Many, too, are deterred from undertaking congenial work by reason of

the inadequate income to be derived therefrom, and the unsatisfactory

prospects which it presents. Let it suffice to mention the teaching

profession, which fails to attract in any considerable numbers the

right kind of men and women. A large proportion of its members did not

become teachers from deliberate choice, but, having failed in their

attempt to secure other employment, were forced to betake themselves

to the ever-open portals of the great Refuge for the Destitute, and

become teachers (or, at least, become classified as such). True there

are a few "prizes" in the profession, and to some of the _rude

donati_ the Church holds out a helping hand; but the lay members

cannot look forward even to the "congenial gloom of a Colonial

Bishopric."

Others, again, are attracted to employments (for which they may have

no special aptitude) by the large salaries or profits which are to be

earned therein, often with but little trouble or previous training--or

so, at least, they believe. The idea of vocation is quite obscured,

and a man's occupation is in effect the shortest distance from poverty

which he cannot endure, to wealth and leisure which he may not know

how to use.

It frequently happens, too, that a young man is unable to afford

either the time or the expense necessary to qualify for the profession

which he desires to enter, and for which he is well adapted by his

talents and temperament. Not a few prefer in such circumstances to

"play for safety," and secure a post in the Civil Service.

It is plain from such considerations as these that all attempts to

realise the Utopian ideal must needs be, for the present at least, but

very partially successful. Politics are not the only sphere in which

"action is one long second-best." Even if it were possible at the

present time to train each youth for that calling which his own gifts

and temperament, or the reasoned judgment of his parents, selected as

his life-work, it is very far from certain that he would ultimately

find himself engaged therein. English institutions are largely based

on the doctrine of individual liberty, and those statutes which

establish or safeguard individual rights are not unjustly regarded as

the "bulwarks of the Constitution." But the inalienable right of a

father to choose a profession for his son, or of the son to choose one

for himself, is often exercised without any real inquiry into the

conditions of success in the profession selected. Hence the frequent

complaints about the "overcrowding of the professions" either in

certain localities or in the country at large. The Bar affords a

glaring example. "There be many which are bred unto the law, yet is

the law not bread unto them." The number of recruits which any one

branch of industry requires in a single year is not constant, and, in

some cases, is subject to great fluctuations; yet there are few or no

statistics available for the guidance of those who are specially

concerned with that branch, or who are considering the desirability of

entering it. The establishment of Employment Exchanges is a tacit

admission of the need of such statistics, and--though less

certainly--of the duty of the Government to provide them. Yet even if

they were provided it seems beyond dispute that, in the absence of

strong pressure or compulsion from the State, the choice of

individuals would not always be in accordance with the national needs.

The entry to certain professions--for instance that of medicine--is

most properly safeguarded by regulations and restrictions imposed by

bodies to which the State has delegated certain powers and duties. It

may happen that in one of these professions the number of members is

greatly in excess, or falls far short of the national requirements;

yet neither State nor Professional Council has power to refuse

admission to any duly qualified candidate, or to compel certain

selected people to undergo the training necessary for qualification.

It is quite conceivable, however, that circumstances might arise which

would render such action not merely desirable but absolutely essential

to the national well-being; indeed it is at least arguable that such

circumstances have already arisen. The popular doctrine of the early

Victorian era, that the welfare of the community could best be secured

by allowing every man to seek his own interests in the way chosen by

himself, has been greatly modified or wholly abandoned. So far are we

from believing that national efficiency is to be attained by

individual liberty that some are in real danger of regarding the two

as essentially antagonistic. The nation, as a whole, supported the

Legislature in the establishment of compulsory military service; it

did so without enthusiasm and only because of the general conviction

that such a policy was demanded by the magnitude of the issues at

stake. Britons have always been ready, even eager, to give their lives

for their country; but, even now, most of them prefer that the

obligation to do so should be a moral, rather than a legal one. The

doctrine of individual liberty implies the minimum of State

interference. Hence there is no country in the world where so much has

been left to individual initiative and voluntary effort as in England;

and, though of late the number of Government officials has greatly

increased, it still remains true that an enormous amount of important

work, of a kind which is elsewhere done by salaried servants of the

State, is in the hands of voluntary associations or of men who, though

appointed or recognised by the State, receive no salary for their

services. Nor can it be denied that the work has been, on the whole,

well done. A traditional practice of such a kind cannot be (and ought

not to be) abandoned at once or without careful consideration; yet the

changed conditions of domestic and international politics render some

modification necessary.

