Archive

Tag Archives: 1944 Education Act

Sir David Hancock

I have a filter in my RSS reader that picks up obituaries with the word ‘education’ in them. Sounds morbid, I know, but few things are more inspirational than reading about people whose lives were used to improve schools.

Last week Sir David Hancock appeared in the feed. Working as senior civil servant for the DfE during the tenure of Keith Joseph and Kenneth Baker, he is credited with getting the Education Reform Act 1988 onto the statute books (arguably the most important reform since the 1944 Act).

What surprised me as I read the obituary is how influential Hancock clearly was, and yet how few of the Edu Secs biographies so far have really discussed the role of civil servants, at least not in complimentary ways. I’ve started reading Maurice Kogan’s “The Politics of Education” in which he interviews Edward Boyle and Anthony Crosland, and dissects the way education policies are implemented. While short shrift is often shown to civil servants, he quotes a senior official saying:

“I can honestly say that there is not one new policy in my sector of responsibility that I have not either started or substantially contributed to over the last twenty years”

If this is true, does treatment of one’s civil servants matter? Do the Secs who eschew thanking others end up being considered more “great” simply because they have stolen the limelight from others more deserving? Or can their civil service relationships affect whether or not policies are successfully implemented?

It’s another thing to watch for as I continue reading….

245px-Sir_Winston_S_Churchill

When Rab Butler was summoned by Churchill to be informed of his new position as President of the Board of Education, Churchill was typically forthright.

Butler’s biography explains what Churchill said:

I now want you to go the Board of Education. I think that you can leave your mark there. You will be independent. Besides,” he continued, with rising fervour, “you will be in the war. You will move poor children from here to here,” and he lifted up and evacuated imaginary children from one side of his blotting pad to the other; “this will be very difficult”. He went on: “I am too old now to think you can improve people’s nature. Everyone has to learn to defend himself. I should not object if you could introduce a note of patriotism into the schools.” And then, with a grin, recalling our conversation the previous week, “Tell the children that Wolfe won Quebec.”

When Butler said that he should like to directly influence the school curriculum but that such moves were commonly frowned upon, Churchill answered earnestly: Of course not by instruction or order but by suggestion”

Today’s post continues on from Part 1…..

Rab Butler faced a dilemma. After 40 years of waiting he was now being offered the chance of his dream job as Viceroy of India. Turn it down and the job would unlikely be offered again. Take it and the 1944 Education Act, a bill he had toiled at, might fall apart.

In the end, the decision was simple. Churchill and Butler had never been good friends, with the two clashing on issues of Empire and India. Butler was unconvinced he could implement any satisfactory changes when they would need to pass via Churchill. Butler also thought it unlikely that he was Churchill’s first choice for the role, meaning there was always the possibility it would be pulled away in the last minute. Hence, he declined.

Unfortunately, Churchill would still prove to be a blockade for Butler: he needed his approval on the Education Bill, even though he had specifically said he would not consider such reforms while the war was ongoing. In March 1943 Butler was asked to spend the night at Chequers. Once there Churhill read aloud a prepared speech about Britain’s post-war future, in which he described education’s role.  On finishing, Churchill told Butler he must re-write it overnight and make it better (even though Churchill would not release him from social activities until 1am). In the original speech Churchill promised national school standards and an immediate raising of the the leaving age. Butler’s rewrite softened the leaving age (it would instead be ‘progressively prolonged’) and added the new religious arrangements.

Churchill called for him the following morning:

…at a quarter to eleven my presence was demanded and I found him in bed, smoking a cigar, with a black cat curled up on his feet. He began aggressively by claiming that the cat did more for the war effort than I did, since it provided him with a hot-water bottle and saved fuel and power. Didn’t I agree? I said not really, but that it was a very beautiful cat. This seemed to please him.

Churchill looked at the new speech and Butler revealed his intentionto draft a new Education Bill encompassing the church school changes. Churchill ignored his comment.

Heartened by Churchill declining the opportunity to outright stop the idea Butler moved forward and in January 1944 moved the Second Reading of the bill in the House of Commons. Some attacks were raised, but only a few. Butler’s careful costings and claims that it would ‘take a generation to implement’ helped calm fears.

By August 1944 the Bill was through and Butler received a telegram:

“Pray accept my congratulations. You have added a notable Act to the Statute Book and won a lasting place in the history of British Education. Winston S. Churchill”

Henceforth, every child had the right to a free secondary education for at least four years (eventually five). Though the school system was initially split across grammars, moderns and technical, Butler’s view was that the buildings would gradually combine onto one site (known in original documents as ‘multilateral’ schools rather than comprehensive). The Act also included provision for a progression toward compulsory part-time education up to the age of 18; a policy that has yet to fully come to fruition.

No doubt Butler was chomping at the bit to implement the new school plans he had worked so hard to complete. Unfortunately, the 1945 General Election loomed on the horizon.

