EDUCATION: ITS AIMS AND MEANS I OPENED this subject in the April number of this Review with the suggestion that one cause of the failure of our educational system might be found in State interference, and if we are setting to work to improve it, we might well take the opportunity to consider whether the present attitude of the Government towards it is of any advantage, or whether, if some State interference is necessary, this attitude could not be profitably changed. It would appear that there is a considerable remnant left in Israel who do not bow the knee to the Government in educational matters. Passing over the efforts of the old Congregational Board, the Voluntary School Association, and Edward Baines of the Leeds Mercury, as perhaps too historical for these days when the world goes so quickly round, we may notice that Sir Roland Wilson, in the preface to his booklet on The first and last fight for the principle of Voluntary Education,' states that he attended the meetings of the British Association in Birmingham in 1913, and that the addresses on Education by acknowledged experts to which he listened, came to this-'Give us the maximum of public money, with the minimum of public control,' which simply means that education is very expensive, while Government management of it is very bad. The author of the booklet is also clearly of the same opinion; and lately Mr. Harold Cox, in an address to the British Constitutional Association on the 22nd of February, 1917, in enumerating several ways in which the nation might economise, recommends the abolition or at least the considerable curtailment of free schools; adding The advantage to education is that we should be able to build up an appreciable number of schools that would be independent of Government control'; and he points to the collectivist character and consequent immoral tendency of German State Education. The late Professor Chrystal once declared that the old Scotch system of popular education was by far the best in the world, and that the only thing wanting was that the Government should make it compulsory, but they would not do that without meddling with and spoiling it. Many good authorities who remember the old National Schools have said that the education there was 1 Eastern Press Ltd., 3 Chancery Lane. much better than that of the modern schools, but have urged that it was not widely enough distributed, to which the obvious reply would be 'Then, why not make it compulsory, without altering its character and administration?' The opinions referred to above point to three ways in which Government agency may come into contact with education, viz. by Compulsion, Subsidy, and Interference with Administration. Those of the Congregational Board, the Voluntary School Association, and Edward Baines, were dead opposed to Government interference in any way whatever. To them may be added Sir Roland Wilson and probably Mr. Harold Cox. Professor Chrystal would seem to have welcomed compulsion, and probably State aid, but he was averse from interference with administration. The findings of the Newcastle Commission of 1858 would perhaps carry the most weight, but that the members seem to have been sharply divided in opinion, which fact is admitted. They declared against compulsion, considering, after weighing the matter carefully, that its difficulties and evils outweigh any good to be expected from it. In spite of the arguments of Baines, of which they must have been fully cognisant, they concluded that private beneficence without State aid would be insufficient to keep education up to the proper level; but with regard to all three points a minority held that Government has no educational duties save to vagrants, the destitute, and criminals, emphasising 'the difficulty of impressing parental duty if the system of grants goes on'; also that expense must continually increase, operations being regulated by the increasing and varying demands of enthusiasts and philanthropists rather than by the natural needs of public service. With regard to interference with administration, while not condemning directly the principle, they criticise unmercifully past Government action, suggesting drastic improvements, and eulogise the private efforts of employers of labour in the following terms: The institution of good schools by great employers of labour for their workpeople, and the exertion of their influence for the encouragement of the schools, has been, and will be, attended by the greatest and most unmixed benefit to education, and this may be done not by single employers only, but by several in combination. This does not evince much desire for Government agency, at least in administration, but points to the valuable results of employers' efforts, before their suspension by Government interference. Surely this system might be revived with great advantage to employers and workmen in particular, and to the public in general. It has been objected that under the prevalence of limited companies directors are supposed to look after the interests of their shareholders alone; but, if so, the sooner they learn that these are bound up with those of their employees the better. The practice, for technical training, was largely in vogue in Germany before the war, and the big limited companies were the principal supporters of it. It is pleasing to note that in a late gathering at Lord Leverhulme's house Mr. Fisher said he had resisted strong pressure to exclude the possibility of such schools in his Bill, adding that he did not share apprehensions that they would restrict the intelligence of students; and his marked approval of an employer's school, which combined with the work of the industry a considerable measure of general education, is, as he said of the school, a very happy augury. A regret may well be felt at his insistence on inspection and supervision by the Board of Education, but if he will reform that also, perhaps any resulting mischief may be at least mitigated. Sir R. K. Wilson