Three plus three equals six but school plus teacher does not equal education

By Rosemary Houghton
In common with many other parents, I have struggled, for years to give my children what I regard as real education, in spite of their school, (though these were good ones). Not only parents, but many schools, try to do this, which sounds nonsense, but isn't. This is because we think education means schooling. It doesn't, and can't.
A few generations ago, children of well-to-do, families often did lessons at home. They were usually horrible but short, and the "real" education went on out of lesson hours.
Those whose parents were reasonably unfussy could spend hours making dens, exploring, watching the blacksmith or helping the groom. Even the unfortunate boys who went to school had holidays in which to organise hair-raising exploits. fall out of trees and go poaching. (Contrary to the popular image, Victorian children of the "gentry" often had lots of freedom witness the books of Mrs. Ewing and others.)
Poorer children often got no schooling. If they did it • was extremely basic, but they often got a good education, in stories, craft, country lore and skills. It depended on -the parents: but Cobbett's account of his own education and of that he gave his own children makes one sigh with envy.
Of course many were exploited, ill used ' and ignorant, even in the country, and increasingly in the cities their fate was grim. So, rightly, the schools got them off the streets and gave them a glimpse of something other than endless toil and misery. That was why reformers pressed for longer school hours, and more years in school.
But their lessons, normally, for rich as for poor, were a matter of tucking away as much information (some useful, some not) as
possible. (Alice's account of her lessons in Alice in Wonderland is not such a parody as to disguise the reality.) Very necessary, and line for the natural scholar-but not enough.
For the traditional rural culture had almost gone, and the watered-down version of a "gentleman's" or "lady's" education hopefully offered to the products of slum homes produced not culture but a hatred of the very word.
So there was more and more schooling and less and less education and more and more enlightened educators protested, and in the end they produced results within what had, by then, become "the education system."
By the thirties, many and after the war all schools nave time to "games", housecraft, wood and metal work, art, music and (for older children) sciences and nore complex technical skills. There were now some subjects which virtually all children could see sense in.
This sounds like the solution, making schooling into a whole education, not just hammering in essential skills and academic knowledge (but that matters, too). It is only when you visit one of the really "modern" expensively equipped schools, and see whole housecraft "flats," engineering shops, sports blocks and so on that it suddenly strikes you: "Why in a school?"
Playing at houses or factories is fun, but older children know it's make-believe. They are bored and frustrated; they are "cynical" or "apathetic," or they wreck their beautiful new schools, won't learn, drive young teachers to vengeful bullying out of sheer fear and insecurity.
Why? "Shortage of staff?" . .
"Classes too large?" ... "No discipline at home?" But adolescents who are interested in what they are learning will behave well even in large numbers, and the type of discipline used on a child is simply an insult to a young adult almost old enough to marry.
It is true that there arc schools State and fee paying where children do feel that they are being allowed to get to grips with real life. Teachers effectively act at
links with the outside world, real discussion encourages mature attitudes, out-of-school activities are arranged.
Two things need to be said about this. One is that there never will be enough schools of that quality. There will never be enough money. We know that, but it's "not done" to admit it. And although there are many good teachers there will never be enough single-minded heroes and heroines.
Some people feel that part of the answer would be to close feepaying schools and so force all those highly qualified teachers and , highly motivated parents to give the State system a shot in the arm. But experience shows that good teachers go to the good schools, of whatever kind, and parents who can afford it move near them. So the few good schools get still better but the others don't.
Secondly, even if we could staff all schools with first-class teachers and equip them with every possible facility, this would only mask the problem, which is that schools don't provide preparation for real life. Good or had, at 16 (or 18) the young adult is dropped from a disciplined, protected environment into one of uncertainty and competition and adult problems.
While they are still at school they are well aware it is not "for real." That's why they are angry or apathetic or sometimes too docile, and unable to cope with the responsibility when they come out. (College teachers know how the "good" school student can go to pieces in the freedom of student life.) Why don't we simply with equating education with schooling? On the whole, the primary schools do well for children young enough to need a "whole" environment.
Secondary schools could then teach a few hours a day (or days a week) of technical or theoretical subjects, or parts of subjects, which are best taught in a formal way, by specially trained experts. This would cut class sizes and expenses. It would also give teachers the experience of teaching people who were not serving a ten-year sentence, but spending time on necessary though perhaps arduous study, knowing that they had, besides, a life in which adult skills, responsibilities and roles were being gradually undertaken.
For the "academic" type there could be seminar-style ' courses and lectures.
The early universities took boys in their early teens. Factories and workshops would have people set aside part or whole time, to teach and guide groups of "junior" part time workers in various departments.
People doing craft-work could be paid to take small groups of "apprenticesfor varying periods. When a boy or girl found a trade or profession really -absorbing. that could become preparation for a career, with theoretical courses to match.
Sensible mothers and wives would welcome the company, the stimulation and the extra cash provided by taking a few girls or boys at a time to learn child care, housecraft of needlework, and the elusive art of "managing" money, not to mention all the little tips and personal helps that a classroom situation cannot provide.
All this could be a little like the old apprenticeship system, but more varied and necessarily more centrally supervised. This should be carefully integrated with appropriate theoretical studies and the encouragement of arts and leisure activities, in settings where these would not seem childish because shared with many older people, as they arc at evening classes and some "area colleges" now.
What is now done as sparetime voluntary social work could also become a normal part of education in citizenship, an adult affair in which young adults naturally share, not something for do Loaders or those with "socially consciousparents.
The country is full of people who are good at their jobs and their lives and love to share their skills and experience. They don't want to be teachers, but with a little training and proper organise lion they could be giving children what they really need.
This is a gradual and realistic transition from childhood to the grown-up world, with no sudden break, no hard lines between those who "stay on" at school and those who leave, no "we and they" attitude to adults, since adults will have been fellowworkers as well as guides from early days.
I don't suppose it will happen. Our education system is like Concorde. Having put so much money and effort and enthusiasm into it, more is required than reason, humanity and commonsense before people will admit that the goodwill and the money could 'be better spent.
So 1 suppose we shall have to go on cramming real education and working experience into evenings and holidays, as long as preparation for public exams doesn't eat away even those little islands of real life.