Am now getting near the end of Rab Butler’s autobiography. The later chapters mostly cover his time as Chancellor and working in the Home and Foreign office. The chapter on his role as Education Minister retold his involvement in the 1944 Education Act and I thought it was worth recounting that process because of the insight it gives into the passing of education bills.

*

The 1944 Education Act is considered one of the most significant education reforms of the 20th century. But it was not supposed to be this way. Eight years earlier the 1936 Education Act laid down the same law now associated with the ’44 act: that every child should remain in school until aged 15. With a three year lead-in period the policy was due to start on 1st September 1939. On that day, Germany invaded Poland.

The perils of war rained hard on the education system. Evacuation, loss of male teachers, the use of school buildings for war ministries, all meant countless interruption. Educational operations could at best be called ‘hazy’ during this time. The poverty and lack of literacy among the inner-city children bundled off to the doorsteps of the wealthier also brought a growing awareness of England’s educational inequalities. Not for the first time education became the rally cry for anyone who wanted to improve these children’s futures, and so it was that Butler was handed the job of preparing for a better situation once the war was won. [The idea that England would not be the ultimate victors appears never to have entered Butler’s mind].

In June 1941 he published “The Green Book” – a plan for a ‘multilateral’ schooling system that would abolish ‘extreme inequality of wealth and possessions’. The NUT responded with their own “Dark Green Book” and the Directors and Secretaries Association published an “Orange Book” giving their views on the matter. Coloured books were clearly the blogging of its day.

More inclined than later secretaries to listen, Butler took the books seriously and attempted to move his position.

Unfortunately, not everyone was pleased by his actions. Churchill sent a letter on the 13th September 1941 stating:I certainly cannot contemplate a new Education Bill. Churchill was concerned that any quality education system threatening private schools would be a distraction right at the time he needed the elites most. He was probably right. Butler henceforth laid off the public schools (he had previously suggested integrating them) but continued writing his Bill.

A thornier problem was that of the ‘provided’ and ‘non-provided’ schools. In the 19th century most schools were operated by voluntary bodies who raised money from public subscriptions. From 1833 the State also provided funds to ‘assist’ the schools. By the early 1900s the largest voluntary provider, the Church of England, educated nearly two million children. However, two and a half million were also by this point educated in local government schools. If church schools needed money for new buildings, or to pay more teachers, they were given money by the state, however attending religious school was only possible if you of that faith. Taxpayers then asked: Why should the state fund schools that our child (of a different religion) cannot attend? [That it took England so long to become annoyed by this is fascinating; America had a similar debate a hundred years previously].

The debate had rumbled on, but by the 1940s Church of England schools were now the ones most in need of repair. Many had too few pupils to be economical. And the discriminatory policies the schools had towards teachers, often underpinned by racist tendencies, irked the NUT. Butler knew that in a post-WWII world, where money was tight and needs high, handing over cash for the necessary repairs to CoE schools considered discriminatory and elitist was going to split spleens.

Through intense negotiation Butler therefore got the agreement of many Anglican districts to hand over their school building to the local authority; in return, schools would teach an agreed religious studies [This move much delighted Churchill who teased Butler by calling it the ‘County Council Creed’ and asking whether Butler was planning to create a State religion.]

The Roman Catholic church, however, was less concilliatory. They called the new curriculum ‘Disembodied Christianity’ and argued they had not spent millions building schools in the 19th century to simply hand them over to the council. It was a fair point.

Butler’s next compromise bestowed two new phrases on our educational landscape. He offered Church schooles the choice of becoming either ‘controlled’ or ‘aided’. If ‘controlled’ the LEA would be responsible for all the school’s costs, the appointment of teachers, and the children would be taught the ‘County Council Creed’. If a religious school chose the ‘aided’ path then the LEA was responsible for teacher salaries and the running of the school, but managers were responsible for alterations to bring the building up to standard. On the plus side aided schools could hire and fire all teachers at will, and could teach religion as they wished.

Still, the churches would not play nicely.

At least, not until Butler revealed the hard facts. Over 90% of Church Schools were 40+ years old and the Church simply did not have enough money for their upkeep. They, and Rab, knew it. Butler’s deal was a solid one: the ones who shifted to the LEA got their curriculum and retained choice over their leaders but the building costs were sucked up by the LEA who could quell the baying crowds by explaining that they now had control over recruitment, admissions, etc.

All was exciting and the passing of the Act finally looked assured. It was only then that Butler got a phone call. He had finally – after years of waiting – been considered for the role of Viceroy to India, his dream job, and was asked if he might wish to take it?

Of course he wanted to go. It was what he had dreamed about for so long. But the Bill was in a fragile way. Without him it was entirely possible that it would fall apart. What on earth was he to do?……

%d bloggers like this: