Tutored by Ben Greenman at The Glasgow School of Art and submitted on 6th January, 2012

thrallsa call for designers at the heart of education?

John Flitcroft

Are we in thrall to an education system no longer suitable for today’s students? What has led us here, and how do we escape?

written by John Flitcroft who studied

for his dissertation by Ben GreenmanThe Glasgow School of Art and was tutored

for a BDes (Hons) in Product Design at

this 8,571 word dissertation was

2

SYNOPSIS

This Dissertation presents the argument for designing the system of state education in the UK from

scratch. By looking at the history of the UK education system it highlights the lack of a grand plan, and

shows how the development of education has been irreversibly harmed by inthrallment to undesigned,

seemingly abstract and contemporarily unsuitable ideas, coupled with the suggestion that education

development has, until recently, rarely been free from crippling religious and political bias.

3

CONTENTS

Introduction

How the Education System just sort of happened

Celts, Romans, Countrymen

The Dirty Cities and the Good Queen

Educated by the Board

The National Curriculum to drive us forward

What does the National Curriculum endeavour to provide?

Success in its own eyes

Success in the eyes of its students

Success in the eyes of employers

Why have I told you this?

End notes

Bibliography

Books

Audio Visual

Reports

Web Resources

Appendix

Time line of selected Education Acts 1870-1989

4

5

5

8

9

14

14

15

16

17

18

19

22

22

22

23

23

24

24

4

INTRODUCTION

A common consensus amongst academics, and the population at large, is that the education system is

not delivering all that it should. Businesses complain that young people are illiterate and uneducated upon

leaving school, schools complain that the curriculum is prescriptive and restrictive and the government

dare not implement any long term plans for fear of them coming to fruition under another

administration. It is my primary contention that todays education system is falling short of providing the

skills and knowledge demanded of young people by society and businesses. I believe this not to be due to

poor teaching, but to a fundamental problem with the process used to create each development of the

education system and used to write every act. I will run through a brief history of the Education system,

showing how it was an undesigned and ungainly system to start with, and how this was compounded by

standardisation.

My second belief is that, through attempting to simplify the system without using an objective design

outlook, we have developed an organisation unknowingly in thrall to the assumptions and needs of the

mid-1800's. We can not hope to improve the education system until we have thrown off these baseless

beliefs and started designing from a clean slate.

This dissertation does not set out to say the education system must be changed. Its aim is to show

that the education system of today is undesigned. If we want the best out of the system, the best for our

young people and ultimately the best for society we need to reassess what education means, without being

in thrall to the current system, and design for that scenario. It may well be the case that our newly

designed system is very similar to the existing system. We cannot, however, assume this to be the case

until we have designed and checked.

5

HOW THE EDUCATION SYSTEM JUST SORT OF HAPPENED.As a term 'Education' covers all manner of sins. When you ask people to talk about their education

they will inevitably assume you mean their formal schooling. In an average year a student will spend 57

days worth of time under the supervision of teachers.1 The remaining 308 days worth of time are spent

in the care of their parents, but society as a whole overlooks this vast majority of their time as a part of

their education.

The impact of informal education is often curiously overlooked when discussing how a person was

educated. It is, however, integral to how a person views the world. It might be suggested that academic

knowledge is gained at school, whilst morals2 and vocational education begins at home.

Informal education is an entirely different ball park to formal education, for instance informal

education can be influenced through television and extra curricula activities, but it is difficult to assess and

control. It is formal education that this dissertation concerns itself with, though informal would make a

fascinating area of research.

What follows is a short history of education in Britain, as can be told in such a short space. It is

important to note, whilst reading through, that many of the decisions made very early on form the

foundation stones of todays education, particularly the Norman invasion of 1066. I have attempted to

prioritise the information I communicate and so some information has had to be excluded. It is

important to remember that the decisions made on education are made in the social context of the day

and that in the last 2000 years has seen many, many cultural shifts in Britain!

Celts, Romans, Countrymen

Prior to 597 we cannot say much about the system of formal education in Britain.3 We believe that

education as we might recognise the concept was brought to Britain by the Romans. We can only infer it,

by considering that before the Romans arrived we have no evidence of mass literacy, and indeed no

writings about the country at all, but the Romans left the country with a very literate population.4 We also

know that the Romans provided a form of education to many of the other the people that they

conquered, though we have no direct reference to the peoples of Britain.5 That last 100 years of the

Roman Empire also saw the first rise of Christianity in Britain. Christianity, as we will see again later,

traditionally propagates through communities by education. The fall of the Roman Empire saw the

Britons re-assert their cultural identity6 and reject much of the Roman culture, part of which was seen to

be Christianity. With Christianity forced out of the parts of Britain which the Romans had occupied

education seems to disappear for circa 180 years.

In 597 Christianity landed once again in Britain, coming in through the Kingdom of Kent with

Augustine (later of Canterbury). He had been sent by the pope to convert King Æthelberht, and to return

the Christianity to the other Kingdoms of Britain. Augustine successfully persuaded Æthelberht to

change his spiritual allegiances and then began to convert his subjects. To do so priests were needed to go

out and spread the word. Not only must they therefore learn what the word was, they must also learn a

whole new language, Latin. Schools were set up in some major cities and priests were trained to preach

6

and sent out to take care of local parishes. The system of education continued, with these priests being

expected to pick a local child to educate in the understanding that they too would become a priest.

Over the 700s Education began its long and incredibly slow devolvement from the church.7 Though

schools were still owned by the church and staffed by monks and clergy they began to amass enough

wealth to have some say over what they were doing and to what ends they were educating people. A

major step away from priestly-only education occurred in the 780s when Alcunion, the master at the

school of York, translated the Latin grammars in the native Germanic language and began to teach not in

the style of Latin rhetoric, but through the vernacular poetic and riddle based rhetoric.8 This step forward

had hardly gained a foothold when first the Kingdom of Mercia, and then the Scandinavian Invasions,

took Northumbria and York and formal education drops below the radar of history once again.9 We have

small evidences that formal education continued throughout the period of occupation, but they are

principally scribblings in the margins of earlier documents.10 What we do have is evidence of more and

more documents being translated in to vernacular languages11 which suggests, as these documents must

have had some audience that was not Latin or Scandinavian speaking, increasing literacy amongst the

local population, itself an indication of education.

Education returned in force once again with the Norman Invasions of 1066, which brought with it

not just Christianity but a system of schooling from France designed to control education as well as

controlling the activities of the church.12 The Normans granted charters to formalise schools and School

Masters, an occupation which became a profession distinct from that of priest. By 1200 there was a

distinct professional class of teachers and, though some links with the clergy were maintained, it is

believed the education system was more devolved from the church than it ever had been. The number of

teachers and their duties is difficult to pin down, as at the time they were often recorded as priests,

probably because of small ecclesiastical roles which many teachers did, as literate people were compelled

to, hold13.

As the 1200s continued teaching became a more respected profession, its moniker of acceptance

came when Kings and Bishops were seen to be providing the occasional lecture in towns, and education

became a much desired commodity. Teaching was suddenly a very desirable job. It was safe, respected and

very lucrative. Schooling expanded and became available to a wider and wider audience.

