Government policy towards secondary schools and history teaching 19001910
The period 1900-1910 is a crucial one in the development of secondary education in
England. Not just in the structure of the secondary system but also in the development
of what was taught. There was a consciousness that other countries, particularly
Germany, were prioritising technical expertise in their educational facilities to an extent
which meant England was being left behind in the skills market, and English companies
were bringing German technicians and clerical workers into the country. A number of
educationalists wanted much more emphasis on increasing the technical and scientific
side of education to the vast majority of children. However there was a great
uncertainly about how far this emphasis should be developed, and at what age it should
be begun, even among those who supported the concept. This indecision, linked to the
potent factors of class and religion, meant that by the end of the decade the ideas of
expanding technical education and wider educational opportunities to all children had
been largely dismissed except by some parts of the labour and trade union movement.
In the early 1890s the Government had given the Bryce Commission the task of
investigating secondary education; the Commission had found a complicated situation.
There was already an array of different types of secondary schools and even the
definition of secondary education was not clear to commentators at the time. Nor was it
clear how many children were in the different types of ‘secondary’ schooling. The
Commission described three grades of secondary schools (which had been designated
by the earlier Taunton Commission) but even within each ‘grade’ there was a wide
range of quite different institutions. For example the Bryce Commission included within
the third grade endowed schools, certain private schools, and higher grade or higher
grade elementary schools. What we tend to think of as ‘secondary’ schools would
probably have come into the second grade. Before considering the ‘secondary schools’,
it is necessary to look at all the other forms of post elementary education which were
used, almost exclusively, by working class children.
Higher Grade Schools
Higher grade schools were an extension of the elementary schools run by the School
Boards. They usually placed an emphasis on scientific and technical subjects, partly
because they could apply to the Science and Art Department for grants for science and
art subjects although some did devote considerable time to ‘literary’ subjects. They
generally provided education to the age of fourteen or fifteen and were seen as
recruiting elementary school students from the lower classes who would be going into
2
jobs as soon as they left school but wanted more training and education than the
elementary school could provide. They only existed in some areas, mainly the cities, and
varied from area to area.
In London there was a considerable number of them and they were seen as an
important element in the capital’s education system. An Inspector’s memo from Jan
1900 sets out the minimum time for compulsory subjects in general Higher Grade
Schools (as opposed to ‘Schools of Science’). In both girls’ and boys’ higher grade
schools, ‘History and Geography’ must be taught for at least two hours a week and it
was emphasised that it was “not desirable” that education on the HG schools “be
carried on to the extent to which it is at present by class teaching alone, but that
methods of education should be chosen by which the scholars should be forced to
develop their powers of self-reliance by individual effort”.1 As far as individual schools
are concerned, a glance at the timetables in the National Archives files shows how
impossible it is to generalise about what was being taught in these schools. Every school
whose details are there has different levels and names of classes and every class has
different amounts of time spent on history. At Montem Street School in Finsbury, the
girls had one hour of history in Standard VII, three in Form 1, one in Form 2 and one and
three quarters in Form 3.2 Oldfield Road Boys (also in Finsbury) had one hour, 15
minutes of history a week in Standard 7 and ‘ex7’ (the year after).3 At Fleet Road Higher
Grade School one hour, 20 minutes of history was taught a week to the ‘Intermediate
Class’, an hour of Commercial History to the ‘Senior Commercial Class’ (and an hour to
the ‘Junior Commercial Class’, an hour and a half to the Girls only ‘Candidates Class’ and
an hour and a half to the ‘Scholarship Class’.4
The higher grade schools became part of the debate about what kind of secondary
schooling should be developed if there was to be some expansion of post-elementary
education. Many elementary school teachers and the School Boards which ran them
saw the higher grade schools as fulfilling a very useful function of developing the
education received in the elementary schools and being appropriate for pupils who had
aptitude for more schooling but who it was felt would feel completely out of place in the
atmosphere of a more traditional secondary school. However for a number of reasons
1
National Archives, ED 14/41. ‘Curricula in Higher Grade Schools’, 22/1/1900.
Ibid, Timetable - Montem Street School, Finsbury, Girls’ Department, c1899-1900. Forms 1-3 are
presumably the years after VII ie 15-17 years old.
3
Ibid, ‘Special Time Tables, Oldfield Road Boys’ School, 1899-1900.
4
Ibid, Fleet Road Higher Grade School, 1900.
2
3
which have been much debated5, the development of the higher grade schools was
effectively stunted. They were caught up in the moves to remove educational powers
from the School Boards which had been the target of the Conservative Party for some
years6. They were seen as promoting secular education through the Board Schools at
the expense of the church schools and there was growing concern from both the
powerful Church of England lobby within the Conservative Party and also from
Conservatives who feared the radicalism that might be fostered in the working class if
secular education took a dominant hold. It was presumed that if the school boards were
subordinated to and eventually replaced by the country councils as the main
educational bodies these would prove more conservative in their administration.
First, the classes organised by the School Boards were deemed ineligible for Science and
Art Department grants. Then came the Cockerton judgment; a famous incident in the
annals of the history of education. In 1899 an art school in London brought a case
complaining of competition from evening classes provided by the London School Board
and the London Board district auditor upheld its argument, disallowing expenditure for
classes of a non-elementary nature from rates. The LSB appealed up to the High Court
but lost at every level. This ruling applied to the Higher Grade Schools as well as the
evening classes so their funding by school boards was in effect illegal although they
were given special permission to continue for another year.
Higher Elementary Schools
Meanwhile, in May1900 the ‘Higher Elementary School Minute’ was issued by the Board
of Education, partly to clarify the position of the higher grade schools whose status had
5
Secondary education during the early years of the 20C was a highly controversial area both at the time
and for historians of education since the 1940s. See for example: Whitbread, Nanette, ‘The early
twentieth-century secondary curriculum debate in England’, History of Education, 1984, Vol 13, No 3;
Daglish, ND, ‘The politics of educational change: the case of the English higher grade schools’, Journal of
Educational and Administrative History, Vol XIX, No 2, July 1987; Lowe, Roy, ‘Robert Morant and the
secondary school regulations of 1904’, Journal of Educational and Administrative History, Vol XVI, No 1,
Jan 1984; Banks, Olive L, ‘Morant and the secondary school regulations of 1904’, British Journal of
Educational Studies, Vol 3, No 1, Nov 1954; Taylor, Tony, ‘An early arrival of the Fascist mentality: Robert
Morant’s rise to power’, Journal of Educational and Administrative History, Vol XVII, No 2, July 1985;
Kazamias, Andreas M, Politics, Society and Secondary Education in England, (University of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia 1966); Graves, John, Policy and Progress in Secondary Education 1902-1942, (Thomas
Nelson & Sons Ltd, London 1943); Banks, Olive, Parity and Prestige in English Secondary Education: A
Study in Educational Sociology, (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1955); Eaglesham, EJR, The Foundations
of Twentieth-Century in England, (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1967); Simon, Brian, Education and the
Labour Movement 1870-1920 (Lawrence & Wishart, London 1965).
6
These were set up under the 1870 Education Act. They were elected by ratepayers on a secret ballot
every three years; women might both vote and stand for office and from 1870 onwards there were a
number of influential female board members across the country.
4
been made unclear by the ongoing ‘Cockerton’ decision7, and partly to continue the
clarification and re-organisation of the education system and ensure that the School
Boards did not encroach into secondary education. This followed the policy of the acting
(and substantive holder of the post from April 1903) Permanent Secretary of the Board
of Education, Robert Morant.8 The Minute laid down a rationale for a version of the
higher grade schools – the higher elementary schools which would be clearly within the
elementary school system not the secondary (which Morant was already planning to
reorganise) and would teach no pupils beyond fifteen. They would provide a form of
elementary education beyond the ordinary elementary school and would in general
have a technical and scientific bias designed to meet the needs of industry and
employers.
The Higher Elementary Schools were for children aged 10 to 15 years of age “who are
certified by an Inspector of the Board as qualified to profit by such instruction”. The
concept behind them was that “the special object which they have in view is to qualify
the children taught in them to enter any of those callings in which scientific methods
have to be employed”9. The four year course of instruction was based on science and all
the pupils were trained to make accurate measurements and perform and record simple
experiments, although they also took elementary Mathematics, a foreign language and
Drawing. Classes were to be relatively small; “as a rule, confined to thirty-five, and may
not exceed forty”.10It has been argued that the higher elementaries were just a way of
appeasing a working class desire for secondary education while avoiding putting their
7
The case had not been through all the appeal stages yet and the London School Board did not finally
exhaust these unsuccessfully until December 1900.
8
Sir Robert Morant, 1863-1920. Educated Winchester College and Oxford. Taught briefly at a prep school
then went to Siam where he tutored the crown prince and then became involved in the Siamese
educational system. Becoming politically involved in Siam, his position eventually became “untenable”
(ODNB) and he returned to England where “though he pursued a career in the civil service, he was also to
attract public controversy” (ODNB). He worked and lived briefly at Toynbee Hall and then went to the
education department of the privy council where he worked for Michael Sadler. Morant rapidly rose to
become acting and then permanent secretary of the Board of Education, and Sadler resigned from the
civil service with some bitterness, later describing Morant as “an early arrival of the Fascist mentality”.