If the Legislature has protected the purchaser--in spite of the

doctrine of "caveat emptor"--by enactments against adulteration of

food, and has in addition, created machinery to enforce those

enactments, are not we justified in asking that it shall also protect

us against incompetence, especially in cases where the effects, though

not so obvious, are even more harmful to the community than those

which spring from impure food? The prevention of overcrowding in

occupations would seem to be the business of the State quite as much

as is the prevention of overcrowding in dwelling-houses and factories.

The best interests of the nation demand that the entrance to the

teaching profession--to take one example out of many--should be

safeguarded at least as carefully as the entrance to medicine or law.

The supreme importance of the functions exercised by teachers is far

from being generally realised, even by teachers themselves; yet upon

the effective realisation of that importance the future welfare of the

nation largely depends. Doubtless most of us would prefer that the

supply of teachers should be maintained by voluntary enlistment, and

that their training should be undertaken, like that of medical

students, by institutions which owe their origin to private or public

beneficence rather than to the State; nevertheless, the obligation to

secure adequate numbers of suitable candidates and to provide for

their professional training rests ultimately on the State. The

obligation has been partially recognised as far as elementary

education is concerned, but it is by no means confined to that branch.

It is well to realise at this point that the efficient discharge of

the duty thus imposed will of necessity involve a much greater degree

of compulsion on both teachers and pupils than has hitherto been

employed. The terrible spectacle of the unutilised resources of

humanity, which everywhere confronts us in the larger relations of our

national life, has been responsible for certain tentatives which have

either failed altogether to achieve their object, or have been but

partially successful. Much has been heard of the educational

ladder--incidentally it may be noted that the educational sieve is

equally necessary, though not equally popular--and some attempts have

been made to enable a boy or girl of parts to climb from the

elementary school to the university without excessive difficulty. To

supplement the glaring deficiencies of elementary education a

few--ridiculously few--continuation schools have been established.

That these and similar measures have failed of success is largely due

to the fact that the State has been content to provide facilities, but

has refrained from exercising that degree of compulsion which alone

could ensure that they would be utilised by those for whose benefit

they were created. "Such continuation schools as England possesses,"

says a German critic, "are without the indispensable condition of

compulsion." The reforms recently outlined by the President of the

Board of Education show that he, at any rate, admits the criticism to

be well grounded. A system which compels a child to attend school

until he is fourteen and then leaves him to his own resources can do

little to create, and less to satisfy, a thirst for knowledge. During

the most critical years of his life--fourteen to eighteen--he is left

without guidance, without discipline, without ideals, often without

even the desire of remembering or using the little he knows. He is

led, as it were, to the threshold of the temple, but the fast-closed

door forbids him to enter and behold the glories of the interior. Year

by year there is an appalling waste of good human material; and

thousands of those whom nature intended to be captains of industry are

relegated, in consequence of undeveloped or imperfectly trained

capacity, to the ranks, or become hewers of wood and drawers of water.

Many drift with other groups of human wastage to the unemployed,

thence to the unemployable, and so to the gutter and the grave. The

poor we have always with us; but the wastrel--like the pauper--"is a

work of art, the creation of wasteful sympathy and legislative

inefficiency."

We must be careful, however, in speaking of "the State" to avoid the

error of supposing that it is a divinely appointed entity, endowed

with power and wisdom from on high. It is, in short, the nation in

miniature. Even if the Legislature were composed exclusively of the

highest wisdom, the most enlightened patriotism in the country, its

enactments must needs fall short of its own standards, and be but

little in advance of those of the average of the nation. It must still

acknowledge with Solon. "These are not the best laws I could make, but

they are the best which my nation is fitted to receive." We cannot

blame the State without, in fact, condemning ourselves. The absence of

any widespread enthusiasm for education, or appreciation of its

possibilities; the claims of vested interests; the exigencies of Party

Government; and, above all, the murderous tenacity of individual

rights have proved well-nigh insuperable obstacles in the path of true

educational reform. On the whole we have received as good laws as we

have deserved. The changed conditions due to the war, and the changed

temper of the nation afford a unique opportunity for wiser counsels,

and--to some extent--guarantee that they shall receive careful and

sympathetic consideration.