The early 1300s saw a rapid decline in the population of Britain, mostly down to a series of plagues

which culminated in the Black Death. This drop in population and the devastation that accompanied it

had a great effect on Britain though, as Nicholas Orme says, it is difficult to pin down what exactly

changed. The general population of Britain became very insular, and rejected the now dominant Norman

and Latin languages as people went back to the vernacular. This was reflected in the, now much smaller,

education community as over the next hundred years textbooks moved almost entirely into vernacular

languages.14

The early 15th century had education once again evolving further away from the church and then it

moved away from the crown. It became a largely independent entity funded by private individuals and, as

ever, by the students themselves. The Normans had recognised different 'levels' of schooling, based on

7

the different levels of priestly initiates, and saw the beginnings of a Grammar School system feeding into

Universities.15

The 16th century saw the reformation and the crown becoming once more firmly involved in

education. In switching the entire country from Catholic to Protestant as quickly as possible it had

become very important that the populace, in essence, knew what they were supposed to be doing. From

the viewpoint of Henry VIII this made education a very useful tool. School Masters were given what

could be described as the first curriculum. They were told to teach the children in their care 'simple

summaries of what to do and what to avoid, and to refrain from giving them books which might corrupt

their minds or their faith'16 A uniform method of teaching grammar was also established by the crown,

and spread across the nation within a year. The majority of schools were, however, still owned or

supported by Monasteries. The Monastic community were seen as very probable dissenters from the new

religion and the Disillusion of the Monasteries began. The process was not initially designed to spare

schools, or help those under monastic education to continue their learning out with the church and so the

schools fell with the monasteries. By 1540 all monastery schools were gone and about half of the

Grammar schools, traditionally backed financially by monasteries, also fell. In 1539 Henry VIII did pass a

bill through parliament to establish new schools in the old monastic buildings but it wasn't until five years

later that anything happened. In 1544 thirteen new Cathedral School were set up17. These schools could

be said to be the first ever state schools. The state-funded School Master was ordered to provide

education to all comers for free, according to a proscribed curriculum. The final years of Henry VIIIs

reign saw many more church schools set up, and chantry school set up as chantry land was confiscated

and gifted to various people on the condition of state schools being set up.18 These chantry schools ran in

this manner until 1548 when war on two fronts forced the crown to act to gain money. Chantry churches

and monastic property was once again confiscated, and this time sold off from under the feet of the new

schools. The State continued to fund existing education, and so those schools that weren't sold, mostly

Grammar Schools, survived.19

As the 17th Century wore on it seemed the times during which the aristocracy could maintain control

by force was fading and perhaps learning and trade would determine the hierarchy from now on. The

aristocracy began gifting and endowing schools as never before in order to educate their own and those

under them. The rise in British trade saw an increase in record keeping, another draw for creating a

literate population and workforce, and new money which was also put into educating the population.

Whilst 19th century politics was largely against education the working classes, the french revolution

was still fresh in the mind, but the working classes had continued developing a network of school funded

by philanthropic and local endeavours. The majority of funding was provided by endowments and gifts,

with the rest having to come out of the pockets of the parents.20 This lack of money provoked the

inevitable problem of a lack of teachers and even more so, a lack of educated teachers. Churches were

still the major source of schooling. Whilst they had initially educated only future priests they began to set

up general schools, teaching Reading, Writing, Arithmetic and, of course, the Christian faith. Girls could

8

also learn sewing and knitting, and boys where instructed in grammar21 and a trade.22 Sunday schools were

also set up and run by the church. They were very successful, with large voluntary attendance. They had a

huge draw in that they took place on the Sabbath and, as such, children who were required to have a full

time job could attend without losing earnings. By 1840 most workers had some form of literacy, and the

discussions in parliament turned from 'if working class students should be educated', to 'how'.23

If you were to look at the basic structure of education at this point in history you would recognise it

as being very similar to that of today, although with many more options within that basic structure.

The Dirty Cities and the Good QueenThe Industrial Revolution saw the population move into the towns and cities to work in factories and

mills, leaving behind their farms, local parishes and rural lives. Rather than working along side their

seniors in the fields or in trade a new class of urban youth were put to work in factories, down mines, up

chimneys and anywhere there were tight, grubby jobs that a child was capable of doing.24

Between 1796 and 1833 various people within government began to contemplate the idea of the state

becoming more involved with education. These contemplations took the form of a few suggestions for

debate in parliament and even a debate that made it to the Lords. There was one study commissioned in

1816 by parliament into the possible audience and desire for mass education. It tentatively reported that it

found 'a very large number of poor Children are wholly without means of instruction, although their

parents seem to be generally desirous of obtaining that advantage for them'25 Though nothing tangible

came out of these investigations and suggestions it was the first sign that the laissez-faire government

might be prepared to become involved in social matters.

1833 saw the first government investment in Education, £20,000 to fund the building of school

houses. The funds were controlled and awarded by the Treasury, as setting up a commission or

department to do so was seen as a path to setting a dangerous precedence analogous to writing a blank

cheque. The next government involvement came not from the radical MPs who had been trying to push

the government into action, but was instigated by a memo from the newly crowned Queen Victoria.

A series of parallel social movements also began to occur which started the long and drawn out

process of the forming of the modern state education system. Forward thinking Industrialists, like Sir

Titus Salt built model villages for their workers, which were designed to create a healthy, happy workforce.

In Salt's model village, Saltaire, he put a school, recognising that an educated workforce might bear more

fruit than an uneducated one. This response was not universally seen as a good one. Other Industrialists

resisted the idea of having a more educated workforce for a variety of reasons, from worrying that

educating people who were happy to do undesirable jobs might make them believe they were capable of

greater things and thus lower morale, to the concept that educating their workforce would make them

able to think, which is an intrinsically dangerous thing for those in the lower classes to be able to do.26

Simultaneously rich philanthropists, like Baroness Angela Burdett-Coutts began campaigning against

cruelty to children, and child labour.27 Similarly they began funding schools in their own right, wherever

they saw the need for such institutions. This saw, for the fist time in nearly 1800 years, formal places of

9

education that were neither owned, funded, staffed or run by the Church, though religion was still high

on the curriculum, indeed it was still central in life. Eventually the Government was shamed into passing

legislation like the Factories Act of 1847 which limited the working hours of children until child labour

was eventually eliminated.

By limiting the working hours of children, the government created a problem for itself with just what

to do with all these now unengaged children. The answer provided itself in the Elementary Education

Act of 1870 which created the framework for the compulsory education of all children between 5 and 12

in England and Wales. The act therefore, unwittingly, later became the foundation stone of a modern

state education system. The government had to ensure that all these children were receiving some form

of education, and to do that needed to ensure that enough schools were provided.

Schools were being built, as they had been for a very long time, by a variety of unconnected

organisations, churches, schools, councils etc. This diverse selection of founders and the social

perspective of the funders and organisation provided a great time for different educational philosophies

and methods, allowing for experimentation with a supply of fresh slates, and no central authority to

enforce standards. This was truly the start of something, with a limited amount of preconception, about

certain aspects of education, and it allowed people to experiment. The education of children was not

necessarily thought important by some providers, but it was a legal duty and so had to be done. It was

therefore important to do it cheaply, and provide great economies of scale. Whilst many creative, unusual

and seemingly effective education methods where tried, mostly in schools funded by wealthy

philanthropists, the ones that made it through were the ones that could educate the most children, with

the fewest teachers using the least resources.

It was here that the hierarchy of subjects, now standard in every school in the western world was laid

down.28 Science, Maths and English29 are at the top, and the Arts are always at the bottom. This system

makes sense for the Industrial Victorians. Science had got them to where they were, masters of the largest

empire on earth, surely it would continue to pave the way forward. What they needed was a trained

workforce who thought logically, and could build and adapt. These fact based subjects are also easy to

teach (to the level required in the education of the time) by repetition, which became the method of

choice in most schools. Even with the technological revolution under way this fact based approach was

attacked from the very beginnings. Hard Times, by Charles Dickens, was published in 1854, well before

the Elementary Education Act, and satirises the fact-first education that was taking a hold of the country.

Educated by the BoardWriting about the structure of education after 1900 becomes increasingly difficult as the account

become less a matter of historical reflection and more a politically charged description of the

contemporary. A large number of books were written in the 1970s and 80s as Britain geared up to the

National Curriculum, and these provide some interesting insights into the system of the day. They are,

however, very much politically motivated. A huge number of reports into education have been

commissioned and an equally large number of acts affecting education have been actioned since what is

seen as the act that laid the foundation for the modern system, that of 1899. To help show a selection of

10

the more contentious reports acts, or those which had the greatest impacts, I have used chapters 2 and 3

of The Education Fact File, by June Stratham Et Al, to create Appendix 1, a timeline. I will combine this

timeline with two more detailed case studies of the education system, one in 1953, and one in 1969.30The first forty-five years of education in the twentieth century was really made possible by the 1899

board of education act which, though at the time deemed rather an anticlimax, allowed for education to

be managed by a default body, rather than have aspects of it controlled by semi-autonomous

organisations.

The period up to the first world war saw several important reforms being built on the foundations of

the 1899 act. The Balfour Act (1902) was the first major education act. It set out to begin to counter, as

Balfour said, that 'England is behind all continental rivals in education'31. The act focused on the

centralisation of teacher training, which caused a hot dispute between the government and both the

churches who until this point had had a monopoly on teacher training and considered, possibly correctly,

this to be a move towards a secular education system, controlled and inspected by a third party. It also

created Local Education Authorities (LEAs) which formed the organisational hierarchy through which

education is controlled to the present day. LEAs are responsible for the expenditure of their budget,

within defined perimeters, by the schools under their influence. The run up to World War 1 saw LEAs

authorised to spend money on school meals and to provide medical inspections in elementary schools.