says that compulsion has been demonstrably the cause of friction, and friction the cause of inefficiency. He must refer to the compulsion between the Reformation and Napoleonic times, for the compulsion of times before this, on the existence of which he insists, does not seem to have produced any. And it may be doubted whether, in the period mentioned, compulsion per se brought about the friction. It is more probable that it was the direction of that compulsion, due to religious differences. Popular education at that time consisted almost entirely of instruction in religious dogma, and the feuds of the Churches naturally became the feuds of education. There seems to be no more reason for compulsion in education bringing about friction, than compulsion of other duties of parents towards their children, such as feeding and clothing them sufficiently. There is neglect of these duties to-day, but it subjects the defaulters to the punishment of the law, and no general public friction results. But if the authorities were to prescribe plum-pudding for infant breakfasts, or sending children to play in smallpox hospitals, the friction would certainly arise, and prevail in proportion to the absurdity of the demand, even to the stopping and subsequent scrapping of the machine. Moreover, the Factory Acts introduced partial compulsion, and no popular friction arose on their account, and little on that of the universal compulsion more lately introduced. Owing to the neglect of the whole subject during Napoleonic times, the feuds of the Churches seem to have been forgotten, and the old National Schools, though chiefly under the management of the Anglican Church, worked harmoniously, with Anglican and Dissenting pupils sitting side by side-until the politicians invented grievances. And one curious finding of the Newcastle much better than that of the modern schools, but have urged that it was not widely enough distributed, to which the obvious reply would be Then, why not make it compulsory, without altering its character and administration?' The opinions referred to above point to three ways in which Government agency may come into contact with education, viz. by Compulsion, Subsidy, and Interference with Administration. Those of the Congregational Board, the Voluntary School Associanon, and Edward Baines, were dead opposed to Government interference in any way whatever. To them may be added Sir Roland Wilson and probably Mr. Harold Cox. Professor Chrystal would sez s bare welcomed compulsion, and probably State aid, but le mis pere from interference with administration. The indices off the Newcastle Commission of 1858 would RCES AT DE 208 Tight, but that the members seem to is her sharpy Ended in eginken, which fact is admitted. Thy deurdagars xeyeške, acnsidering, after weighing the LARCONIT Sk is Lärcles and evils octweigh any good Neri 70 1. In spite of the arguments of Baines, 1 * INt bure been fly agnisht, they con 12.1 we teredosos viboe Site and would be insufficient and in the proper lemel - but with regard to all Lark the Fremment has no educational As redestre and criminals emphasising ལ I POSSIL TAR by the system of grants CHYTS HIS NIELLY Drease operations in demands of entir their shareholders alone; but, if so, the sooner they learn that these are bound up with those of their employees the better. The practice, for technical training, was largely in vogue in Germany before the war, and the big limited companies were the principal supporters of it. It is pleasing to note that in a late gathering at Lord Leverhulme's house Mr. Fisher said he had resisted strong pressure to exclude the possibility of such schools in his Bill, adding that he did not share apprehensions that they would restrict the intelligence of students; and his marked approval of an employer's school, which combined with the work of the industry a considerable measure of general education, is, as he said of the school, a very happy augury. A regret may well be felt at his insistence on inspection and supervision by the Board of Education, but if he will reform that also, perhaps any resulting mischief may be at least mitigated. Sir R. K. Wilson says that compulsion has been demonstrably the cause of friction, and friction the cause of inefficiency. He must refer to the compulsion between the Reformation and Napoleonic times, for the compulsion of times before this, on the existence of which he insists, does not seem to have produced any. And it may be doubted whether, in the period mentioned, compulsion per se brought about the friction. It is more probable that it was the direction of that compulsion, due to religious differences. Popular education at that time consisted almost entirely of instruction in religious dogma, and the feuds of the Churches naturally became the feuds of education. There seems to be no more reason for compulsion in education bringing about friction, than compulsion of other duties of parents towards their children, such as feeding and clothing them sufficiently. There is neglect of these duties to-day, but it subjects the defaulters to the punishment of the law, and no general public friction results. But if the authorities were to prescribe plum-pudding for infant breakfasts, or sending children to play in smallpox hospitals, the friction would certainly arise, and prevail in proportion to the absurdity of the demand, even to the stopping and subsequent scrapping of the machine. Moreover, the Factory Acts introduced partial compulsion, and no popular friction arose on their account, and little on that of the universal compulsion more lately introduced. Owing to the neglect of the whole subject during Napoleonic times, the feuds of the Churches seem to have been forgotten, and the old National Schools, though chiefly under the management of the Anglican Church, worked harmoniously, with Anglican and Dissenting pupils sitting side by side-until the politicians invented grievances. And one curious finding of the Newcastle |