The 1902 Education Act is largely seen as the work of Balfour who became the Conservative Prime
Minister during its passing, but Morant was important as an adviser and he reorganised the Board of
Education to implement the Act effectively. Despite his controversial reputation Morant managed to work
well with the Liberals when they came to power in 1905 and he was knighted in 1907. Under his regime
school meals for underprivileged children were introduced in 1907, a system of medical inspection and
treatment of schoolchildren initiated and Dr George Newman appointed to run it. He introduced a
number of other reforms both at the Board of Education and at the National Insurance Commission and
later the Ministry of Health where he was the first permanent secretary.
9
‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1902-1903’ (HMSO, London 1903), p46.
10
Board of Education, ‘1904 Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools with Schedules’, (HMSO,
London 1904), p 16.
5
children into the ‘real’ secondary’ schools, but their establishment was also a reflection
of the perception that England was lagging well behind other European powers in its
modern technical and scientific training. However even some higher elementary school
headmasters were wary of too much early scientific specialisation and advocated giving
the pupils a more rounded education. These arguments were part of the debate over
the value of a ‘liberal’ humanities-based, even ‘classical’ education, which ran
throughout the early years of the century and will be discussed in more detail when we
look at secondary education.
In fact, Higher Elementary Schools often continued in the same premises and along
similar lines to the Higher Grade Schools. The Inspector, Mr Currey, reported that this
was the case with Ipswich higher elementary school which had opened in the same
premises as the previous higher grade school. He suggested the drawbacks to these
higher schools were that children started at them at varying times (although this was
being changed); that parents were unclear about the purpose of the school, and were
reluctant to commit to the four year course; there was “some not unnatural reluctance”
on the part of teachers in elementary schools to lose “their best children...when they
are beginning to show some return for the pains bestowed upon them”.11 And it was
soon clear that higher elementary schools were not favoured by the education
authorities – which from 1902 were the local county councils. They often either merged
them back into elementary schools or renamed and developed them as secondary
schools
In 1903, there were only 29 Higher Elementary Schools, providing education for 7,459
children; just over a third of those attending were girls and over two thirds of all the
children paid no fees. It is not clear at this stage whether any learnt history. In 1904 the
Code was still clear that the curriculum and time table of the higher elementary school
had to be approved by the Board of Education and “show that a sufficiency of Science
instruction , both practical and theoretical, is provided for in each year”.12
However within a year the reorganisation of post-elementary education was under way
and the secondary schools were in the ascendant. The rationale for the Higher
Elementary Schools was changed:
By 1905 the Board was aware that the Minute of 1900 had virtually failed…The
board was inclined to lay the blame on the terms of the Minute itself,
mentioning in particular the high cost of the building equipment required and
11
‘General Reports of H.M. Inspectors on Elementary Schools and Training Colleges for the Year 1902
(HMSO, London 1903), p77.
12
Ibid, p15.
6
the scientific nature of the curriculum demanded, which was not particularly
suited to the occupations for which many of its pupils were destined. Accordingly
the 1905 Code introduced new regulations for higher elementary schools…to
encourage local authorities to organise such schools13
The Board of Education wanted the higher elementary schools to succeed. As the
Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education, Sir William Anson said to the House
of Commons in 1905:, “if no intermediate type of school between the elementary and
secondary schools is created, I fear it will lead to a lowering of the standards of the
secondary schools”.14 They wanted to provide an intermediate school to prevent a
dilution of the standards of the secondary schools through the introduction of an influx
of working class children who might not only lower standards by leaving half way
through the four year course but would also lower the social standards of the school.
The National Union of Teachers and increasingly all sections of the labour movement
who now shared a growing interest in educational provision became more strongly
against them precisely because of fears that this was the purpose of the schools: to
divert poorer children from proper secondary education. In 1900 the Higher Grade
Schools had been one of the few paths to extending their education for working class
children; by 1908 the secondary school sector was expanding and working class
advocates saw no reason why their children should not be participating in it.
The rationale for higher elementary schools was now that they were for children who
might wish to defer leaving school until they were fifteen but no longer; particularly in
areas “where there is a steady demand in skilled occupations for the services of young
people”. If these children were in schools where very many pupils would leave at
thirteen or earlier “ the general standard of work that can profitably be attempted by
any of the higher classes of the school” would be “very seriously” lowered and these
children would need the Higher Elementaries.15 The HES course would now be only
three years, from twelve years old (and the scholar would leave at fifteen except with
special permission from the Inspector).
As far as the curriculum was concerned, since the publication of the 1904 Code, the
circumstances which had led to the imposition of a scientific curriculum “no longer
exist”, and the curriculum would now be less specialised (and therefore less expensive
as laboratories, equipment and specialist teachers were all necessary for the earlier
13
Banks, Olive, Parity and Prestige in English Secondary Education: A Study in Educational Sociology,
(Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1955), p54.
14
Sir William Anson quoted from Hansard, 1/8/1905 in Banks, op cit, pp54-55.
15
Board of Education, ‘1905 Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools with Schedules’, (HMSO,
London 1905), p iii.
7
curriculum).16 The curriculum must now be more general, more flexible according to the
particular needs of the locality. A “special side” would remain, responding to
circumstances (“In some cases the chief local industries may demand fine workmanship.
In others a high degree of manual skill may be less important than the power to use
machinery or to handle materials used in construction, and to carry out the details of a
design”. And for girls, the curriculum will “be expected to include a practical training for
home duties, which is applicable to the circumstances of their own homes”.17) However
it was firmly stated that the “curriculum will not be approved unless it provides,
together with this special instruction, a progressive course of study in the English
Language and Literature, in Elementary Mathematics, and in History and Geography”. 18
So the curriculum would be an extension of the elementary one and no details are given
of what should be taught. Probably it was a development of the higher grades of the
elementary school. The Code said firmly that as long as there was “a sufficient amount
of general instruction” the practical side will be left “largely” to the decision of the local
Authority and there will also be no regulation as to how time is divided between the
different subjects. It does however say that care must be taken to avoid specialising, “in
order to serve the needs of a particular trade or the needs of a group of related
industries”. This kind of routine is better developed in “the workshop or in the counting
house”. The Code says that:
to learn to do a thing with mechanical accuracy, and to neglect to consider why a
thing is done in one way and why not in another, will not encourage that
adaptability and intelligent understanding of routine work which add so much
both to the value of an employé (sic), and to his own powers of selfdevelopment and advancement.19
This is in one sense a quite enlightened approach to vocational education. However the
next section reveals the enormous difference the Board is seeking to impose between
higher elementary and secondary education. Turning to subjects beyond the “ordinary”
(which include history) it says “the purpose of a Higher Elementary School should be
borne in mind”. Looking for example at French:
…the question of introducing French into the curriculum may arise. In a
Secondary School the teaching of French may be regarded as a first step towards
introducing the scholars to the literature and thought of France, and though this
16
Ibid, p iv
Ibid, p v.
18
Ibid, p15.
19
Board of Education, ‘1905 Code of Regulations’, op cit, p vi.
17
8
use of the language may not be fully realised in the Secondary School, yet the
course is long enough to ensure that the scholar will have the opportunity of
acquiring a literary as well as practical knowledge of the language, useful for this
or for other ends. A thorough study of language has also a value in intellectual
training.
In the Higher Elementary School, on the other hand, French could not, owing to
the limitations of time, be studied adequately for either purpose, and therefore
its introduction is best considered solely in relation to the question of immediate
usefulness in employment…The circumstances of the locality must determine
the propriety of attempting to teach French at all in a Higher Elementary
School20
For the next few years there was a mixture of Higher Elementary Schools still working to
the old policy which they were allowed to do until 1909-10, and a few new ones
operating according to the revised regulations. In 1907-08, the Board of Education
annual report says that thirty new Higher Elementary Schools were opened in England;
28 of these were ordinary elementary schools converted into HESs, one secondary
school converted into an HES and just one was an entirely new school. However, reading
on, it turns out that 22 of the 28 converted schools were LCC ones which had provisional
recognition and in the end the LCC withdrew them all as it could not undertake to satisfy
certain conditions which the Board imposed for paying grants at the higher level
provided for HESs. By mid 1908 there were in total 38 HESs of the ‘new’ type and 21 of
the ‘old’.21
This annual report from the Board is interesting in that it includes some information
from the inspectors’ reports, at least from the ‘older’ HESs which are in transition –
most of the others are too new for definite opinions to be drawn. In one school the
inspector complains that the boys in particular leave when they reach their “14 th year
and says that the curriculum needs to be modified (although very good “for the purpose
of a good general education”; there should be more mechanical and laboratory lessons
– “The aim should be throughout in the direction of training the boys to be intelligent
artisans rather than teachers, clerk, or craftsmen in the higher sense”22. He says the
girls’ curriculum is “even more deficient than that for the boys as regards practical
training”. They “receive no Housewifery training, and out of 150 girls, only 36 learn
20
Ibid, p vii.
‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1907-08’ (HMSO, London 1909), pp 25-26
22
‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1907-08’, p44
21
9
Cookery and 28 laundry in the year”. 23 The schools were clearly moving towards
academic teaching. English is praised at another: “A wide selection of literature is
studied in each class, and the aim of the course is that the girls should enjoy their books
instead of merely acquiring facts about them. For the first-year girls the literature is well
correlated with the History and Geography…the girls express themselves well on a
variety of subjects, many of which are selected by themselves. Some excellent
compositions were seen in the second-year class and it was noticed that the girls had
collected the information for themselves out of school hours”.24 Unfortunately the only
mention of history is vague: “History and Geography are also in general reported to be
well taught”.25
Over the next few years, the number of Higher Elementary Schools gradually increased to 46 in 1909-10 but the number of pupils attending them remained low and by 1913-14
there were only 36.26 And the figures show that although at age thirteen there was a
peak of students attending, the number rapidly declined after they became fourteen. As
most pupils only joined the schools at twelve this meant they were only receiving two
years of education in them.27 As the Board’s 1909-10 annual report concluded; “..it can
hardly be said that the majority of Higher Elementary Schools are in any special degree
fulfilling what the Board conceive to be the true function of a school of this type”.28
Reformatory and Industrial Schools
Throughout this period a number of children were receiving their education through
reformatories and industrial schools. Reformatories had been set up by charitable
individuals and societies to provide accommodation for young offenders and neglected
children. From 1854, legislation provided that they must be approved by the Secretary
of State for the Home Office, and that funding would be provided for them from the
Treasury to provide maintenance for their inmates. From 1857 approval was given for
industrial schools for vagrant and neglected children which were again established and
managed by voluntary societies. The 1870 Elementary Education Act gave education
authorities the power to establish industrial schools although by 1913 only 22 of the 112
such schools were local authority owned and managed, and all 37 of the reformatories
23
Ibid.
Ibid.
25
Ibid, p45.`
26
‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1913-14’, p68.
27
‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1909-10’, p64.
28
Ibid, p63
24
10
were still in charitable hands.29 By 1913 the number of children in reformatories and
industrial schools was nearly 18,000. The Children Act 1908 clarified that reformatories
were for juvenile offenders aged between 12 and 16 years who must go to them for
between three and five years; industrial schools were for vagrant or neglected children
under the age of 14 to stay there for a period the court thought “proper for the teaching
and training of the child”, and for child offenders under the age of 12 and those
between 12 and 14 in certain cases.30
Every year there was a perfunctory inspection of the schools: the Home Office
reformatory and industrial inspectorate was considerably less well paid than those
inspecting factories, mines and explosive manufactories let alone the Board of
Education inspectors, and the difficulties involved in visiting often remote schools made
it a demanding task.31 Looking at the mentions of history teaching in their annual report
for 1907, there is usually little to say about it. In Bedfordshire Reformatory (and many
others) , ‘History good’; similarly at Birkendale Farm and at many others, “history
readers have been in use”. These two phrases reappear time after time, sometimes with
slight changes as at Kent Industrial School, “History readers have been used to good
purpose” and at Beacon Lane, Liverpool, “history readers have been intelligently used”.
However at St Vincent’s Industrial School, Dartford, “ History readers might well be used
more frequently”, this latter comment is unusual – usually history is only mentioned if it
is relatively positive. There is absolutely no sense of history being taught in any but the
most mechanical reader-based way.32
This was borne out by the Departmental Committee’s Report on Reformatory and
Industrial Schools produced six years later. It asked some Board of Education inspectors
to look at a sample of reformatory and industrial schools. Looking at their findings the
Committee concluded that “the certified schools have not, except in isolated instances,
attempted to follow the changes made in the elementary schools in curriculum and
method during recent years”. 33 Its Report quotes the Board Inspectors as saying the
schools “closely resemble the good schools of 15 or 20 years ago, but we miss in them
some of the characteristics of the best schools of to-day…in history and geography,
29
‘Report of the Departmental Committee on Reformatory and Industrial Schools’, (London, HMSO 1913),
pp 4-5.
30
Ibid, p44.
31
Hurt, John, ‘Reformatory and industrial schools before 1933’, History of Education, Vol 13, No1, 1984,
p50.
32
‘Fifty-first Report for the Year 1907 of the Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools of Great
Britain, Part I’, (London, HMSO 1908). comments taken from pp 35-265.
33
‘Report of the Departmental Committee on Reformatory and Industrial Schools’ (London, HMSO 1913),
p 30.
11
object teaching and drawing [and English and arithmetic], the syllabuses and methods
are those of 15 to 20 years ago”.34 The Chief Inspector of Elementary Schools is quoted
as saying: “They have the merits of the old type of elementary school. The work is
accurate, careful and neat within a narrow range. On the other hand…there is not the
intelligence, the individuality and the originality which are in the best of our schools
today”. When asked how he would compare the schools to average rather than the best
elementary schools he thought the best reformatory schools would be more “accurate
and thorough” but the second rate elementary school would probably be better for
“range of information”, and for composition, reading and also geography, “because the
new methods of teaching geography have penetrated even to the second-rate
elementary schools”35
The Reformatory School inspectors took issue with this. The Acting Chief Inspector
maintained “that for the mass of children the older methods were better than the
newer, and that the average boy is better grounded for the work of life in the
schoolroom of an industrial school than in the average public elementary school”. He
valued “the modern attempt to make lessons more interesting and more stimulating”
but contended “that the newer methods have involved the loss of some of the qualities
of ... thoroughness and accuracy, which were the virtues of the older system”.36 As far
as history was concerned he freely admitted that “History is not generally formally
taught, but in every school I should say they use history readers”.37
Continuation/evening schools
The Continuation Schools originally grew out of the voluntary schools and classes run
outside working hours for the poor by concerned volunteers; sometimes prompted by
evangelical or religious devotion, wanting to ensure that the poor could read the Bible
or knew about religion; sometimes from a more secular, scientific or semi-political
motivation.38 By the mid nineteenth century the main types of education for older
working class children and adults were elementary schools for adult beginners;
Mechanics’ Institutes classes where scientific and technical knowledge was taught ; and
continuation schools where young people improved on, or recovered, the knowledge
34
Ibid, pp 30-31
Ibid, p31. He unfortunately makes no specific mention of history.
36
Ibid.
37
‘Report of the Departmental Committee on Reformatory and Industrial Schools; Evidence’, (HMSO,
London 1914), p 497
38
Most of the information for this background briefing on continuation schooling comes from Board of
Education, ‘Report of the Consultative Committee on Attendance, Compulsory of Otherwise at
Continuation Schools, Vol I.- Report and Appendices’, Chapter VI., ‘The History and Present Position of
Evening and other Continuation Schools and Classes in England and Wales’, pp 67-79.
35
12
they had already been taught. Although there had been mistrust from some sectors
organising these classes about receiving state help in case it jeopardised their political or
religious independence and curtailed their activities, by mid century there was general
acceptance of the advantage of some state assistance. It was also increasingly clear that
for the continuation classes to provide an effective education service to older children
and adults they needed to have behind them a well-organised system of elementary
education providing a basic foundation of knowledge for all children.
In 1851, the year of the Great Exhibition which dramatically promoted the virtues of
technology and innovation, grants were first provided by the Government for Evening
Schools. Two years later (apparently at the suggestion of Prince Albert39) the
Department of Science and Art was set up to provide grants, advice and support to
technical and artistic education, initially for “the industrial classes”. Gradually two
systems developed; advanced Evening Classes supported by the Science and Art
Department, and Evening Schools grant-aided by the Education Department which
supplemented deficiencies in early education and were seen as “not secondary, but
continued elementary education”.40 However, with the establishment of effective
elementary schools across most of the country following the passing of the 1870
Education Act, the numbers attending evening schools began to decline.
They only began to rise again after many of the rules and regulations which had
enforced an elementary school syllabus and testing system on them were removed or
softened. Numbers registered to attend rose sixfold between 1892-93 and 1899-1900.
As with Higher Grade Schools, the question arose as to whether they came under
‘elementary’ or ‘secondary’ education (and thus who should administer them). They
were also involved in the ‘Cockerton’ judgement (see p3) with the Local Government
Board London district auditor disallowing some of the expenditure incurred by the
London School Board on both Higher Grade Schools and Evening Continuation Schools.
After the passing of the 1902 Education Act which brought both elementary and ‘higher’
(or secondary) education under the administrative control of Counties and County
Boroughs it was clarified that Continuation Schools were part of ‘higher’ education, not
elementary.
The numbers attending Continuation Schools were not insubstantial: in 1901, over half a
million ‘scholars’ took classes in them (compared with over five million pupils in
elementary schools). As with the Higher Elementary Schools which were established
after the Cockerton Judgment, there was a body of opinion which wanted a technical
39
40
Ibid, p 74.
Ibid, p76.
13
and scientific emphasis in the continuation schools. However the basic subjects
remained the most popular; in 1901 there were 5,198 evening or continuation schools
and ‘Reading, Writing , Arithmetic, or two or three of these subjects combined’ were
taught in 3,661 of them. The next most popular subject was ‘Drawing’ (in 2,223 schools)
and then came ‘Geography, History, or both combined’ in 2,100 schools. Science
subjects were taught far less widely. In terms of numbers of pupils studying them the
‘Geography, History group’ had 50,187 students, coming after the 3Rs, then
Needlework, Woodwork and Drawing. As far as the students’ ages are concerned, very
approximately a quarter were between 12 and 15 years of age, a quarter over 21 and a
half, 15-21 years old.41 Inspectors’ reports suggest that the majority were actually
between 14 and 18.
The 1900 ‘Revised Code’ for inspectors suggested that an elementary scholar should be
able to pass on “without a break in his education to an evening continuation school”.
The subjects taught at the elementary school should form a foundation on which the
higher studies of the evening school could be built. “Among the most important of such
subjects” were “the knowledge of the scientific principles which underlie the technique
of the industries of the neighbourhood” and also “some general acquaintance with
English History, without which the teaching of the life and duties of an English citizen
will lose much of its effect”.42 The Code of Regulations for evening continuation schools
laid out the Board of Education’s suggestions for what should be taught although it was
stressed that as long as they were approved in advance by Inspectors, other Schemes of
work could be proposed.43 For ‘History’, which was included under ‘English Subjects’, it
was suggested that the pupils be taught:
a) particular periods or subject, e.g.:- The reign of Queen Victoria. History of the
British colonies. The Stuart period, with especial reference to the constitution
and functions of Parliament. The expansion of England in the 18 th century.
b) Biographies of leading persons and the chief events in a selected portion of
history, e.g., 800 to 1215 A.D. or 1688 to 1760 A.D.44
This history was not included in the detailed ‘specimen syllabuses’ included in the Code
but ‘Life and Duties of the Citizen’ and ‘Commercial History’ were.