This period also saw the number of different types of schools increase to the point which there were in

excess of 16 types of school available around England and Wales, creating an ever more complex

system32. The war time period saw only a few further developments, ensuring that education was free

during elementary level to all students, and removing all exceptions to compulsory education at this level,

and allowing LEAs to extend spending on secondary education.33In immediate post-war Britain the labour government set about creating the welfare state under which

we still live. They set up both the NHS and the modern education system, building institutions so

intrinsic to what we think of as 'Britishness' that no government after has dared to try and bring them

down entirely. The reforms to education came in the form of The Butler Act34 which essentially replaced

all education legislation preceding it, and created the system we would, by and large, recognise today.35 It

formalised a unified school system, taking children through from when they were five to their 15th year in

a progression of educational levels. The Act also created the triplicate secondary school system which

dominated education in England and Wales for the next thirty years. A major section of the bill, in time

spent in debate, was the guidelines surrounding religion in schools. The aim was to provide all students

with Religious Education whilst not enforcing any particular religion upon students. Religion was to be a

matter handled at home, allowing schools to have an intake with many denominations. The initial wording

of the bill would have meant that voluntary schools36 could not choose intake or teachers on the basis of

religion. Because bills must pass through the Lords before becoming law they would need to gain the

support of the Lords Spiritual, the 26 most senior bishops of the Church of England, who carry the

vested interests of the Church of England and would not let a bill pass with such wording.37 The Catholic

11

church, whilst not represented in the Lords, had huge influence purely by being a major educator.38 Butler

struck a deal, he pledged to allow religion, albeit on non-denominational lines, to remain at the centre of

school life, in exchange for having a larger LEA representation on school governing bodies39. By putting

LEAs into this position in voluntary schools the Butler Act did arguably more to unify, rather than just

centralise, the education system.

Schooling in the early 1950s education system had just undergone the first of two trials, the return of

children whose schooling had been interrupted by the war had come back and passed through it, and now

they were looking at the oncoming wave of the baby-boomer generation.

State education existed on three levels: Primary (Infants40 and Juniors41), Secondary and Higher

Education. Infant and Junior schools were beginning to move away from traditional rote teaching and

into a more 'free activity' style teaching method.42 Though this was far from across the board. School

buildings were also beginning to change. Whilst most children were still educated in large Victorian

buildings43 many in industrial centres were damaged by the heavy bombing of the Second World War.

These schools were replaced by new 'long, low and light' buildings44.

Since 1944 the triplicate system had dominated state education, and the whole thing pivoted round a

period of examination in a students final year at junior school. The eleven-plus examination was used to

decide if a child should go to a traditional grammar school or to a new secondary modern. This was

supposed to be a real breakthrough in education provision but, as had happened throughout education

history, it didn't work as it should. The idea was to divide academic and non-academic students and place

them into different teaching environments from which they would get the best benefit. In principal this

was a great idea, and a genuine breakthrough. Unfortunately the concept ran into several major barriers,

both of its own making and of public perception, that it didn't anticipate, and couldn't recover from.

People knew the Grammar Schools, they knew the heritage and the history of the schools. Academic

learning was also viewed as the measure of educational success. Thus failing the eleven-plus and going to

a new secondary modern school looked less like an alternative route than a failure. You seemed to have

been labelled a write off.45 Because the Secondary Moderns and Secondary Technical Schools were

suppose to deliver a different form of education (non-academic) they initially had less of a focus on the

three Rs, instead looking to develop this knowledge outside of formal lessons. This lack of focus

appeared to parents to be an abandoning of those subjects which we all see as being so intrinsic to

education and re-enforced the image of a failure.

The mass reforms of the 40s created an environment in which old lessons and educational passions

were covered over and lost. The 50s and 60s saw relatively little government involvement and

development, as the legislation creating LEAs had provided an unexpected level of autonomy for schools.

Coupled with the remnants of the laissez-faire policies under which the initial education acts had been

created this meant the government had very little control of its own education system. It could offer and

withdraw money, but that was about it.46

A wedge was also driving itself deeper into the teaching profession between those that taught in

Secondary Modern and Techs and those that taught at Grammar Schools. Caused, again, to some extent

12

by the public view of Grammar Schools being the place of knowledge and valued academic learning and

unions being set up specifically for one set of teachers or the other47. This, coupled by the ambivalence

towards educational development in the teaching profession caused a slump in internal drive for

educational development.

Political change did, however, suggest that another great educational reform was about to happen.

The Labour Government sent out a Circular in 196548 declaring the Governments intent to end the

triplicate system and replace it with a comprehensive system.

In 1969 the state of education at Junior level was in much the same structure as twenty years

previously, with the now much more extended nursery section. Demand greatly outstripped the supply

when it came to under 5s. Nurseries and Nursery Schools could only cope with so many children, and

Day Nurseries (establishments owned by the Department for health, not education) were also full. The

government had recently confirmed it would not be building or funding any more Nursery

establishments in the near future. Fortunately, in a move harking back to the Dame Schools of the Middle

ages, Parents have got together and formed the new Play-Group Association extending the under 5s care

in a formal manner.49

Infant and Junior Schools were paired together under the name of Primary Schools. With Primary

schools housing the two departments generally under one roof, though in some instances they existed as

two campuses that were closely linked. Class size was the debate of the day, with concerns from every

front that an average of 32.7 students were in every class, with 15,000 classes having 41-50 pupils.50

Despite this Infant schools are now championing free play and successfully passing classes on up to the

Junior schools with nearly three quarters of pupils are literate and numerate.51

Junior Schools developed a rigid timetable and utilise streaming across the board, geared towards the

eleven-plus examination. This makes the eleven-plus the focus of three years education further deepening

both the stigma associated with failing it, and the pressure from home to pass it, despite Secondary

Modern Schools now routinely putting students in for GCE examinations. Streaming was causing some

consternation. Whilst teachers rated it as a very effective way of splitting a class to support both the

strongest and weakest academically, parents were less in favour. Parents argued that streaming decided at

age 7 who would pass the eleven-plus, an argument which we would now give much credit to, as it has

now been shown how labelling a student as gifted or below average can be a self-fulfilling prophecy.52

The 1970s and 80s saw a sudden redevelopment of interest in education, both in the government and

public consciences. The public movement saw a rise in public unrest which mirrored the rise that was

occurring in many other sectors of the community shown through the general strikes of the 80s.

A conservative government cancelled the labour circular indicating the end of the triplicate system

and instead made the development of comprehensive education a free choice for individual LEAs.

During the conservative governments tenure the point was reached at which more than half of LEAs

had stated their intent to change to a comprehensive system.53

Ever since the Fisher Act of 1918 there had been provision, and a statement of intent, for education

to be compulsory until 16. The change had been recommended by several reports and the 1972 raising of

13

school leaving age order finally saw this realised.

After the second election of the decade the new labour government of 1974 restated the intention to

unify secondary education and replace the triplicate system with a fully comprehensive one. It instigated a

compulsion for LEAs to submit plans for the change. This compulsion was once again repealed, by the

second conservative government in 1979.54 The new government, that of Margaret Thatcher, oversaw a

series of changes in education culminating in the National Curriculum, though the educational policy for

which she is probably best remembered in the British consciousness is the removal of state funded milk

in 1971. The majority of the 80s saw cost cutting in education, as did most of what remained of publicly

owned services, due to the deep recession of 1979-81 combined with the conservative views upon public

services.55

In 1988 the Conservative government really took what Labour had started, the centralisation and

unification of education, and brought it to completion with the creation of the National Curriculum

through the 1988 Education Act.56 As well as the National Curriculum the Act aimed to streamline

decision making by allowing delegation of financial and other governance decisions from LEAs down to

governing bodies and head teachers of schools.

14

THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM TO DRIVE US FORWARD

In legal terms the National Curriculum forms part of the Education Reform Act 1988, It is a legal

requirement in state schools, as are any assessments prescribed by it.57 The National Curriculum consisted

initially of 10 subjects which were to be studied up to the age of 16. The number of subjects now varies

with age, and only the three core subjects are compulsory after the age of 14. The three core subjects are,

unsurprisingly, Science, Maths and English58. The other subjects to be taught are classed as foundation

topics. Religious education is not included within the National Curriculum, but it is compulsory in all

schools.

