Educational Theory and Practice

However, the matter goes beyond this. The fact is that the theory and practice of a special form of education for an “elite” and of a less expensive inferior type of education for the remainder, has always been a barrier to full education for the great majority of young people.

Theories of an intellectual “elite”, whether chosen by intelligence tests to determine the I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) or by examination, are still accepted in all Australian States, and in the capitalist world generally.

For this “elite” there is a special kind of secondary education, usually highly academic. In general, the pupils selected for this type of education have better buildings and equipment, more highly qualified teachers, and are in smaller classes than the remainder who, in the main, follow more practical courses in technical or home science schools.

The “streaming” of children into these different courses has an obvious class bias; the pupils selected for the “elite” schools being intended for professional life, those in the other types of school for various types of working class occupation.

This is very obvious when a study is made of the ways in which pupils have been, and are still, selected for different types of schools and courses.

The question at issue is not whether children or adults differ in natural ability. Clearly, some are more gifted than others; some absorb knowledge more readily, some mature earlier; some have special gifts in music, art and other fields.

What is important is the existence of a theory that only a small minority is capable of full secondary education; a theory that meets the requirements of class-privilege in capitalist society. It is on such a theory that selection for various types of education has been conducted for many years.

The question is frequently asked whether the most talented children achieve their maximum academic development ill a class or school where there is a marked difference of ability.

Proponents of the selective school claim that the incentive of competition at a high level raises the standard beyond what it would reach if competition were less keen.

Evidence on this point is not conclusive.

The carefully selected top-level pupils in selective high schools in N.S.W. certainly achieve a great number of high passes in their final examinations, but it is also true that many country high schools achieve results not far below, and in some cases equal to them, from ungraded pupils of varying levels of I.Q. and primary achievement. Furthermore, a number of high and intermediate high schools, especially those with small senior classes, have been securing 100% passes in the Leaving Examination, a state of affairs by no means common in selective schools.

What can be said with assurance is that segregating the outstanding pupils in “Opportunity A” classes in primary school, and in selective high h schools, tends to unbalance them, to give them notions of intellectual and social superiority that are harmful to their social development.

The fact is that educational progress of pupils is determined by a number of factors, including incentives, size of classes, quality of teaching, the effectiveness of school organisation, the pupil’s own approach, and, above all, the capacity for work. In study and academic work, as in all fields of human activity, the transforming power of labour is a basic issue. Human ability expands through its exercise in labour, in concentrated effort, in the field of academic work, as in all others. Furthermore, improved nutrition or standards of physical fitness or an improved home-situation, lead, often, to a marked increase in levels of scholastic achievement; and even to increases in the level of the “Intelligence Quotient”, (I.Q.) which, in theory, is an innate, fixed and changing quality, not subject to the influence of external factors. (See below, under “The I.Q. system”.)

Selection by Examination

By the early years of the 20th century, education to primary standard had become general. Industrial society needs general literacy to enable its machines to be efficiently maintained and serviced, and its bookkeeping and general administration to be carried on.

But capitalism required only a tiny minority with higher education to carry out the more skilled operations and higher administrative functions. These were selected by public examination which was highly competitive and academic.

The vast majority of children either ceased formal education at the end of the primary course at about ages 12-14, or took a limited secondary or technical course, to become skilled craftsmen or clerical workers.

Secondary Education for all

As production processes became more complex, the need increased for a greater percentage of workers with a higher secondary or tertiary education (scientists, agronomists, technologists, doctors, teachers, administrative staff) .

At the same time, public demand, led by the working class movement, raised the slogan of secondary education, not as a privilege, but as a right for all.

Various governments, under pressure from the trade unions and the labour movement as a whole, have introduced reforms, such as part-time daylight training for apprentices, increase of the school leaving age, and similar legislation in other fields.

However, the demand for greater equality of educational opportunity has continued to be pressed upon governments by the working class movement, and progressive opinion generally.

Selective Systems

In opposition to these demands, various theories have been advanced, all based on the assumption that those who, in fact, succeeded in life deserved to succeed because of inborn ability, and that first-rate education would only be wasted on the remainder.

In practice, this has meant the arrangement of children in schools according to the class position they were expected to fill in society, i.e. professional people, skilled craftsmen, semi-skilled or unskilled workers.

In some States this is still done by means of public examination, usually between the ages of 11 and 12. On the basis of the examination, at this extremely early age, a final decision is made as to the course or type of school in which the pupil is to spend his secondary school life (i.e. academic high, junior technical or home science). In other words, for the great majority, the course commenced at age 11 determines the future position of the child in society.

Educationists in general have long been thoroughly dissatisfied with the predictive accuracy of such an examination held at so early an age.

There are even more grounds for dissatisfaction now that crisis conditions have resulted in tens of thousands receiving education under such chaotic conditions that many, even of the ablest children, gain poor examination results.

The I.Q. System

The system of selection operating in N.S.W. since 1943 was introduced as an alternative to selection by public examination.

The I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) system was, it was claimed, both scientific and democratic. Pupils were admitted to secondary schools not on the basis of examinations, but of alleged ability to succeed as determined in advance by a test of intelligence, although minor use was made also of school test results.

Those with highest I.Q.'s were, in general, admitted to full high schools; those in the intermediate group to junior technical and home science schools; the third, and lowest, to “opportunity” or “general activity” classes or schools.

The N.S.W. Department of Education has itself in practice admitted the low predictive value of I.Q. tests, by increasing in recent years, the emphasis placed on school tests in selection of pupils, and by making the final decision through a committee. However, the I.Q. still plays a decisive part in determining courses.

The I.Q. system operates partially in other States. For example, within some schools, children of the same age are graded into forms according to their I.Q.; whilst in Queensland, there is every indication that I.Q. tests will soon be introduced as the standard method of selection for secondary schools. In all States there are advocates of the system, as the alleged scientific method of evaluating innate ability.

Actually the I.Q. system is the reverse of scientific. It is based on an unproven assumption that tests can be devised to be given to children between the ages of 9 and 12 that will establish their innate ability, their intelligence.

This is supposed to be a fixed, practically unchanging quality, so that, when the test results are known, the child can be placed into the educational category for which the results indicate he is suited.

What happens in practice is that the child, long before he has finished his primary education, is card-indexed by the Guidance Sections of education departments, in effect allotting him his future place in society.

This is the most damaging effect of the I.Q. system, that it divides children according to the results of tests, almost into different castes, from which their chance of escape to a different grouping is meagre.

In this respect the I.Q. system of selection is worse than others, but not different in its basic effects.

The existence of different quality streams of education, whatever the method of selection, leads inevitably to glaring anomalies.