41
Board of Education, ‘General Reports on Higher Education with Appendices for the Year 1902’, (London,
HMSO 1903), pp 116-118.
42
Education Department, ‘Revised Instructions issued to Her Majesty’s Inspectors, and Applicable to the
Code of 1900’, (London, HMSO 1900), p 26.
43
Board of Education, ‘Code of Regulations for Evening Continuation Schools, 1900’, (HMSO, London
1900), p7.
44
Ibid, pp 7-8.
14
The syllabus for ‘Life and Duties of the Citizen’ listed a wide range of topics to be
covered. It said that it “touches only on limited aspects of the public life of the citizen”
and omitted “various important considerations” which teachers would “no doubt”
discuss in dealing with the subject. However it also said that as set out in the syllabus it
would “be found difficult to teach, except to those older scholars who are in the habit of
reading and thinking intelligently about public affairs...The teacher will select that part
which is most appropriate to the circumstances and needs of the school and the locality.
For younger scholars a much simpler form of syllabus should be prepared...” 45
The syllabus started with an introductory preface with headings, presumably for
discussion, such as; “Public duties accompany all forms of work in life, whatever the
occupation or profession”; “Serving personal interest alone is not enough”; “’All for
each’ should be requited by ‘each for all’”; “Loyalty to one’s own village or town should
lead to a larger patriotism...Self interest and class interest should be subordinate to
general and national interests”.46 This is followed by: “The Nation and the State.- What
they mean. Difference between Representative Government and Despotic Government.
Responsibilities involved in representative government”.
It then went through all the detailed elements of civic society – local government
(including such things as “the village and the parish”, “education”, “the Poor Law
Union”; central government (including its various elements – the Crown and the Houses
of Parliament the Judicial System; Executive Government) ; the Duties of Citizens in
relation to Local and Central Government; the Empire (including the “Obligation to
cultivate knowledge about our brethren ‘across the sea’. Native Races within the Empire
, and our duties to them”) and finally “Industrial and Social Life and Duties” which
includes “What constitutes national wealth” and discussion of “Associations of Workers”
and “the State and Labour”, suggesting “the duty of the community to sympathise with
every reasonable effort of the workers to improve their condition, and to develop their
intelligence...A healthy and skilful body of workers , upright in character and self-reliant,
is a source of strength to the country”.47 It concluded by linking patriotism with civic
duty:
As intelligence, honour, and virtue are essential to the welfare of the family, so is
patriotism necessary to national and social life. We have to recognise that our
public responsibilities are duties as much as personal and family obligations. We
have no right to expect just legislation or impartial administration unless we
45
Ibid, p 18.
Ibid, pp 18-19.
47
Ibid, pp 19- 22.
46
15
perform with intelligence those public duties which devolve upon all. If we suffer
injustice in connexion (sic) with public affairs, we have little right to complain
unless we have done our duty.48
The Code also offered a detailed proposal for a syllabus in ‘Commercial History’. This is
an ambitious history with a strong geographical emphasis, dealing with the history of
commerce from the earliest times and across all civilisations. In effect it offers a world
history, told from the perspective of the development of commerce – “Commerce is a
great factor in all civilisation. Commercial history tells how mankind has progressed
from small isolated communities to the great organised nations of the modern world,
which depend for their existence on mutual trade and intercourse”.49 This is a large
undertaking and a warning note at the beginning suggests that although the course of
instruction should as far as possible cover the whole scheme, the latter portion
concentrating on ‘English Commercial History’ “should be dwelt on at greater length”. It
also proposes using “striking episodes and biographies” when dealing with “the drier
facts” and “when possible, to introduce any illustrations of directly local interest”. 50
The syllabus emphasises the importance of rivers in the development of civilisations – in
Babylon, Egypt, (and also China and the recent opening up of Africa). It describes how
the Egyptian and Babylonian civilisations were connected by the caravans crossing the
Syrian Desert which gave rise to the Phoenician civilisation on the coast of Syria. From
thence it moves to the Greeks and Romans and the way all these civilisations intertraded between themselves across Europe. As it moves through the historical eras it
sometimes has an almost Marxist analysis. The notes on the Middle Ages include
“Commercial importance of pilgrimages and of the crusades, which re-open the east to
the west”.51 Similarly the commercial importance of the Norman Conquest is that it
opens up England to the Continent. The outline gradually becomes more Anglocentric
(justified by the argument that by the nineteenth century “English commercial
supremacy was established”52) although it does talk of the “renewed importance of the
Mediterranean” in the nineteenth century, and the growth of Hamburg and Antwerp.
However, how far these syllabuses were ever put into practice is almost impossible to
know. Unless there are any relevant memoirs (perhaps from working class pupils who
later went on to university) or detailed inspectors’ reports the work of the continuation
schools will remain even more obscure than that of the elementary schools.
48
Ibid, p 23.
Ibid, p 46.
50
Ibid.
51
Ibid, p 47.
52
Ibid, p 48.
49
16
Secondary schools
The 1902 Education Act was passed after some enormous popular protests53 and
opposition from Liberals, Labour and Trade Union activists and Nonconformists. There
were heated debates in Parliament and a long campaign of passive resistance against it
led by a Baptist minister and Liberal Fabian called John Clifford. The Liberal election
victory in late 1905 was in part due to the continuing anger over the Act which was seen
as reinstating the power balance in education towards the establishment Churches – the
Church of England and the Roman Catholic church – and abolishing the popular
democratic control which the School Boards had represented. A great deal has been
written about the background to the Act which there is not space to cover here.
The Act abolished the 2568 School Boards set up by the Elementary Education Act 1870,
and handed over their duties to local borough or county councils. The 328 Local
Education Authorities as they were called, were now given powers to establish new
secondary and technical schools as well as developing the existing system of elementary
schools. In its annual report following the enactment of the Act, the Board of Education
admitted that: “Many of the provisions of the Act have been and continue to be a
matter for controversy” but said it was “gratified to find that in the majority of localities
there is much willingness to accept it as a step towards bringing education, co-ordinated
in all its forms, into more intimate connection with other branches of local life, and to
unite in administering it in a spirit of fairness and liberality”.54
However the 1902 Education Act was only about organisation and structures; it said
nothing about syllabus and curriculum. The existing secondary schools (and those which
were likely to be established by the newly empowered local education authorities)
which received funding from the Government were funded through very complicated
arrangements as either Division A schools in which they “must provide a thorough and
progressive course in Science, forming part of a course of general education” or Division
B schools which offered “a course of general instruction including a scheme for a three
or four years’ course in Science”.55 These sound similar but in practice the A schools had
a predominantly scientific curriculum and the B schools were those with a mainly
classical and literary curriculum. The A schools received a higher grant than the B ones
and by 1903 there were more of them (226 to 160 B schools). This all fuelled the debate
53
Eg 70,000-100,00 people marched against it in Leeds in autumn 1902 according to Brian Simon,
Education and the Labour Movement (Lawrence & Wishart, London 1974), p 222.
54
Board of Education, ‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1902-1903’, (HMSO, London 1903),
p6.
55
Board of Education, ‘Regulations for Secondary Schools (from 1 st August 1903 to 31st July 1904),
(HMSO< London 1903), pp 4 & 14.
17
among teachers, headteachers, pedagogic experts and politicians about what kind of
curriculum there should be, which as we have seen, had already begun in the debates
over the Higher Grade/Higher Elementary Schools. As Olive Banks described; “there was
a growing alarm that the spread of science in the schools had been so extensive that the
linguistic and humanistic studies were in danger of neglect”.56
Robert Morant, the Permanent Secretary at the Board of Education, has been accused
by a number of historians over the years of a Machiavellian plot to impose a classical
education on the grammar schools57 but in fact most of the educational establishment
were concerned that there was now too much emphasis on science and technology at
the expense of ‘literary’ subjects. James Bryce, Chairman of the Royal Commission on
Secondary Education which had reported in 1895, was by the early 1900s wondering if
the turn towards science had gone too far, as was Morant’s much praised predecessor,
Michael Sadler. Even technical educators were complaining of the lack of general
education among the students they were seeing in their advanced technical classes. 58
There was also concern that pupil teachers (intending elementary school teachers who
were increasingly taught in secondary schools alongside the other pupils, before going
on to a short non-residential course at a college, rather than remaining within
elementary schools as they had done previously) would become too specialised in
science at the expense of the humanities.
Her Majesty’s Inspectors made adverse comments on the quality of humanities teaching
although it is unclear how far the situation had really changed. Many of the grammar
schools taking advantage of the A grants were small struggling schools which saw the
grants as a lifeline and had not been teaching any subjects successfully for many years.
In 1902, JW Headlam reported on “the teaching of literary subjects in some secondary
schools for boys”59 for the Board of Education’s ‘General reports on Higher Education’.
Headlam does not at this time appear to have been officially an inspector but he was
appointed a permanent Staff Inspector of Secondary Schools in 1904 on a salary of
£800-900.60 As the future author of both Circular 599 on the teaching of history in
56
Banks, Olive L., ‘Morant and the Secondary School Regulations of 1904’, British Journal of Educational
Studies, Vol 3, No 1, Nov 1954, p 34.