As well as an academic curriculum the National Curriculum also attempts to lay down guidelines for

moral and emotional education. These ideas should be implicit, and part of the grand plan, rather than

given their own subjects.

It is currently under review, which will be discussed shortly, but remains in force and schools are

advised to plan on the basis that the current system is here to stay.

What does the National Curriculum endeavour to provide?At primary level the national curriculum endeavours to provide to its students 'opportunities for all

pupils to learn and achieve' and 'to promote pupils' spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and

prepare all pupils for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of life'.59 At secondary level these

aims become enablers 'It should enable all young people to become: Successful learners who enjoy

learning, make progress and achieve, confident individuals who are able to live safe, healthy and fulfilling

lives and responsible citizens who make a positive contribution to society.'60

These aims, it states, will be achieved through teaching a series of subject to children. Key Stage 361

subjects to be taught are; Art and Design, Citizenship, Design and Technology, English (Core Subject),

Geography, History, ICT, Mathematics (Core Subject), Modern Foreign Languages, Music, Physical

Education, Science (Core Subject), Religious Education and Personal, Social, Health and Economic

education (non-statutory).

It is interesting to consider that Maths and Science are still core subjects, despite the country now

being post industrial.62 It is, however difficult to imagine it any other way. We are in thrall to the idea. One

of the main objectives of the current education system is, as much as we like to ignore it, to compare

children and put them in boxes according to ability. When you leave school you leave with knowledge and

skills but also with a letter next to each subject. A cynical person might suggest that, in these days of

constant testing and ranking of both students and schools, the Sciences and Maths are useful topics for a

school to teach as they are objective, easy to break down into 50 minute snippets, and most importantly

very easy to test,63 as opposed to subjective subjects like fine art. At virtually every stage of education

students are tested to see how the teacher is performing, how the school is performing and finally how

the student is performing. Through these tests the level of schooling a person can ultimately attain is

decided. This model of continual standardised testing is a strange idea. We don't do it anywhere else. It

has been said it's rather like pulling up your garden once a year to see how the roots are doing. There are

15

several negative results of this constant testing. One is the pressure on teachers to teach to exams. This

can effectively stop the teacher designing courses of study that build on a young person's interests and

passions if they extend out beyond the defined curriculum.

The reasons why teaching these subjects will help achieve the aims of the National Curriculum goes

unstated, something that makes it very difficult to assess if these subjects are, as I think, a hand-me-down

way of teaching skills which has devolved into facts or if they have a basis is what young people of the

twenty-first century really need to progress in the world and become a productive member of todays

post-industrial society. The system is supposed to deliver a new and relevant education to young people,

however when if you consider the list of subjects from the regulations for secondary schools in 1904

comprised of: English, Mathematics, Science, History, Geography, a foreign language, Drawing, Physical

Education and Manual work/housewifery64 you would have to assume not much has changed over the

last 108 years. If we take drawing to be similar to Art and Design and manual work/housewifery can be

paralleled with Design and Technology, the only additions to school teaching in the last 108 years are

Music, Information, Communication and Technology (ICT), Religious Education and Personal, Social

and Health Education (PSHE). Whilst the world around it has undergone fundamental social, economic

and technological change the English and Welsh education system has stoically remained the same, and

begrudgingly allowed a few small subjects to be attached on to it in some attempt to deal with the

modern world. Whilst one could argue that the content of the courses have changed, as have the

methods of teaching, it remains the case that the world does not have the same priorities as it did in 1904,

yet the subject focuses in education has not changed.

Success in its own eyesThe Education system sets its own goals, and uses them to measure its success. It's very base goal,

the one which it believes all students should be able to attain, is five good GCSEs.65 In 2007, 5 years after

the last education reform and 10 years after the last major re-write of the National Curriculum, only

44%66 of students achieved this most basic benchmark. If the education system believes that exam results

are the best way to assess students then it has to admit that it is not achieving what it says it must. We

need to remember that education is an experiment. We do not know how to educate people best, but

have spent 150 years67 using essentially the same plan and we are still calling 56% of people who pass

through the system a failure. If this rate of failure were to apply anywhere else it would be deemed

unacceptable. How long would a car manufacturer last if 56% of it's vehicles were deemed to be below

standard?

To counter this we can see that for the last 23 years (i.e since the National Curriculum was

introduced) the amount of students achieving the top two grades at GCSE has increased year on year.68

The top set of students, commonly called the Academic students, do seem to do very, very well in this

system. Although the increase in top GCSE grades awarded each year is met with, and increasingly

preempted by, accusations of exams getting easier and various comments on the merits and lack thereof

in course work and modular assessment, this can be seen as proof that we are getting better each year at

teaching academic children certain academic things. Considered from a critical point of view it is

16

important to assess the value of having a small proportion of academic students achieving very highly

against having a high proportion of non-academic students failing and being set up for life believing they

have nothing to offer, when the truth is simply that they are part of the majority that did not fit into a

system conceived almost 150 years ago.

In January 2011 the Secretary of State announced the intention of the government to review the

national curriculum, in order to provide teachers with more freedom in the class room. The review makes

it clear that the National Curriculum was never intended to be the main thing taught in schools. It's

original purpose was to provide a

'guide to study in key subjects, which would give parents and teachers confidence that students

were acquiring the knowledge necessary at every level of study to make appropriate progress'69

Now however the national curriculum has become so bloated through reforms that not only is it

prescriptive, in subject, content and teaching methods, it takes up the overwhelming majority of teaching

time.

In a speech launching the review Michael Gove, Secretary of State of Education, stated :

"Our timetable will allow this new curriculum in English, Science and Maths to be introduced in

2013. All these subjects – alongside PE – will remain compulsory at all key stages."

Whilst the review is looking to develop 'a complete overhaul of the curriculum'70 it refuses to break

ranks with some of the ideas to which we find ourselves in thrall. In this case the idea that English,

Science and Maths should be compulsory at all levels. The review starts out with this limitation already in

place. You cannot overhaul an entire system whilst putting such limitation upon it's design.

The review looks at successful education systems71 around the world, particularly those of South

East Asia and the most successful western systems (notably Finland), and through comparison with the

English system rewrite the National Curriculum in such a way that it will emulate the success of those

systems. In December 2011, the department released a summary of the initial review findings, as well as a

series of observations regarding the continued view of 'potential' in schools72 one highlighted point of

which was:

'The international evidence shows that all successful jurisdictions expect pupils to study a broad

curriculum to age 16, built around a core of academic subjects'73

The review also assumes that academic success is the mark of a good education system, as it uses

OECD's PISA74 league tables to judge the quality of a school system. It also assumes that the results an

education system produces is down to itself only. The review makes no mention of cultural and social

effects on children. Assuming education to be a closed system is not going to yield the best research

results.

Success in the eyes of its studentsStudents will always vote about education in the only way they have the power to; with their feet. And

truancy is increasing. The average school day sees 64,00075 pupils missing from school with no adequate

reason given. We are also seeing an increase in expulsions76, largely due to disruptive behaviour. Given

17

that 70% of secondary students acknowledge they are counting the minutes to the end of each class it

really shouldn't be any surprise that the less restrained or less engaged students will become disruptive. It

is also worth considering that, as Ken Robinson says,

'When we [ people educated in the 1960's and 70's] went to school we were kept there with a

story, which was if you worked hard and did well, you would go to college and get a job. Our

kids don't believe that anymore.77'

Today education has apparently lost its purpose. One comes to school, one does 'work' and one

leaves. It takes a phenomenally motivated person to do work with absolutely no promise of reward, yet

this is what we expect of our children today.

We are also raising our children in a world of unparalleled intellectual stimulation and expecting them

to sit still and listen despite the huge availability of free flowing information and distraction.78 Given the

availability of uncontrolled knowledge, and the unprecedented ability of young people to access this

information, formal education has to offer a real incentive for young people to see the point of getting

their information from it, rather than from other sources.

Despite this lack of motivation and huge range of distractions students79 are in thrall to the idea that

high grades matter. They are also told what they can achieve. If they achieve that then they have reached

their potential, as set by the system. The allocation of potential is often a self-fulfilling prophecy if you

are labelled intelligent, gifted and a high achiever then they will become just that. Likewise if you are

called less-able or a low achiever then that, too, is likely to become the case.80

Ken Robinson suggests that if you look at the Education System as an outsider you have to conclude

that the whole system is geared for one thing: to produce university professors.81 If you were to succeed

completely in education, pass every test with flying colours, you would end up in that position. 82

Success in the eyes of employersThe ultimate judges of an educations success on a skills front is bound to be the employer. They look

at the grades awarded to students, then take that person out into the real world, they therefore have an

understanding of just what a C in English Literature means. Every year in July and August there are a

range of articles published in the national press in which industry leaders complain that standards are too

low and prospective students do not have the skills required of them in the 21st century.83

Aside from the discussions of standards one must find alarming that, given the National Curriculum

states it's aims are to 'Enable all young people to… achieve… [and] make a positive contribution to

society'84 that industry finds the young people who come to it form employment unable to do just that.

18

WHY HAVE I TOLD YOU THIS?It is my belief that the education system has never been designed, and it is common consensus that

the education system has not naturally evolved to a satisfactory state through the current process. It is

therefore time to allow a design process to be utilised to design the system from scratch. Because of the

way education has evolved we are in thrall to ideas which are not necessarily of value in the 21st century,

ideas so integral to education that we don't even see them as ideas, simply as the way it is done. Each time

education has been reformed throughout history there has been a plethora of political and social

pressures upon the reform which has, in many cases, been pacified to the detriment of education. This

seems almost unavoidable given they have occurred in a political landscape. Politicians, who control

education by virtue of the Secretary of State for Education, being a member of the government, have a

vested interest in not rocking the boat, or in blindly adhering to a party line85. Although reforms are now

becoming more student focused they are based on the foundations of a system built to control and

appease various religious bodies, a system built to educate the population in an image of an industrial

production line, a system built to provide employers of the 18th Century with a workforce skilled in what

they need. What is required is a system built to provide the young people of today and tomorrow with

the skills they need to go out into a post-industrial world and make it their own.

If you look at the people involved in writing reports and education acts you will find that they

consist, quite rightly, of experts in the field of education and research86 but they very rarely involve a

designer. It is not the done thing, but it should become so. Designers have the skills required to look

beyond the self-enforced limits that an expert will tend to see in their own field, and the knowledge

required to use the experts as a resource to structure an enquiry that will not reiterate what has been said

a hundred times before but free those involved in the design process from their preconceptions and allow

new ideas and a real view of what is needed to emerge.

Education is something which takes many years to prove itself, is fundamentally expensive, and

phenomenally important to the nation. Those three properties do not make it an attractive political target

for a full scale redesign which could suggest that things need to change right down to a base level. To

convince a government to invest in such a huge and speculative project would be difficult. Yet it is vitally

important, to individuals, companies, societies and indeed civilisation, that we do so.

19

END NOTES

1. Based on a 7 hour day, and a 39 week school year

2. M. Kroh, and P. Selb, Inheritance and the dynamics of party identification

3. SJ Curtis, History of Education in Great Britain, pg. 2

4. Nicholas Orme, Medieval Schools, pg. 15

5. Ibid

6. An impressive feat, given that they had been under Roman control for a little short of 400 years.

7. The devolvement from the church happened in tiny developments over a long period of time. Although changes like

education producing more than just priests occurred relatively early on, from around 780, others took much longer. Until the late

1990s it was still compulsory for schools to have a communal act of worship every morning. Things like this took so long to

change because of the religious routes of the UK and the role of religion in the State, especially the Lords Spiritual, who sit in

the House of Lords and thus vote on all education legislation.

8. Joan Simon, The social origins of English education, pg. 31

9. Ibid, pg. 36

10. Orme, Medieval Schools, pg.40

11. Ibid, pg. 46

12. Simon, The social origins of English education, pg. 38

13. John Lawson, Mediaeval Education and the Reformation, pg. 88

14. Ibid, pg 169

15. Orme, Medieval Schools, pg. 298

16. Orme, Medieval Schools, pg. 296

17. Lawson, Mediaeval Education and the Reformation, pg. 73

18. Ibid, pg. 311

19. Lawson, Mediaeval Education and the Reformation, p.g 83

20. K Evans, Th Development and Structure of the English Education system, pg. 15

21. Grammar as a form of communication, rather than what would be understood today as grammar.

22. This wide range of subjects would not be available at every School.

23. WB Stephens, Education in Britain 1750-1914, pg. 14

24. AS Bishop, The rise of a central authority in english education, pg. 4

25. Parlimentary Papers [PP] 1816, IV, 3 quoted from A.S Bishop, The rise of a central authority in english education, pg. 7

26. EG West, Education and the Industrial Revolution, pg 7

27. Helena Braun, & Ian Hislop. When Bankers were good.

28. Ken Robinson. Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity, 2006. Ken Robinson is an author, and adviser to various governments

around the world on arts education

29. Replace with the National Language of choice.

30. Bishop. The Rise of a Central Authority for English Education pg. 1

31. C Ben. and C. Chitty, Thirty years on: is comprehensive education alive and well or struggling to survive? pg. 3

32. Derek Gillard., Education in England: a brief history.

33. Stratham, Et Al, The Education Fact File, pg.14

34. The Education Act (1944)

35. Ken Jones. Education in Britain. pg.14

36. Schools owned and operated by churches or other religious organisations, but funded by the state.

37. Gillard, Education in England: a brief history.

20

38. Jones. Pg. 18

39. Ibid

40. 2-5 year olds

41. 5-12 year olds

42. Peggy Jay, Better Schools Now! pg. 11

43. Some even in buildings that had been blacklisted for demolition in the 1920s

44. Ibid, pg. 7

45. Phinn, Gervaise. pg. 56

46. Jones. pg. 52

47. Jones. pg. 63

48. Stratham, Et Al, The Education Fact File, pg.17

49. Tyrrell Burgess, A Guide to English Schools, pg. 81

50. Ibid, pg. 84

51. Ibid

52. Guy Claxton, What's the point of School?: Rediscovering the Heart of Education. pg. 69

53. Jones. pg. 136

54. Stratham, Et Al. pg. 14

55. Jones. pg. 127

56. Ibid pg. 131

57. Bob Moon. A guide to the National Curriculum. 2001 p.7

58. In Welsh speaking schools Welsh is also a core subject. In English speaking schools in Wales it is a foundation subject.

59. The National Curriculum; Primary Curriculum; Aims, Values and purposes. http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk accessed 22.11.11

60. The National Curriculum; Secondary Curriculum; Aims, Values and purposes. http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk accessed

22.11.11

61. "The period beginning at the same time as the school year in which the majority of pupils in his class attain the age of twelve

and ending at the same time as the school year in which the majority of pupils in his class attain the age of fourteen" defined by

the Education Act 2002

62. I'd recommend watching John Bennett - Why Maths Instruction is Unnecessary. http://youtu.be/xyowJZxrtbg

63. Unlike subjective subjects like Art or Design

64. Claxton, pg. 36

65. A good GCSE is classed as one that is awarded a Grade C - A*

66. Claxton, p.17

67. Education for the masses was set out in the Newcastle Report in 1861 and formalised by the 1970 Elementary Education

Act.

68. Jeevan Vasaga, GCSE results: Record results see pass rates rise for 23rd year in a row, The Guardian, 2011

69. Department for Education, National Curriculum review launched.

70. Department for Education, Michael Gove to Twyford Church of England High School

71. Judged by the OECD PISA rankings

72. The observations being that if you assume that there is a certain amount of people in every class that will not grasp a given

subject, as happens in Britain by our teaching culture, we ensure that is the case by moving on to another subject to early.

73. Department for Education, Review of the National Curriculum in England

74. A Pen and Paper test, lasting aprox 2 hours.

75. State School Truancy reaches record high; Shepherd, Jessica; The Guardian; 25/04/11. accessed 7/11/11

76. Ken Robinson, Et Al. All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. pg.29

77. Ken Robinson, Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. TED 2006

78. Ken Robinson, Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. TED 2006

21

79. And perhaps just as importantly parents

80. Claxton, pg.70

81. Ken Robinson, Hammer Lecture: Sir Ken Robinson

82. That was initially part of the set up for arts education. The provincial schools, such as the Glasgow School of Art, passed

their best students on to the central design school, who trained them up and sent them back to potential schools as teachers. This

was a method set up to control taste, design, the arts and manufacturing industries after the great exhibition of 1851.

