthusiasm for serious pursuits, have been noticed where young people have been granted time off voluntarily by employers for the purpose. Part-time education
eliminates the break with schooling and cultural interests besides bringing in a good return on the education already received.
It is difficult to avoid criticism of the present whole-time school system, and the question naturally arises : what is the use of ex- tending whole-time schooling when the real problem is the low quality of the education already provided? Ask anyone who has led Army Discussion Groups what he thinks of the education system of this country as evidenced by such a cross-sectional view of society, and whether the tragic' situation would be better im- proved by giving more education of the same kind, or the same quantity of a better kind. If the State school-leaver at 14 could emerge with the equipment of factual knowledge, clarity of thought and expression and moral qualities which are common in the boy of the same age after the best type of preparatory school training this part of the case for keeping him longer would collapse. Rather should we say, then, spend the millions available on reducing the size of classes and improving both schools and teachers. We have only so much to spend, and whether we like it or not, economic factors do compel a choice between quality and duration of, State education.
There are three people to be considered in arriving at the correct age for abandoning whole-time schooling, the child, the parent and the employer. In •a democratic State the child can claim the best available, the best for his own needs and capacity, but both parents and employer arc compelled to view the matter in its economic light. On the one hand, food and clothes must be pur- chased, while, on the other, only services which have a sale value can be paid for. When the parent wishes his child to leave school to take up a highly paid dead-end occupation, he is woefully wrong ; so is the employer who asks for the cheapest labour at the earliest date ; the child suffers on both counts. How, then, can we meet the real economic demands and at the same time protect the child's interests ? The answer is to be found in part-time education. The transition from school to employment is a critical experience, and should be made less sudden than at present. By correct adjustment at this stage we should be able to abandon the conception of age at which education ceases, and substitute that of a fusion period, a gradual process.
If during the first year after whole-time schooling every young person could spend half his time in gainful employment and half under educational influence we should achieve much. The adoption of half-time fusion in place of a higher leaving-age would at one step provide solutions for many problems. It would meet the economic difficulty of the parent by providing a half-week's wage, which would exceed in amount any probable Government allowance and would save the taxpayer the cost of the allowance. It would give the employer an easy system. to operate, in which he would employ two boys per job sharing the wage of one. The educa- tionist would certainly benefit, in that he would be helped over the difficulties entailed in meeting the vast increase in buildings and staff. The number of new teachers required quickly would, by such a scheme, be reduced by something like 40,000, so enabling a higher quality to be selected. But; most important of all, the child would be better off ; it is common knowledge in industry how morale and stability improve when a boy or girl enters formal employment accompanied by part-time education under wise guidance.
The present difficulties in implementing the new Act will not disappear for some time to come ; good teachers are not made over- night. Let us, therefore, stand back from the wood and consider carefully the effect of this new tree—part-time education—which has grown into the scene through the efforts of a few enlightened employers since our ideas on the school-leaving age were first formed. It will be seen that in the half-time fusion year we have an excellent device for overcoming our present difficulties. Present progress need not be postponed, and a sure stepping-stone can be provided to help us over the next few years without in any way prejudicing future advances either in the raising of the school-leaving age or, far more important, in establishing continuity of education beyond that age. Now that the whole loaf is once again withheld, let us take the half ; it may even provide a better meal.
Previous page