57
See footnote 1.
58
See quotes from senior figures in technical colleges suggesting that pupils should not specialise in
technical and scientific subjects until they were at least 16. Banks, op cit, pp 37-38.
59
Board of Education, ‘General Reports on Higher Education with Appendices for the Year 1902’, (HMSO,
London 1903), pp 61-66.
60
JW Headlam (later Sir James Wycliffe Headlam-Morley), 1863-1929, had already been a professor of
Greek and ancient history at Queen’s College, London (the first teacher training college for women, now a
private girls’ school). According to the ODNB he joined the Board of Education in 1902 (when he
18
secondary schools and the accompanying memorandum, Headlam would be an
influential figure in history teaching during the first part of the twentieth century.
By ‘literary’ Headlam meant “Modern Languages, English subjects (History, Geography,
Literature, Grammar) and in some cases a small amount of Latin”.61 He looked at a
selection of over 70 schools across the country in rural areas, country towns and large
industrial centres. He said that the proportion of pupils coming from public elementary
schools varied enormously – from ten to a hundred per cent in schools which had been
established by School Boards and other local authorities (it is not clear if some Higher
Elementary Schools were included in the sample). According to Headlam, where all the
pupils came from public elementary schools, “they begin the work often completely
destitute of any literary training”.62 Further, many of the schools were receiving Division
A funding and so inevitably had to concentrate on scientific and technical subjects. And
Headlam admitted that they often did this very well:
The efforts of the permanent Inspectors of the Board have, during the last few
years, brought about a great improvement in the mathematical and scientific
work. Among those Schools which receive grants from the Board of Education,
one necessarily finds a carefully graded and coherent course in those subjects;
there is lavish expenditure of provision of apparatus for teachers, and generally
the masters have a very adequate knowledge of the subjects they teach. All
these qualities are too often absent in the literary work, which until recently has
not, even in those Schools which are managed in accordance with the
regulations of the Board, been subject to regular supervision.63
Headlam felt that the teaching of French was in a state of “rapid change”, and
improvements to teaching methods meant that “there is at least hope and promise”.
Where ‘English subjects’ were concerned he saw neither hope nor promise. “In a large
number of Schools the teaching has not yet reached that stage at which criticism begins
to be useful or possible. The very first elements of good work are absent”. The
instruction was based solely on text-books:
presumably wrote his survey of literary subjects) although he does not appear in Whitaker’s Almanac until
the 1905 edition (published 1904). Headlam went on write histories of modern Germany and was heavily
involved in propaganda and intelligence during the First World War, participating in the 1919 Peace
Conference and subsequently becoming historical adviser to the Foreign Office. He was a founder of the
Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) and was knighted just before he died.
61
Ibid, p 63.
62
Ibid, p61.
63
Ibid, p62.
19
The masters have no knowledge on the subject except what they gain from the
book which the boys use. They therefore make no attempt to supplement,
correct, and select from or explain the information given in these books, though
the statements made are necessarily unintelligible, unless further information is
available. The books themselves are sometimes fairly good; sometimes they
contain nothing but the baldest statement of facts. Motives of economy (which
are entirely disregarded in dealing with Natural Science) require that the same
book should be used in several successive forms, and boys of 16 still continue to
learn their history from the book they used when they were 13. No history but
English History is taught, although an understanding of English History is
impossible without some knowledge of the History of the Continent. The period
chosen for study is determined not by the previous career of the boys, but by the
syllabus of an examination; and I have, for instance, not once, but repeatedly,
found boys studying the Wars of the Roses who are quite ignorant of all previous
history – in one case so ignorant that they did not know who William the
Conqueror was. This I have found in a really good School but the master had
never thought of making the enquiry (sic) what their previous knowledge was;
the point was of no importance for the examination for which the boys were
being entered.64
Headlam also drew attention to the lack of library material for literary subjects – “To
teach history, language, or literature without books is as absurd as to teach science
without apparatus....In a large number of Schools there are no libraries at all...there will
be not be found a good Atlas of modern times, much less an historical Atlas...The master
who is giving a lesson on English History will find no book to which he can refer for
information where the text-book is defective, or for those illustrations and details
without which no narrative is more than words”.65 As far as history is concerned he
concludes that the boys “are not taught how to use books so as to extract information
from them. The training of the imagination and sympathies, which is the chief use of
History, is absent”.66
Headlam’s criticisms were perhaps extreme and he came unashamedly from a classics
background, but he had inspected over 70 schools and his comments were taken
seriously within the Board of Education where they resonated with the other criticism
mentioned above of the increasingly scientific bias in secondary schools. The eventual
64
Ibid, p65.
Ibid.
66
Ibid, p66.
65
20
result was the publication of new ‘Regulations for Secondary Schools’ in 1904. The
‘prefatory memorandum’ to the Regulations, written by Robert Morant, said that they
had been framed with the view to promoting “the provision and organisation of
Secondary Schools”, giving them a purpose and scheme of instruction to suit them to
take their “proper place in an organised system of National Education”.67
The memorandum defined ‘Secondary School’ for what it suggested was the first time,
as: “any Day or Boarding School which offers to each of its scholars, up to and beyond
the age of 16, a general education, physical, mental and moral, given through a
complete graded course of instruction of wider scope and more advanced degree than
that given in Elementary Schools”.68 Within this it distinguished between three grades of
Secondary Schools (similar to those described in the Bryce Report) – the first-grade
schools which led up directly to the universities and university colleges and which paid
“special regard to the development of the higher powers of thought and expression, and
that discriminating appreciation of what is best in the thought and art in the world”; the
second grade schools which stopped short of university entrance for most of their
pupils; and the third grade, which did not attempt to carry education much beyond 16
and was designed to equip scholars “for practical life in the commercial and industrial
community of which they are members”.69
The memorandum emphasised three points as essential to the course of instruction in
the Secondary Schools:
a) “the instruction must be general”, developing the whole of the faculties, not
concentrating on one area, be it pure and applied Science, literary and linguistic
study or some kind of business training. Specialisation in any of these area must
come after a good grounding in general education.
b) “the course of instruction must be complete”, planned “to lead up to a
definite standard of acquirement in the various branches of instruction indicated
above, and not stop short at a merely superficial introduction to any one of
them”.70 Although Secondary Schools varied enormously according to “the
different requirements of the scholars, to their place in the social organisation”
and parental means and the age at which they would have to leave and the
occupations they might expect to enter, it was expected that the scholars must
67
Board of Education, ‘Regulations for Secondary Schools (from 1st August 1904 to 31st July 1905) (HMSO,
London 1904), p5.
68
Ibid, p 7.
69
Ibid, p 10.
70
Ibid, pp 7-8.
21
carry on to the standard they might be expected to reach at age 16. Some
children might start the School at age 8 or 9 or even earlier and some might
continue even to 18 or 19, but the crucial years of the School were 12 or 13, to
16 or 17 when “a systematic and complete scheme”71 should be carried out.
c) “the instruction must be graded in its various branches”; ie it must progress
forwards stimulating the scholar rather than just offering repetition or ‘marking
time’.
With a view to satisfying all of these requirements it was laid down that grants would
only be given for courses of four years which were approved by the Board. They must be
no shorter, and if they were longer the Board would want to approve the whole course.
The Board would also lay down minimum hours for the range of subjects it deemed
important (the ‘English’ subjects – English Language and Literature, Geography and
History; Languages, ancient and modern; and Mathematics and Science). It claimed
optimistically that this left:
ample time for a well planned curriculum to add considerably to this minimum in
one or more of these groups of subjects, as well as to include adequate provision
for systematic Physical Exercises; for Drawing, Singing , and Manual Training; for
the instruction of girls in the elements of Housewifery; and for such other
subjects as may profitably be included in the curriculum of any particular
school.72
The minimum hours for History were not lavish. The Regulations stipulated that “not
less than 4½ hours per week must be allotted to English, Geography and History” (cf
“not less than 7½ hours to Science and Mathematics, of which at least 3 must be for
Science”.73) unless special permission had been given to omit language teaching in
which case English, Geography and History must have at least 7½ hours per week. Girls’
schools, which had fewer hours of instruction, were allowed to reduce the amount of
time devoted to Science and Mathematics, although at least 3 hours per week must be
given to Science.
Each school had to send its timetable to the Board of Education for approval and there
were a range of other stipulations relating to the running of the grant-claiming
secondary schools; for example they must not be conducted for private profit and must
have adequate and appropriate facilities and buildings. Grants to the school were then
71
Ibid, p8.
Ibid, p 9.
73
Ibid, p 18.
72
22
made per pupil for four years on a scale rising from 40 shillings per pupil attending the
first year of the course for at least an 80% attendance rate, to 100 shillings for pupils
attending the fourth year. It was stated that a higher rate per head could be paid for a
couple of years, at the Board’s discretion, to Division A schools who had been receiving
the equivalent rate of a higher amount per head and there were also a number of
awards to schools providing ‘special’ courses.
Historians differ as to how the Regulations were received. Olive Banks suggested that
although commentators such as Dr Young who wrote the historical background to the
Spens Report (the 1938 government report on secondary education) lamented the
demise of technical education, at this point the Regulations were relatively wellreceived by local authorities and teachers. She said they felt the Regulations would
provide a balanced curriculum and offer secondary education more suitable for pupil
elementary teachers than an education with a technical bias.74 Other historians
including Whitbread and Lowe believe there was more criticism than Banks admitted. 75
However in fact these Regulations only lasted for three years; the incoming Liberal
Government from December 1905 amended them in 1907. The new Regulations
loosened up the curricular framework; the same subjects must still be taught (including
History) but compulsory minimum time stipulations were now removed. The Board said:
That rule was necessary when instituted, and has been of great service in
practically impressing on Schools the necessity of a certain breadth and solidity
in the education given. But it was contemplated from the first as being only a
temporary expedient. The measure of its necessity was the measure of its
success; and the measure of its success is now in turn the degree to which it has
ceased to be necessary. A great advance has been made in recent years in the
whole conception of Secondary Education and in the whole organisation of
Secondary Schools. There has been a growth of interest, of knowledge, and of
experience...76
It went on to say that an effective Inspectorate, a system of detailed reports, and
informal visits and conferences meant that it was now possible to guard against “the
74
Banks, Olive, Parity and Prestige in English Secondary Education: A Study in Educational Sociology,
(Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1955), Chapter 3, pp 31-50; ‘Morant and the Secondary School
Regulations of 1904’, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol 3, No 1, Nov 1954.
7575
Whitbread, Nanette, ‘The early twentieth-century curriculum debate in England’, History of Education,
1984, Vol 13, No 3; Lowe, Roy, ‘Robert Morant and the Secondary School Regulations of 1904’, Journal of
Educational and Administrative History, Vol XVI, No 1, Jan 1984.
76
Board of Education, ‘Regulations for Secondary Schools (in force from 1st August 1907)’, (London,
HMSO, 1907), p viii.
23
risks of one-sided education, of ill-balanced schemes of instruction, and of premature or
excessive specialisation”. So now “it is only laid down that the arrangement of work
must provide for due continuity of instruction, for an adequate amount of time being
given to each subject taken, and for the disallowance of subjects which are not of
educational value”.77 The curriculum and timetable for each school still had to be
officially submitted for approval to the Board which might require modifications in it but
other aspects of the Regulations were freed up. 78
The potential impact of these curricular changes probably received less attention than
they might have done because the Board of Education introduced other changes at the
same time which aroused considerable controversy. Following the passing of the
Education (Administrative Provisions) Act 1907, which introduced the free place system,
the Board announced that “all Secondary Schools aided by grants shall be made fully
accessible to children of all classes” and with this in mind it decreed that all grant-aided
Schools which charged fees (and previously that was what the Board had encouraged)
must open up, without charge, at least 25% of their places to scholars who had spent at
least two years at public elementary schools. In future all schools eligible and desirous
of grants which participated in this scheme would be given £5 per annum for every child
between 12 and 18, and £2 for those aged 10 to 12, and consideration would be given
to providing extra payments to schools incurring expenses in carrying out “special
educational experiments approved by the Board”. 79
The new scheme brought criticism from a number of secondary school head teachers
who liked to believe the existing scholarship system worked adequately and feared the
opening up of the system to an influx of working class children. The Liberal MP for
Bethnal Green SW, Edward Pickersgill, pointed out the situation before the new policy
was hardly adequate – quoting a Parliamentary Return he said that Aston Manor had
one scholarship place to secondary school for 12,858 children, East Ham none for
19,191, and Portsmouth none for 26,871 children. And even where scholarships did
exist they were often subject to the condition that the pupil pledge to become a
teacher.80 Other MPs over the months leading up to the Regulations, including the
President of the Board of Education, suggested that in England (as opposed to Wales
and Scotland) there was very little demand from working class parents for secondary
education for their children.
77
Ibid.
Ibid, p 2.
79
Ibid, p 11.
80
Hansard, House of Commons, Vol 171, 93. 13 March 1907, Mr Pickersgill
78
24
Both headteachers’ fears, and predictions of lack of demand were proved wrong. The
free places were rapidly oversubscribed and the “entrance test of attainments and
proficiency” described in the Regulations81 soon became a competitive exam such was
the demand. Headteachers found that the unruly and uncouth influx they feared failed
to materialise and indeed both Banks and Graves pointed out that the free place pupils
tended to stay at school longer than the fee-payers and formed the cornerstone of the
emerging sixth forms. 82 The most controversial aspects of the Regulations were less
relevant to the current study, and related to the attempts to make schools – and
particularly the teacher training colleges – less denominationally biased in terms of
admissions, halls of residence and teaching. Similarly school governing bodies were not
to require a majority of their members to be of one denomination and had to have a
majority of governors appointed or elected by representative bodies from outside. All of
these clauses could be waived if the appropriate local authority agreed. These clauses
were seen as an attempt to introduce religious division into the ‘higher education’
system and discriminate against the Church of England and Roman Catholic Church
which had set up a number of the training colleges and secondary schools and they
raised an outcry from critics up to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Lowe suggested that this controversy overshadowed the curricular side of the 1907
amendments and resulted in the 1904 regulations remaining influential long after they
were withdrawn. This seems rather implausible, and Whitbread saw “greater flexibility”,
“innovation”, experiments with “alternative curricula” and “debate on differentiation
resumed” in the years after the system was changed. 83
By 1908 there were 736 grant-aided secondary schools and a year later, 804. Only three
of the new ones were mixed, 25 were boys’ and 37 girls’.84 (In many areas there had
been relatively few girls’ schools). Interestingly there were nearly 3000 more girls than
boys aged 16-18 in secondary education – 4,284 boys and 7,039 girls. The Board’s
annual report a year after the new regulations were introduced said that “while it is too
soon yet to estimate results fully, there is undoubtedly a marked improvement; and
what is most noteworthy is the vigorous interest and activity in experiment found all
over the country”.85 It singled out for praise the work of the special subject associations
81
Regulations, 1907, op cit, p 5.
Banks, op cit, pp 67-68; Graves, John, Policy and Progress in Secondary Education: 1902-1942, (Thomas
Nelson & Sons Ltd, London 1943), p68
83
Whitbread, op cit, p229.
84
Board of Education, ‘Statistics of Public Education in England and Wales, 1908-1909, Part 1’ (HMSO,
London 1910), p 103.
85
Board of Education, ‘Report of the Board of Education for the Year 1980-1909’, (HMSO, London 1910), p
42.
82
25
– including the Historical Association as well as the Classical, English, Modern Language,
Mathematical, and Geographical Associations – which had all worked hard to improve
the way their subjects were taught. Circulars issued by the Board on a range of subjects
including History had also “helped the very marked improvement in the teaching of
these subjects”.86 Summing up History, the Board said :
In History two improvements are especially noteworthy. The first is the
introduction of the history of other countries. It is not an exaggeration to say
that until recently all history except that of England has been a complete blank
to pupils in our Secondary Schools. The difficulty of remedying this defect is
great, but the task is being undertaken, and an interest in the national history of
other countries is already being awakened. The second is the study of local
history. Hitherto schoolboys and girls have been brought up quite ignorant of the
history of the town in which they live, of the historical events which have taken
place in the neighbourhood, and of the buildings and other remains which exist
there. Improvement has begun here and, though it has not yet gone very far,
there is every reason to hope that in a few years the interest and affection of
boys and girls will have been aroused in their local monuments, and the
foundation laid for a larger and more intelligent local patriotism.87
‘Teaching of History in Secondary Schools’, Circular 599
The Circular issued on History was distributed in November 1908. The accompanying
letter to HMIs from the Board, signed by WN Bruce, the Principal Assistant Secretary at
the Secondary Schools Branch, had mentioned both the elements singled out in the
Board’s Report. It said that “it is most important that some instruction on the history of
other countries should be included in the History course of all Secondary Schools, and
also that the interest of the pupils should be aroused in the history of the district or
town in which they live” and told them to encourage schools they visited to do this.88
The Staff Inspectors’ Committee had already approved the Circular, which had been
drafted by Mr Headlam, one of their group, who had written the earlier criticism of the
teaching of literary subjects in 1902. WN Bruce had sent it to Robert Morant, the
Permanent Secretary of the Board of Education, praising it and asking him to consider
how they might widely circulate the accompanying explanatory memorandum which Mr
Headlam had also written. He thought it “a sad pity to let it be buried in the file”.
86
Ibid.
Ibid, p 43.
88
National Archives, ED 12/48. Memo to Inspectors from W N Bruce, 25/11/1908.
87
26
Morant agreed, saying it was “so admirable and so helpful and will so vastly help to
explain and justify the Circular”. As for the Circular, Morant believed, “it cannot but
carry great weight and be of immense help everywhere”. He realised “how glad one
would have been to have had it before one, years ago when one had to try and direct
that kind of study for varying ages”. He urged publication as soon as possible although in
revealing asides about his need to control (or perhaps knowledge of previous typos) he
added “Proofreading must be carefully done”) and in the margin “I should like to see the
last proof before final printing off. RL Morant”. And as well as sending his
congratulations to Mr Headlam for his “admirable piece of work”, he also ventured to
suggest:
the need of emphasising the use of a suitable map (not on too small a scale)
showing very broadly the big political divisions of (at least) Europe, for each of
the main periods dealt with. I know that many boys & adults imagine the
Crusades or the Charles V stories, in a mental picture of the map of modern
Europe. He mentions it at the foot of page 8. But it is equally necessary earlier, is
it not? Mutatis mutandis this applies also to the Elizabethan expansion.89
Headlam’s Memorandum was published, although it is not clear how far it was
circulated. The Circular was certainly distributed widely. More hand-written notes from
Robert Morant show that he personally added the main newspapers (Daily Mail, Daily
Telegraph, Standard, Times etc ) to the list of all the obvious educational authorities and
a few selected journals like the Local Government Chronicle and Schoolmaster. The
Memorandum is almost as long as the Circular. In it, Headlam said that the circular
“recommends to schools a course of study including a consecutive study of English
history from the earliest times, extending over three years at least, and four wherever
possible”. However “it also recommends that a large liberty should be assumed in each
school to leave out freely much which is included in the ordinary school treatment”.90 In
explanation it said that:
One of the chief reasons why much history teaching is so unsuccessful is that an
attempt is made to teach too much. The number of facts, persons, events,
mentioned in any ordinary text-book used in the middle forms is far greater than
boys can understand, much less remember. If an attempt is made to remember
them it results in a purely verbal memory of the words, names and language of
89
National Archives, ED 12/48. Handwritten notes, WN Bruce 16/10/1908, RL Morant,
17/10/1908.
90
National Archives, ED 22/36. Board of Education ‘Memorandum in explanation and expansion of the
Board’s Circular on the Teaching of History in Secondary Schools’, p1.
27
the text-book. This is worse than valueless, and makes boys hate the whole
subject. In addition to this the amount of work to be got through prevents them
dwelling with any detail on those events or ideas which would be and are
interesting and instructive to boys. A considerable amount of detail is necessary
to get the full interest and instruction even for quite young boys, but this
requires time, and time is now wanting.91
Headlam described various ways that had been suggested to deal with this problem: the
first was the ‘special period’, formerly much encouraged by the examinations. The
drawbacks were that the ‘boys’ then crammed themselves full of facts about their
period rather than understanding the issues, and that they did not gain a “a view of
English history as a whole”.92 There was now more of a concentration by examining
bodies on “a long period, eg, from 1066 to 1485, for ‘outlines’ and a short period for
special study”. Headlam was not keen even on this. He felt they should study all the
important events that happened during the longer period, and special periods should be
left till very late in the school career and should then be very short and studied in great
detail eg “the first five years of the French Revolution, the War of American
Independence, the history of England from the year 1638 to the battle of Naseby, the
history of Elizabeth’s reign to the defeat of the Armada”.93 They should only be studied
if the pupils were advanced enough to read works written for adults and “something of
the nature of an original authority”.94
The second approach was the ‘concentric system’ in which the whole of English history
would be studied every year; each year adding to the pupils’ detailed knowledge. This,
Headlam felt, meant too much ground had to be covered each year so that everything
was always done in a hurry with no time to get strong impressions of anything. “It also
has this great danger, that it tempts the master to put broad historical generalisations
before the boys when they are still without the rudimentary knowledge of the facts on
which the generalisations are based”.
The third approach was beginning with the present day and going backwards “on the
ground that all instruction should proceed from the known to the unknown”. However
Headlam was dubious that “it is possible to speak of the political history and system of
the present day as being in any real sense known to boys and girls of 12 to 14”. He felt
that “this system misses that which should be the chief aim of every historical teacher,
91
Ibid.
Ibid, p2.
93
Ibid.
94
Ibid, p 3.
92
28
the presentation of a narrative which explains itself. Narrative should precede analysis,
but a course of study which begins at the end must always be analytical”.95
Headlam proposed that for the four years from 12 to 16, schools should plan “a course
of three or four years in which there should be a consecutive study of English study in
the extended sense which is here advocated , ie , English history with large digressions
into foreign history. The whole of English history would then be divided into three
periods, one of them being assigned to each year”. But this would be done on the basis
that these periods are much too large to be covered in one year so that “a great deal of
it will have to be left out”. This must be determined beforehand and the “boys should
be told what is being left out, and why”. Headlam gives a couple of examples of this
approach, for example:
In a course on the Tudor and Stuart period for boys of 14, we might begin with
the great discoveries, leave out the greater part of the reign of Henry VII and the
first part of Henry VIII, go straight to the explanation of the Empire of Charles V,
laying stress on the permanent importance of it, and showing how its effects still
continue, and then take up the history of England at the beginning of the
Reformation. The foreign policy of Elizabeth would probably be fully dealt with;
and the whole relation to Scotland during the reigns of the Tudors, with a fuller
treatment of Mary, Queen of Scots. The Irish question would either be left out
altogether, or if there were time, dealt with sufficiently fully to show its effect on
the future history of Ireland; but if it was taken, there could not be a break at the
death of Elizabeth, it would have to be carried on at once to the time of Strafford
, including the settlements of James I.96
He admits that this scheme would only work if the pupils already had an adequate
grounding in historical teaching in their earlier years of schooling, with a good
knowledge of “the traditional stories, as well as the succession of the kings”. 97
Turning to revision and examinations, Headlam believed that “if the teaching is properly
done there will be constant indirect revision of all work that has been done before”,
because as new subjects are begun there should be “constant reference back to all that
has been learnt bearing on this”. For example: “The dissolution of the monasteries
should be introduced by recapitulation of the main facts about them; the Reformation
by a reference to the ecclesiastical policy of William the Conqueror”. As for
examinations, he declared; “History is always a most difficult and unsatisfactory subject
95
Ibid.
Ibid, p 4.
97
Ibid.
96
29
to examine in well”. Areas like the study of local history were extremely difficult to
examine. As far as the general history papers were concerned foreign history should be
included and questions should be set which “encourage those who have a fuller
knowledge of the most important events rather than a general verbal knowledge of a
large number of names and facts”.98
Headlam’s Memorandum was the accompaniment to Circular 599 on the ‘Teaching of
History in Secondary Schools’ (‘Price One Penny’), which was a detailed programme for
history teaching, although it started off saying:
It must be clearly understood that it is not the wish of the Board to lay down
strict rules either as to the arrangements of the course or as to the methods of
teaching. This would be, above all, undesirable in a subject such as history, in
which perhaps more than in any other there is room for the greatest variety of
treatment. The experience of Inspectors, however, shows that in many schools
there is clearly need for some help.99
Setting the stage, the circular said that the time given to history teaching was generally
two lessons a week with some flexibility when it was linked up with English literature or
modern languages, or at different periods in the school course when it might be
alternated with geography.
Turning first to the initial stage of history teaching – from the earliest age to about 12 (ie
pre-secondary) the Circular said that this “will consist almost entirely of stories. These
should not be confined to stories taken from the history of England. The pupils should
become familiar with the chief events and characters from the history of the most
important nations, in their traditional form”. There was “endless scope for selection”
but lessons might include stories from “..the Persian Wars, Alexander the Great, stories
from Roman history, the fall of Jerusalem and the history of the early Church...the
invasion of Attila, Charlemagne, the Cid....Columbus and other explorers, Galileo,
Washington, Garibaldi”.100
Although at first the children cannot distinguish between history and legend, by at least
the last part of this stage they should have a sense of the chronological sequence of
events. By 12 years old, “they should have some idea of the nature of the great nations
and stages in civilisation, centring in each case round certain individuals or events in
their chronological succession”. The stories should be illustrated “by plans and pictures
98
Ibid, p5.
Board of Education, ‘Teaching of History in Secondary Schools’, Circular 599 (London, HMSO 1908), p 2.
100
Ibid.
99
30
of armour, dress, castles, etc, and the pupils should themselves be occasionally required
to make plans and models”.101 This stage was important because these stories can never
“be learnt with the same interest and facility later, and the stories from history afford
excellent material for training the imagination”.102 Much of the teaching would be given
orally but suitable books should also be used. As far as dates were concerned: “They
should not have to learn a large number of dates, and generally dates should not be
learnt except of those events which have been specially studied; but a few of the most
important dates must be known...It does not seem desirable to give up the traditional
system by which boys are expected to know the kings of England, but of course the
dates and names of the kings should be learnt in connection with some of the important
events of the reigns, and not merely by rote”.103
The next stage, 12 to 16 years, presented more of a challenge. As far as English history
was concerned: “In nearly every school it will be necessary here to place a formal course
covering the whole of English history from the invasion of the Romans to the present
day”. At least three years would be necessary for this and Headlam went on to explain
the plan he had already described in the Memorandum of dividing the chronological
history into three parts, one for each year, and then if possible a year for revision. As in
the Memorandum, he pointed out that “an attempt to give an equal and uniform
knowledge of the whole of English history must fail”.104 What should be aimed at was:
a clear apprehension of the general chronological sequence of the cardinal
events;
a fairly detailed study of those parts or aspects of the history which are at each
stage of the school course not beyond the comprehension of the pupils.105
So, “at each stage attention should be concentrated not only on what is important, but
on that the importance and interest of which can be made intelligible to the pupils” – so
“much of the internal history of the eighteenth century...much of the political history of
Charles II’s reign, the internal history of the Lancastrian period...” can be omitted to
concentrate on “events such as the Crusades, the Civil War, the reign of Elizabeth...”. 106
Finally pupils should not attempt “to learn all the names and facts which are mentioned
in the ordinary school text-books” but some areas will need more detailed study than
101
Ibid, p 3.
Ibid.
103
Ibid, p 2.
104
Ibid, p3.
105
Ibid.
106
Ibid, p 4.
