Alleged Novelties in Modern Schools

There is just one more nuisance to be disposed of before I come to

the positive side of my case. I mean the person who tells me that

my schooldays belong to a bygone order of educational ideas and

institutions, and that schools are not now a bit like my old school.

I reply, with Sir Walter Raleigh, by calling on my soul to give this

statement the lie. Some years ago I lectured in Oxford on the subject

of Education. A friend to whom I mentioned my intention said, "You know

nothing of modern education: schools are not now what they were when

you were a boy." I immediately procured the time sheets of half a dozen

modern schools, and found, as I expected, that they might all have been

my old school: there was no real difference. I may mention, too, that

I have visited modern schools, and observed that there is a tendency to

hang printed pictures in an untidy and soulless manner on the walls,

and occasionally to display on the mantel-shelf a deplorable glass case

containing certain objects which might possibly, if placed in the hands

of the pupils, give them some practical experience of the weight of

a pound and the length of an inch. And sometimes a scoundrel who has

rifled a bird's nest or killed a harmless snake encourages the children

to go and do likewise by putting his victims into an imitation nest and

bottle and exhibiting them as aids to "Nature study." A suggestion that

Nature is worth study would certainly have staggered my schoolmasters;

so perhaps I may admit a gleam of progress here. But as any child who

attempted to handle these dusty objects would probably be caned, I do

not attach any importance to such modernities in school furniture.

The school remains what it was in my boyhood, because its real object

remains what it was. And that object, I repeat, is to keep the children

out of mischief: mischief meaning for the most part worrying the

grown-ups.

What is to be Done?

The practical question, then, is what to do with the children. Tolerate

them at home we will not. Let them run loose in the streets we dare not

until our streets become safe places for children, which, to our utter

shame, they are not at present, though they can hardly be worse than

some homes and some schools.

The grotesque difficulty of making even a beginning was brought home to

me in the little village in Hertfordshire where I write these lines by

the lady of the manor, who asked me very properly what I was going to do

for the village school. I did not know what to reply. As the school kept

the children quiet during my working hours, I did not for the sake of

my own personal convenience want to blow it up with dynamite as I should

like to blow up most schools. So I asked for guidance. "You ought to

give a prize," said the lady. I asked if there was a prize for good

conduct. As I expected, there was: one for the best-behaved boy and

another for the best-behaved girl. On reflection I offered a handsome

prize for the worst-behaved boy and girl on condition that a record

should be kept of their subsequent careers and compared with the records

of the best-behaved, in order to ascertain whether the school criterion

of good conduct was valid out of school. My offer was refused because

it would not have had the effect of encouraging the children to give as

little trouble as possible, which is of course the real object of all

conduct prizes in schools.

I must not pretend, then, that I have a system ready to replace all

the other systems. Obstructing the way of the proper organization of

childhood, as of everything else, lies our ridiculous misdistribution

of the national income, with its accompanying class distinctions and

imposition of snobbery on children as a necessary part of their social

training. The result of our economic folly is that we are a nation of

undesirable acquaintances; and the first object of all our institutions

for children is segregation. If, for example, our children were set free

to roam and play about as they pleased, they would have to be policed;

and the first duty of the police in a State like ours would be to see

that every child wore a badge indicating its class in society, and that

every child seen speaking to another child with a lower-class badge, or

any child wearing a higher badge than that allotted to it by, say, the

College of Heralds, should immediately be skinned alive with a birch

rod. It might even be insisted that girls with high-class badges should

be attended by footmen, grooms, or even military escorts. In short,

there is hardly any limit to the follies with which our Commercialism

would infect any system that it would tolerate at all. But something

like a change of heart is still possible; and since all the evils of

snobbery and segregation are rampant in our schools at present we may as

well make the best as the worst of them.

Treatise on Parents and Children · 第 19 / 65 题