It may be objected, however, that in taking the teaching profession to

exemplify the duty of the State to assume responsibility for both

individual and community, we have chosen a case which is exceptional

rather than typical; that many, perhaps most, of the other vocations

may be safely left to themselves, or, at least left to develop along

their own lines with the minimum of State interference. It cannot be

denied that there is force in these objections. It should suffice,

however, to remark that, if the duty of the State to secure the

efficiency of its members in their several callings be admitted, the

question of the extent to which, and the manner in which control is

exercised is one of detail rather than of principle, and may therefore

be settled by the common sense and practical experience of the parties

chiefly concerned.

A much more difficult problem is sure to arise, sooner or later, in

connection with the utilisation of efficients. Some few years ago the

present Prime Minister called attention to the waste of power involved

in the training of the rich. They receive, he said, the best that

money can buy; their bodies and brains are disciplined; and then "they

devote themselves to a life of idleness." It is "a stupid waste of

first-class material." Instead of contributing to the work of the

world, they "kill their time by tearing along roads at perilous speed,

or do nothing at enormous expense." It has needed the bloodiest war in

history to reveal the splendid heroism latent in young men of this

class. Who can withhold from them gratitude, honour, nay even

reverence? But the problem still remains how are the priceless

qualities, which have been so freely devoted to the national welfare

on the battlefield, to be utilised for the greater works of peace

which await us? Are we to recognise the right to be idle as well as

the right to work? Is there to be a kind of second Thellusson Act,

directed against accumulations of leisure? Or are we to attempt the

discovery of some great principle of Conservation of Spiritual Energy,

by the application of which these men may make a contribution worthy

of themselves to the national life and character? Who can answer?

But though it is freely admitted on all hands that some check upon

aggressive individualism is imperatively necessary, and that it is no

longer possible to rely entirely upon voluntary organisations however

useful, there are not a few of our countrymen who view with grave

concern any increase in the power and authority of the State. They

point out that such increase tends inevitably towards the despotism of

an oligarchy, and that such a despotism, however benevolent in its

inception, ruthlessly sacrifices individual interests and liberty to

the real or supposed good of the State; that even where constitutional

forms remain the spirit which animated them has departed; that

officialism and bureaucracy with their attendant evils become supreme,

and that the national character steadily deteriorates. They warn us

that we may pay too high a price even for organisation and efficiency;

and, though it is natural that we should admire certain qualities

which we do not possess, we ought not to overlook the fact that those

methods which have produced the most perfect national organisation in

the history of the world are also responsible for orgies of brutality

without parallel among civilised peoples. That such warnings are

needful cannot be doubted; but may it not be urged that they indicate

dangers incident to a course of action rather than the inevitable

consequences thereof? In adapting ourselves to new conditions we must

needs take risks. No British Government could stamp out voluntaryism

even if it wished to do so; and none has yet manifested any such

desire. The nation does not want that kind of national unity of which

Germany is so proud, and which seems so admirably adapted to her

needs; for the English character and genius rest upon a conception of

freedom which renders such a unity foreign and even repulsive to its

temper. Whatever be the changes which lie before us, the worship of

the State is the one form of idolatry into which the British people

are least likely to fall.

II

The recent adaptation of factories and workshops to the production of

war material is only typical of what goes on year by year in peace time,

though, of course, to a less degree and in less dramatic fashion. Not

only are men constantly adapting themselves and their machinery to

changed conditions of production, but they are applying the experience

and skill gained in the pursuit of one occupation to the problems of

another for which it has been exchanged. The comparative ease with which

this is done is evidence of the widespread existence of that gift which

our enemies call the power of "muddling through," but which has been

termed--without wholly sacrificing truth to politeness--the "concurrent

adaptability to environment." The British sailor as "handy man" has few

equals and no superiors, and he is, in some sort, typical of the nation.

The testimony of Thucydides to Themistocles ([Greek: kratistos dê oytos

aytoschediazein ta deonta egeneto]) might with equal or even greater

truth be applied to many Englishmen to-day. As this power [Greek:

aytoschediazein ta deonta] in the present war saved the Allies from

defeat at the outset, so we hope and believe it will carry them on to

victory at the last. Yet it becomes a snare if it leads its possessor to

neglect preparation or despise organisation, for neither of which can it

ever be an entirely satisfactory substitute, albeit a very costly one.