102
31
has been the norm in the past. And “the course will also necessarily include reference to
the great inventions, such as gunpowder, printing, the steam engine, which are specially
characteristic of European civilisation, and some explanation of their effect upon the
history of the nation”.107
Under the heading ‘Foreign History’ it was stated that European history “must” be
included whenever it was “necessary for the understanding of English history” which
might mean that sometimes entire lessons would be devoted to it. A number of
examples were given including “the account of the Danish invasions should be
incorporated in a general description of the expeditions of the Norsemen”; “the French
wars of the earlier and later Plantagenet kings will probably be best treated from the
point of view of the growth and consolidation of the French monarchy” and “a full
account of the great discoveries of the 15th and 16th centuries” would be “a starting
point for the history of European colonisation, and also of the rise of the Spanish Empire
and of those episodes in the religious struggles on the Continent, such as the rise of the
United Netherlands, which immediately affect English history”.108 Summing up, Headlam
said: “in this way, it may be possible to remove the complete ignorance of any history
outside England, which is now too common, without adding a separate subject to the
curriculum”.109
The next heading was ‘Local History’. It was “essential” that every school pay attention
to the history of the town and district in which it was situated; generally best done by
referring “to the history of the locality as illustrative of the general history”. The two
ways of doing this were first to look in detail at any great and important event which
had taken place in the neighbourhood which would fit in to the wider studies. Battles
were seen as particularly appropriate. If no particular event had taken place in the
vicinity the teacher could explain the part taken in any of the Civil Wars by that part of
England or, if it was London or the Eastern Counties, might make a special study of the
Peasants’ Revolt. The other way to bring local history into the classroom was to explain
and illustrate general changes, whether political, social or economic, (such as the Roman
occupation, the foundation and dissolution of the monasteries, the Norman settlement,
the economic changes of the 15th or 18th centuries) by reference to their effect on the
particular district.
Study of actual historical remains – castles, city walls, monasteries – must be included
and the architecture of the earlier periods should be studied . “It is far more important
107
Ibid.
Ibid.
109
Ibid, p5.
108
32
that pupils should leave school with their eyes trained to observe the historical remains
which are to be found in almost every part of England, than that they should attempt to
remember the whole of the political history which they cannot understand”. 110 With this
in mind “it is essential that the school library and museum should be well provided with
books, plans, maps and pictures” with a particular emphasis on maps and pictures of the
locality. There should also “be made specially prepared extracts and translations from
historical documents giving full details of local events” eg the relevant extract from the
Domesday Book or chronicles describing great events in the area. In the great
manufacturing towns, reproduced maps would illustrate the changes wrought locally by
the industrial revolution. Preparing all this material would take time and effort but
volunteers might be found to help, and the new Local Historical Associations could be of
great service. “Valuable assistance” on this and many other matters would be found in
the pamphlets issued by The Historical Association.
Headlam admitted that all this was an ambitious programme but reminded his readers
that there was considerable overlap in the information and concepts found in history
lessons with those “in the allied subjects, especially literature and geography”.111
Without subordinating the study of English literature to that of history it would be
possible to co-ordinate what was read in English classes with the work in history. For
example, extracts from Froissart’s ‘Chronicles’ and the introduction to the ‘Canterbury
Tales’ when the Middle Ages were being studied. And “in the same way, if geography is
intelligently taught, much knowledge which is essential for a proper study of history will
be acquired in the geography lessons. Thus the study of geography of Asia should
include some elementary facts as to the rise and spread of Mohammedanism (sic)”. 112 If
the same teacher was not teaching all these subjects there would have to be liaison
between the teachers about what was being taught.
As far as text-books were concerned, Headlam was largely in favour of them, except for
the very youngest of children who were not yet fluent in reading (and even then he
favoured reading aloud to them). “There are not many teachers who have so great a
power of exposition and narrative that it is justifiable for them to dispense entirely with
the use of a book”.113 Further, one of the great values for him of history was the
“valuable practice” it afforded in the use of books. For this reason “the greatest care
should be exercised in the choice of the book to be used” and a clear distinction must be
made between books with “a well-arranged narrative” and those which were “merely a
110
Ibid.
Ibid, p6.
112
Ibid.
113
Ibid, p7.
111
33
chronological summary or compendium of facts to be used for reference”.114 In the
higher forms both were needed but the fault of many was that they attempt to fulfil
both functions. How the text-books were to be used depended on the nature of the
book, the subject, the pupils’ ability and the teacher’s expertise. Sometimes when the
subject was new and complicated the teacher might need to give a full explanation
before the book was studied; at other times the pupils would read it first and discuss
with the teacher afterwards.
Written work should be set even in the lowest forms; partly to afford “practice in
original composition”, answering questions and writing essays, sometimes in exam
conditions, sometimes using books. And partly to give “systematic practice in the taking
of notes, graduated according to the age of the pupils” so that the pupils are trained to
be able to make a “well-arranged digest for themselves of all the information which they
acquire both from reading and from teaching”.115 The Circular finished with two
miscellaneous ‘general’ paragraphs; the first urging the constant use of maps – the
school should provide “good historical maps or atlases” and the pupils should make
them for themselves. And the second insisting that questions to the pupils whether
verbal or written must “train the power of giving a connected narrative or explanation”
rather than inviting an answer which consisted of a single word or phrase. 116
How much of an impact did this Circular have? It was reprinted a few years later and
referred to in government publications into the 1930s so one suspects that it was quite
influential. And in inspectors’ reports the recommendations in the Circular were often
used as guidelines for their comments. This paper concludes with some extracts from
the ‘History’ sections of the first inspection reports of three of the new secondary
schools set up by local authorities after the 1902 Education Act.
Inspectors’ Reports
The Roan School (Boys), Greenwich, had its first inspection in May 1907, eighteen
months before the publication of Circular 599. The tone does seem to be considerably
more critical than the later ones which would have had the benefit of the Circular’s
advice:
History is taught in the main as a Form subject, and the Masters, while none of
them are specialists, appear in general to be sufficiently well qualified for the
work they are called upon to do. The syllabus is planned so as to secure that a
114
Ibid.
Ibid, p8
116
Ibid.
115
34
boy shall during his passage through the School acquire a good general
knowledge of the subject.
While all the lessons gave evidence of careful preparation, they were, with two
notable exceptions, somewhat lacking in interest. Nor can it be said that the
general level of knowledge in the various Forms was at all high. In several cases
where questions were put by the Inspector the answers came almost entirely
from two or three of the best boys, the vast majority making no attempt at all. It
is not clear, further, that sufficient attention is devoted to written work in the
upper part of the School.
Insufficient use appears to be made of maps and diagrams as aids to the
teaching. In only one case was anything of the kind observed during the
Inspection: the Master had constructed a simple sketch map to illustrate the Civil
War, showing the parts of the country, siding respectively with Charles and with
Parliament, and its value was patent throughout the lesson. The same Master
added further to the interest of his teaching by reading a contemporary account
of the attempted arrest of the Five Members. This too was a conspicuous
exception to the general rule.
The equipment for history teaching is very meagre. To give life and zest to the
teaching there should be a supply of illustrations of historical events and
portraits of famous characters, and the Teachers’ Reference Library should
contain a good collection of standard histories. The reading of passages from
these would not only add appreciably to the interest of the lessons, but also
supply the boys with models of a good prose style which would be bound to
react favourably on their English work as a whole.117
The County Secondary School, Fulham, had its first inspection in May 1909:
In History the Head Mistress and her Staff are specially qualified. The course is
arranged in a series of short periods of English History – except in Form IIIA and
Form VA and Form VI where the outlines of \Greek and Roman History are taken
with the object of throwing light upon modern institutions and forms of
Government. Forms I and II, which are taught English History chiefly on
biographical lines, also learn stories from Roman and European History of an
illustrative character; whilst the Tudor period linked with the previous periods by
117
National Archives, ED 109/3708. Board of Education, ‘Report of First Inspection of the Roan School
(Boys), Greenwich, London, held on the 6th, 7th and 8th May 1907’, p 10.
35
the Renaissance is largely studied from the European standpoint by Forms Lower
IV A, B and C.
In Forms Upper IV A, B and C the Stuart Period is studied chiefly from the point
of view of the development of the British Constitution; whilst in the Lower VIA
the Period 1485-1900 is taken for the Matriculation Examination and in the
Lower VIB that set for the higher Certificate Examination, ie the Period from
1485 to 1685, is prescribed.
The details of this interesting Syllabus are well worked out; the text books used
are carefully chosen and drawn upon , the oral methods adopted are generally
effective and the Essay writing connected with the Historical teaching well
directed and supervised.
Sufficient attention to the use of maps and diagrams appears to be given by the
individual teachers and it is understood that the reference library, not yet
sufficiently strong, will be considerably added to in the course of the year.
Altogether the teaching of history seems to be particularly well schemed and
carried out.118
The County Secondary School, Kentish Town (now Parliament Hill School, Camden) had
its first inspection in February 1910:
The School is still in a transition state and it is of course difficult to formulate a
scheme which shall at once provide for the present and future without injury to
either. Having regard to this the work appears to have been very well planned
out, adequately for the present and with good provision for the future. The
School possesses plenty of good reference books, and both teachers and taught
seem interested in their subject; the plan of reading translations from some
original authority is to be commended, and it was noticed that these were
listened to with deep attention. Also there is a reasonable amount of correlation
between this and some of the other subjects. The amount of time devoted to
European and general History as compared with English might perhaps be open
to criticism; but, on consideration and having regard to all the circumstances of
the case it does not seem necessary to advise an alteration which might not after
all be for the better.119
118
National Archives, ED 35/1656A. Board of Education, ‘Report of First Inspection of the County
Secondary School, Fulham, London, held on the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th May 1909’, p 13.
119
National Archives, ED 109/3986. Board of Education, ‘Report of First Inspection of the County
Secondary School, Kentish Town, St Pancras, held on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th February, 1910’, p9.
36
Jenny Keating
History in Education Project
Institute of Historical Research
University of London
June 2009