83. BBC News. Tesco boss raps school standards, 2009

84. The National Curriculum; Secondary Curriculum; Aims, Values and purposes

85. Consider the to-ing and fro-ing over comprehensive education between the Labour and Conservative Governments of

1965-1974

86. Consider the Panel of the latest Education Review (2011) Which can be found here: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/

teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum/b0073043/remit-for-review-of-the-national-curriculum-in-england/

governance-and-membership

22

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BooksBen, C. and Chitty, C, Thirty years on: is comprehensive education alive and well or struggling to survive? London, David Fulton

Publishers, 1996

Bishop, A.S, The Rise of a Central Authority for English Education, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1971

Blishen, Edward, The School that I'd like, Middlesex, Penguin Books, 1969

Burgess, Tyrrell, A Guide to English Schools, Middlesex, Penguin Books, 1970

Claxton, Guy, What's the point of School?: Rediscovering the Heart of Education. Oxford, Oxford Publications, 2008

Crawford, Matthew, The case for working with your hands. London, Penguin Books, 2009

Curtis, S.J, History of Education in Great Britain, London, University Tutorial Press, 1967

Dewey, John, Education Today. London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. 1941

Evans, Keith, The Development and Structure of the English Education Structure, London, University of London Press,

1975

Griffith, Rhys, National Curriculum: National Disaster? London, Routledge, 2000

Hlebowitsh, Peter, Designing the School Curriculum. Boston, Allyn & Bacon, 2004

Jay, Peggy, Better Schools Now! London, Turnstyle Press, 1953

Johnson, LouAnne, Teaching Outside the Box. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 2011

Lawson, John, Medieval Education and the Reformation, Gateshead on Tyne, Northumberland Press Ltd, 1967

Lawton, Desnis (Ed) The Education Reform Act, London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1989

Moon, Bob. A guide to the National Curriculum. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001

Orme, Nicholas, Medieval Schools, Yale, Yale University Press Publications, 2006

Parry, J.P. The Provision of Education in the England & Wales, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1971

Phinn, Gervaise. Road to the Dales: The Story of a Yorkshire Lad. London, Michael Joseph, 2010

Robinson, Ken, Out of our minds. Chichester, Capstone Publishing Limited, 2001

Sennft, Richard, The Craftsman. London, Penguin Books, 2008

Simon, Joan, The social origins of English education, London, Routledge & Kegan Ltd, 1970

Stephens, WB, Education in Briain 1750-1914, Basingstoke, Macmillan Press Ltd, 1998

Stratham, June, Et Al, The Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989

Vaizey, John, Education for tomorrow, Middlesex, Penguin Books, 1967

West, EG, Education and the Industrial Revolution, London, BT Batsford Ltd, 1975

Audio VisualBraun, Helena & Hislop, Ian. When Bankers were Good. Wingspan Productions for the BBC. First Broadcast 22.11.11

Laufenberg, Diana. How to learn? From mistakes 2010

Robinson, Ken. Hammer Lecture: Sir Ken Robinson 2008

Robinson, Ken. Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. TED, 2006

Blikstein, Paulo, One Fabrication Lab per School: The Fablab@School, TEDxManhattanBeach, 2011

23

ReportsFuturelab. What if… re-imagining learning spaces. 2006

Kroh, M., and Selb, P. Inheritance and the dynamics of party identification, Journal: Political Behaviour vol 31, pg 559-574,

2009

Robinson, Ken and others. All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. (Government Paper) 1999

Web ResourcesBBC News. Tesco boss raps school standards, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8306013.stm published

14.10.09 accessed 23.11.11

Department for Education. Review of the National Curriculm. http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/

teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum published 20.01.11 accessed 20.12.11

Department for Education. National Curriculum review launched. http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/

teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum/a0073149/national-curriculum-review-launched published

20.01.11 accessed 20.12.11

Department of Education. Review of the National Curriculum in England. http://www.education.gov.uk/a00201093/

review-of-the-national-curriculum-in-england published 19.12.11 accessed 23.12.11

Department of Education. Michael Gove to Twyford Church of England High School. http://www.education.gov.uk/

inthenews/speeches/a0073212/michael-gove-to-twyford-church-of-england-high-school published 20.01.11

accessed 30.12.11

Gillard, D. Education in England: a brief history. http://www.educationengland.org.uk/history published 2011 accessed

06.10.11

Richardson, Hannah. Ofsted chief proud of 'Dirty Harry' image. BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

education-15537037 accessed 05.11.11

Vasaga, Jeevan GCSE results: Record results see pass rates rise for 23rd year in a row. The Guardian, http://

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/aug/24/gcse-results-2010-coursework accessed 09.11.11

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1870 Elementary Education ActProvides Elementary Schools throughout the country.Creates school districts and school boards in districts with or schoolingIntroduces the idea of Inspection.

1880 Education ActRequires School Boards to pass bye-laws making attendance compulsory, with exceptions.Limits fees to 9d per week.

1880 Local Government ActCreates Country Councils (see 1902 Act)

1891 Education ActGives Parents the right to demand free education for their children.

1906 Education (Provision of Meals) Act

LEAs authorised to spend public money on food for malnourished elementary children.

1899 Board of Education ActSets up the board of education to supervise the Education System.

1907 Education (Administrative Provi-sions) Act

LEA required to provide medical inspections for elementary children.

1902 Education Act (Balfour Act)As 1870, but for Secondary Schools.Allows spending on Secondary Schools, within limits.Abolishes School Boards, and replaces them with Local Education Authorities (LEA) based on county council borders.Some LEAs provide lots of sec-ondary provision, others just the minimum.

1910 Education (Choice of Employ-ment) Act

Allows LEAs to set up Juvenile Employment Beureaux. Foundation for careers service.

1918 Education Act (The Fisher Act)LEAs must submit a scheme of development.Abolishes limits on secondary ex-penditure (1902)Removes exceptions to compulsory elementary education.Abolishes half-time schooling.LEAs can provide Nurseries,All Elementary Fees abolished.

24

Timeline of selected Education Acts 1870-1989

APPENDIX

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1944 Education Act (The Butler Act)The Butler Act replaced almost all preceding legislation;

The Board of Education was replaced with a Ministry of Education, which would promote rather than just manage, the cause of education in England and Wales.Abolished the difference between elementary and higher education, creating a XQLÀHG�V\VWHP�RI�FRPSXOVRU\�VFKRROLQJ�IURP���WR�����ZLWK�SURYLVLRQ�IRU�WKDW�DJH�to be raised to 16. Pupils could be educated in an LEA or Public school, or in an ‘other’ place.It allowed LEAs to take education to those outside of schools, by providing Nursery schools, holiday classes, camps,swimming baths...School meals were to be provided to all children that wanted it (removed in 1980 Act.A support network for primary and secondary education was set up (transport, free meals, medical and dental treatment)Standards for all School premises (both state and non-state controlled) were set.The Minister of Education was named as arbiter for disputes between the public and LEAs, between LEAs, and between LEAs and governors.Two Central Advisory Councils for Education were established to advise the Minister of Education. Dormant since 1967.Laid the guidelines for religious instruction; All schools must start the day with a corporate act of worship. All schools must provide religious instruction (this was the only legislated part of the curriculum until 1988) and this must be nondenom-inational, except for voluntary schools.5HTXLUHG�/($V�WR�ÀQG�WKH�QHHGV�RI�FKLOGUHQ�LQ�WKHLU�DUHD�ZKR�ZHUH�GHHPHG�WR�ÀW�into the ten categories of handicapped.Removed restriction on married women teachers.

1946 Education Act6SHFLÀHG�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�RI�/($V�for maintaining voluntary schools, and the enlargement of controlled schools.

1948 Education (Miscellaneous Provi-sions) Act

LEAs may recover costs of educat-ing pupils not belonging to their area.LEAs may provide clothing grants.

1949 Employment and Training ActYouth employment service estab-lished

1953 Education (Miscellaneous Provi-sions) Act

LEAs may pay for students to attend independent schoolsLEAs may recover costs of provid-ing further educations for students not belonging to their area.

1962 Education ActRequired LEAs to provide grants for DOO�ÀUVW�GHJUHH�FRXUVHV�LQ�DFFRUGDQFH�with income scales.Allowed LEAs to provide grants for further education.Allowed Secretary of State to award Post-graduate course grants.