At the same time we should recognise that any system of training which

seriously impairs this power tends to deprive us of one of the most

valuable of our national assets. It follows that, for the majority at

least, exclusive or excessive specialisation in training--vocational or

otherwise--so far from being an advantage, is a positive drawback; for,

as we have seen, a large proportion of our youth manifest no marked bent

in any particular direction, and of those who do but a small proportion

are capable of that hypertrophy which the highest specialisation

demands.

It is important to remember that, though school life is a preparation

for practical life, vocational education ought not to begin until a

comparatively late stage in a boy's career, if indeed it begins at all

while he remains at school. On this it would seem that all

professional bodies are agreed; for the entrance examinations, which

they have accepted or established are all framed to test a boy's

general education and not his knowledge of the special subjects to

which he will afterwards devote himself. The evils of premature

specialisation are too well known to require even enumeration, and

they are increased rather than diminished if that premature

specialisation is vocational. The importance of technical training as

the means whereby a man is enabled rightly to use the hours of work

can hardly be exaggerated; but the value of his work, his worth to his

fellows, and his rank in the scale of manhood depend, to at least an

equal degree, upon the way in which he uses the hours of leisure. It

is one of the greatest of the many functions of a good school to train

its members to a wise use of leisure; and though this is not always

achieved by direct means the result is none the less valuable. In

every calling there must needs be much of what can only be to all save

its most enthusiastic devotees--and, at times, even to them--dull

routine and drudgery. A man cannot do his best, or be his best, unless

he is able to overcome the paralysing influences thus brought to bear

upon him by securing mental and spiritual freshness and stimulus; in

other words his "inward man must be renewed day by day." There are

many agencies which may contribute to such a result; but school

memories, school friendships, school "interests" take a foremost place

among them. Many boys by the time they leave school have developed an

interest or hobby--literary, scientific or practical; and the hobby

has an ethical, as well as an economic value. Nor is this all.

Excessive devotion to "Bread Studies," whether voluntary or

compulsory, tends to make a man's vocation the prison of his soul.

Professor Eucken recently told his countrymen that the greater their

perfection in work grew, the smaller grew their souls. Any rational

interest, therefore, which helps a man to shake off his fetters, helps

also to preserve his humanity and to keep him in touch with his

fellows. Dr A.C. Benson tells of a distinguished Frenchman who

remarked to him, "In France a boy goes to school or college, and

perhaps does his best. But he does not get the sort of passion for the

honour and prosperity of his school or college which you English seem

to feel." It is this wondrous faculty of inspiring unselfish devotion

which makes our schools the spiritual power-houses of the nation. This

love for an abstraction, which even the dullest boys feel, is the

beginning of much that makes English life sweet and pure. It is the

same spirit which, in later years, moves men to do such splendid

voluntary work for their church, their town, their country, and even

in some cases leads them "to take the whole world for their parish."

However much we may strive to reach the beautiful Montessori ideal,

the fact remains that there must be some lessons, some duties, which

the pupil heartily dislikes and would gladly avoid if he could; but

they must be done promptly and satisfactorily, and, if not cheerfully,

at least without audible murmuring. Eventually he may, and often does,

come to like them; at any rate he realises that they are not set

before him in order to irritate or punish him, but as part of his

school training. It will be agreed that the acquirement of a habit of

doing distasteful things, even under compulsion, because they are part

of one's duty is no bad preparation for a life in which most days

bring their quota of unpleasant duties which cannot be avoided,

delegated, or postponed.

At the present time, however, there is a real danger--in some quarters

at least--of unduly emphasising the specifically vocational, or

"practical" side of education. The man of affairs knows little or

nothing of young minds and their limitations, of the conditions under

which teaching is done, or of the educational values of the various

studies in a school curriculum. He is prone to choose subjects chiefly

or solely because of their immediate practical utility. Thus in his

view the chief reason for learning a modern language is that business

communications will thereby be facilitated. One could wish that he

would be content to indicate the end which he has in view, and which

he sees clearly, and leave the means of obtaining it to the judgment

and experience of the teacher; for in education, as in other spheres

of action, the obvious way is rarely the right way, and very often the

way of disaster. Yet it is a distinct gain to have the practical man

brought into the administration of educational affairs; for teachers

are, as a rule, too little in contact with the world of commerce to

know much of the needs and ideas of business men. The Board of

Education has already established a Consultative Committee of

Educationists. Why should not a similar standing Committee, consisting

of representatives of the Chambers of Commerce of the country be also

appointed? Such a Committee could render, as could no other body,

invaluable service to the cause of education.

Cambridge Essays on Education · 第 13 / 15 段