1944 Flemming - Public Schools and the General Education System.Recommended that Public Schools be progressively integrated into the state system by taking Students on state grants, ultimately all places would be open for students on these grants. Private schools reacted positively, but neither Central Government nor LEAs were willing to take responsibility for the grants.

1944 McNair - Teaching and Youth Leaders.Recommended increases in salary and the increase of teacher training courses to three years’ full time study

1945 Percy - Higher Technological EducationRecommended expansion of technical universities and colleges and the estab-lishment of organisations to co-ordinate the work of universities, colleges of tech-nology and technical colleges at local and national level

�����%DUORZ���6FLHQWLÀF�0DQSRZHUArgued that more University places were needed, especially for science students.More were provided.

1947 Clarke - School and Life (CACE England)Called for a reeducation of pupil/teacher ratio. Recommended that purely educational DLPV�FDPH�ÀUVW��VFKRROV�VKRXOG�QRW�SUHSDUH�VWXGHQWV�IRU�D�SDUWLFXODU�W\SH�RI�HPSOR\-PHQW��,QGXVWU\�EHQHÀWHG�IURP�WKH�WHDFKLQJ�DQG�OHDUQLQJ�RI�EDVLF�HGXFDWLRQDO�VNLOOV�

1948 Clarke- Out of School (CACE England)Urged the LEAs to improve facilities of childrens play and recreation outside of school, and the Government to provide funding for such.

1948 Evans/Aaron - The Future of Secondary Education in Wales (CACE Wales)Education should be Child-centered, must take into account variation in ability and aptitude. Curriculum should emphasise free creation and co-operative inventiveness UDWKHU� WKDQ�SDVVLYH�DVVLPLODWLRQ��5HFRPPHQGHG� WKDW� VWXGHQWV�EH� WDXJKW� LQ� WKHLU�ÀUVW�language (Welsh or English) But English should be taught to a high level in welsh speaking schools, and welsh should be offered in all others.

1954 Gurney-Dixon - Early Leaving (CACE England)Investigated the effectiveness of the 1944 Act, casting doubt on it’s effectiveness at re-ducing social-class-based inequalities in Education. It found that a pupils performance was closely related to their father’s occupational status: The higher the status, the better the performance. It recommended that more grammar school places be provided.

1959 Crowther - 15 to 18 (CACE England)([WHQVLYH�UHVHDUFK�FRQÀUPHG�WKH������*XUQH\�'L[RQ�ÀQGLQJV��OLQNLQJ�VWXGHQW�DWWDLQ-PHQW�DQG�WKH�IDWKHUV�RFFXSDWLRQDO�VWDWXV��5HFRPPHQGHG�PRUH�IXUWKHU�HGXFDWLRQ������or 16-18 year old should be in further education. [Major expansion occurred in the 1980s with high unemployment in school leavers and schemes like YTS]Accepted some comprehensive schools, but argued for the triplicate system. Sug-gested further devisions within the system and exams below GCE levels [The future CSE exams] Also suggested that the leaving age should be raised, as suggested in the 1944 Act. [Occurred in 1972]

1960 Albermarle - The Youth Service in England and WalesRecommended better training for youth leaders, a building of new training premises and setting up of a Youth Service Development Council. [All Implemented] 25

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1964 Education ActChanges the divide of primary and secondary education from 11 (1944 legislation) to 10-12 to allow for middle schools.

1967 Education ActResponsibilities of LEAs for con-trolled schools were extended to middle schools

1965 Circular 10/65 Organisation of Secondary Education

Declared the (Labour) Government’s objective of ending separation at 11 plus.Requested LEAs to submit plans for reorganising secondary education.

1968 Education Acts1:

LEAs may establish Comprehensive SchoolsLEAs may convert existing schools into Middle Schools

2:LEAs must establish boards of governors for polytechnics and other maintained colleges.

1966 Local Government ActIntroduced the rate support grantMade LEAs responsible for paying for school meals and milk.Allocated funding for the payment RI�VWDII�HPSOR\HG�VSHFLÀFDOO\�IRU�the education and welfare of im-migrants.

1970 Education (Handicapped Chil-dren) Act

LEAs made responsible for car-ing for all mentally handicapped children

1970 Circular 10/70 Organisation of Secondary Educations.

The (Conservative) Government ZLWKGUHZ�WKH�&LUFXODU�������Explained intention to allow indi-vidual LEAs to determine the shape of secondary education.

1970 Circular 18/70 Primary and Sec-ondary Education in Wales

Responsibility of Primary and Secondary Education (and related matters) in Wales to be transferred to the Secretary of State for Wales. Secretary of State for Education and Science retains responsibility for Grants, Further, Higher and adult education, Training of teachers. (Most of these transferred in 1978)

1963 Newson - Half Our Future (CACE England)Newton accepted the triplicate system, delivering in different levels of natural ability. He did not, however, accept that the schools for the less able should be poorer buildings and have poorer teaching or in any other respect be poorer. It recommended a redistri-bution of spending on poorer ability students and called for the raising of the school age to 16 once again [Implemented in 1972] It advised that all school leavers should EH�SURYLGHG�ZLWK�D�OHDYLQJ�FHUWLÀFDWH�ZLWK�D�¶JHQHUDO�VFKRRO�UHFRUG·�[the school system geared up for the CSE system instead, though in the late 1970’s something similar began to be used]

1963-64 Robbins - Higher EducationRecognised that, though there was a strong correlation between a fathers job status and academic achievement in school once university entrance was achieved this stopped, with working class students achieving as well as middle class students. It recognised a huge, untapped ‘pool of ability. It recommended massive expansion in higher educa-tion, the establishment of the Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA) [Es-WDEOLVKHG�LQ�����@�the raising of the status of teacher training colleges to colleges of education and the offering of a BEd [Implemented] the granting of university status to ten colleges of advanced technology [Implemented] and in time to others [They became Polytechnics instead]

1967 Plowden - Children and their Primary Schools (CACE England)This report found that a parents attitude to education was more important than any other aspect to their childs academic success. It approved of ‘progressive’ teaching methods and child-centered teaching, a broader curriculum, parental involvement and it recom-mended that schools become more involved in their communities. It recommended the expansion of primary schools, the ending of corporal punishment and greater attention be paid to the education of handicapped students and the children of immigrants. Though the Plowden report had a great effect on the way education was viewed by both parents and professionals few of its practical recommendations were acted upon in the immediate period. Many have come into effect over time, though not necessarily because of Plowdens direct recommendation.

1968 Newsom - Public Schools Commission, First ReportSet up by a labour government, this report concluded that boarding school could either be abolished, integrated into the maintained system or allowed to remain but without their traditional tax privileges. The commission favoured integration, through half of public school places being taken by pupils from maintained schools, who would re-FHLYH�ÀQDQFLDO�DVVLVWDQFH��The recommendations met with considerable opposition and were never implemented.

1969 Haslegrave - Technician Courses an ExaminationsRecommended the establishment of a Technician Education Council and a Business Education Council, to oversee courses and examinations. Set up and later amalgamated to for the Business and Education Council (BTEC)

1970 Donnison - Public Schools Commission, Second ReportSimilar to Newsoms report, but dealing with day schools. Recommended that they should either admit pupils without charging fees and without selecting by ability or should forgo state aid. [Direct Grant Schools were required to choose comprehensivisa-WLRQ�RU�ZLWKGUDZDO�RI�DLG�LQ�����@

26

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1970 Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act

All new Education buildings must be made accessible to disabled people, with exceptions.

1971 Education (Milk) Act1944 Act amended so free milk is only provided to students over 7 if the attended special schools or had medical requirements.

1972 Local Government ActReduced the number of LEAs from 163 to 104.

1972 Raising of the School leaving age order.

School leaving age raised to 16.

1973 Education ActPost Grad education excluded from LEA grants

1973 Education (Work Experience) Act

LEAs able to arrange work experi-ence for children in their last year of compulsory education.

1973 Employment and Training ActRequired LEAs to set up careers service.Department of Employment set up.

1973 National Health Service Reor-ganisation Act

School Health service transferred to Health Authorities, LEAs main-tain dental and medical inspection responsibilities.

1974 Circular 4/74 Organisation of Secondary Education

Withdrew Circular 10/705HDIÀUPHG�WKH��/DERXU��*RYHUQ-ments intention to unify secondary education.LEAs asked to submit plans for comprehensive schools.

1975 Education Act1962 Education Act extended to require LEAs to award mandatory grants to students taking DipHE, HND and initial teacher training courses.

1975 Direct Grant Grammar Schools (Cessation of Grant) Regulations

6SHFLÀFDWLRQ�RI�KRZ�DQG�ZKHQ�direct grants would end.

1976 Education ActAttempt to Abolish selection by abil-ity in Secondary Schools.Limited ability of LEAs to pay for places at independent schools.

1972 James - Teacher Education and TrainingRecommended the reorganisation of teacher training into three cycles concluding in a BA after the second cycle and the third cycle running throughout a teachers career with a terms worth of training every seven years, maintaining a ‘teaching licence’. The cyclic training and a teaching licence were not implemented, however the principle of integrating teacher training into higher education was accepted and occurred through-out the 1970s.

1973 Russell - Adult Education: A Plan for DevelopmentRecommended the establishment of a National Development Council for Adult Educa-tion the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education was set up in 1977, bud did not have the strong government support advised by the report.

1977 Taylor - A New Partnership for Our SchoolsRecommended that every school have its own governing body, consisting of represent-atives of the LEA, school staff, parents and the local community. All powers relevant to school government should be vested in the LEA and these should be delegated to the Governing body, then to the Head Teacher as far as was possible. LEAs should provide initial training for governors. Most recommendations were implemented in the 1980 Act, and then extended in the 186 Act.

1978 Waddell- School ExaminationsThis report was commissioned after a recommendation from the Schools Council (in the early 1970s) That GCEs and CSEs should be replaced by a single system at 16. The report recommended using a single grading system with special papers for pupils of low and high ability. The First GCSEs were introduced in 1986 and examined in 1988.

1978 Warnock - Special Educational Needs,QWURGXFHG� WKH�FRQFHSW�RI� ¶VSHFLDO�HGXFDWLRQDO�QHHGV·��VXJJHVWLQJ� WKDW�XS� WR�����RI�students may fall into this category. A detailed method of assessing such children was proposed. It was recommended that where possible such children should be educated in ordinary schools. 7KH�5HSRUW�VWURQJO\�LQÁXHQFHG�WKH������(GXFDWLRQ�$FW

�����.HRKDQH���3URSRVDOV�IRU�D�&HUWLÀFDWH�RI�([WHQGHG�(GXFDWLRQ3URSRVHG�D� VLQJOH�VXEMHFW�TXDOLÀFDWLRQ� IRU����SOXV�� IRU�SXSLOV� VWD\LQJ�RQ�DIWHU�FRP-pulsory leaving age but not taking A levels. The report recommended approving the scheme, which was in pilot, but modifying it to ensure those that took the course were prepared for employment,

27

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1976 Education (School leaving dates) Act

The date after which children aged 16 are not required to attend school set.

1980 Education ActLEAs need no longer provide free milk or school meals, though they could if they wished. With the exception of providing to children of families on Family Income Support.All independent School required to be registered.Parents given the right to choose which school they wanted their child to attend. Though LEAs could refuse, and parents could appeal.Parents given the right to be represented on the board of the School governing body.5HDIÀUPHG�WKDW�SURYLVLRQ�RI�HGXFDWLRQ�IRU�WKH�XQGHU�ÀYHV�ZDV�GLVFUHWLRQDU\�

1979 Education ActRepealed the compulsion for LEAs to provide plans for comprehensive reorganisation

1986 Education ActsEvery maintained school to have a governing body.Annual report to be presented to parentsCorporal punishment abolished in state schools and for state funded students at independent schools.Governors to determine Sex Ed pol-icy, prevent ‘political indoctrination’ and ensure that children with special QHHGV�DUH�LGHQWLÀHG�DQG�SURYLVLRQ�LV�made for them.

1981 Education Act(Following recommendations of Wanock Report)

Handicap categories replaced with the idea of special needs./($V�JLYHQ�GHÀQHG�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�to identify the needs of individual children and determine provision needed.Parents given the right to be con-sulted, and appeal.5HDIÀUPV�6SHFLDO�1HHGV�FKLOGUHQ�WR�be educated in normal schools, as much as possible.

1986 Social Security ActLEAs no longer had the power to supply free school meals or milk to any children other than those receiv-ing income support.LEAs no longer obligated to provide free school meals or milk to any children.

1982 Cockcroft - Mathematis CountsReport on the teaching of Maths in primary and secondary schools. Recommended an increase in the number of mats teachers as well as the establishment of a maths cur-riculum, or at least a ‘foundation list’ of mathematical topics.

1981 Rampton - West Indian Children in our SchoolsSet up to investigate the education of children from all ethnic minorities, but started with West Indian Children. Recognised West Indian Children were largely undera-chieving, and recommended additional training for teachers in approaching teaching from a multi- cultural approach as well as recognising the requirement of changing the opinions of society at large towards the acceptance of ethnic minorities.

1979 Mansell - A Basis for ChoiceProposed a single year course for young people who had left school and did not need GCEs or preparation for a chosen job. There would be a core of general education and then time for the students to pursue their own interests in a vocational manner

1982 Thompson - Experience and ParticipationA review of the Youth Service. Suggested that the youth service should be attempting to meet the ‘crucial social needs’ of the 11-20 age group, especially the unemployed, handicapped, girls and young women, and ethnic minorities.�0RVW�ÀQGLQJV�ZHUH�UH-jected in a formal response in 1984

1985 Swann - Education for All$�UHSRUW�IROORZLQJ�RQ�IURP������7KRPSVRQ��$JUHHG�ZLWK�LWV�ÀQGLQJV��,W�ORRNHG�EULHÁ\�at other ethnic minorities and concluded that this was an issue regarding the educa-tion of all students, not just those from ethnic minorities. It stated that racism must be fought and harmful stereotypies attacked. It did not support separate schools for ethnic minorities, but noted that sensitivity should be used when looking at minorities which wished for their daughters to be educated at single-sex schools. It also recommended greater effort should be made for the employment and promotion of teachers from minority groups.

28

Reports Acts

Timeline of Acts and Reports created from: Stratham Et Al, !e Education Fact File, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1989 Chapter 2 and 3

1988 Education ActEmpowered the Secretary of State to prescribe the National Curriculum, and set attainment targets for each subject at the ages of 7, 11, 14 and 16 and make ar-rangements for these assessments.Established a National Curriculum Council (One for England, One for Wales) to oversee the implementation and assessment of the National Curriculum.Required LEAs, school governors and head teachers to ensure the National School was taught in all schools. (Independent schools were exempt)Establishes ways of ensuring limits on pupil numbers are not lower than the school can accommodate (assessed as been the number admitted in 1979, when school numbers were at a maximum) Parents may send their children to any school with room./($V�PXVW�GHOHJDWH�FHUWDLQ�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�IRU�ÀQDQFLDO�PDQDJHPHQW�DQG�DS-pointment or dismissal for staff to the governing bodies of schools. These bodies may then delegate these responsibilities to head teachers.$OORZV�3ULPDU\�VFKRROV�RI�RYHU�����SXSLOV�WR�RSW�RXW�RI�/($�ÀQDQFH�DQG�FRQWURO�(with approval of it’s governing body, and a parent vote).Removes polytechnics and some other colleges of higher education from LEA control, making them ‘free standing statutory corporations./($V�PXVW�GHOHJDWH�FHUWDLQ�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�IRU�ÀQDQFLDO�PDQDJHPHQW�DQG�appointment or dismissal for staff to the governing bodies of larger colleges remaining under LEA control.The funding of Higher Education put into the hands of two independent organi-sations, a University Funding Council (UFC) and a Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council (PCFC). They will fund higher education through funds directly from the Secretary of State. They may attach terms and conditions to funding provided to any institution.

1988 Kingman - Report of the Commit-tee of Inquiry into the Teaching of Eng-lish Language.Set up to recommend a model of how English language works, and form a basis for teacher training in the subject. Recommended what students should know by 7, 11 and 16 and recommended a model in four parts. Stated that dialects did not form ‘bad grammar’, but suggested that standard English should be taught. Doe not favour learning by rote. Favours setting attainment for age groups, but expressed reservations about mastering English ‘rung by rung’. Recommended traing for english teachers at primary and secondry level.Report was used as the basis for a working party on English in the nartional curricum.

29

e: john@jdflitcroft.comw: www.jdflitcroft.com

t: @jdflitcroft