The classroom at large Roy Hedge
Formal classroom teaching is not enough to prepare children for life beyond school gates. Teachers need to be more aware of the energy and commitment of their pupils and be ready to direct them towards the expanding challenge of voluntary service. By their nature, schools are rarely in the vanguard of social change. They operate under conditions which strongly reinforce that most potent of phenomena, human inertia. With the exception of some idiosyncratic private institutions, schools exist to initiate children into an established adult society. What that society unquestioningly values will be prominent in the curriculum. What it once valued, but now questions, will probably also be there, because a body of personnel and expertise will have been developed within each school and, in the educational system in general, to deal with it. Religious Education and Classics probably fall into this category. The expertise in a subject area, which is the basic qualification of most secondary teachers, therefore in itself can be a strong conservative force. All of a child's time in school is normally accounted for. If he is to do something new, he must give something up. The pressure on a teacher's time is equally great. If he is conscientious he may spend up to sixty hours per week in work-related activity during term, including about twenty five hours in the classroom. The forces of conservatism are strengthened again. The conscientious teacher develops a stagger-on, hand-to-mouth philosophy which militates strongly against his radically changing his courses, or introducing something new. The less conscientious teacher, or the teacher who is merely tired of the struggle, is not likely to innovate much. So those who want to introduce new things into schools on a wide scale, face serious difficulties. Introducing children to a concept like mental health, or their involvement in community action, or volun18
tary social service, may be seen by no-one on a school staff, as part of his job. The central activity of schools is still classroom teaching. True some classrooms have changed in many ways in the last ten years. There is a diminishing quantity of traditional 'expository' teaching, in which the teacher addresses himself to a class of pupils who act as little more than an audience. The advantages of individualised learning, practical experiment, group discussion and project work, with the teacher as an organiser of the children's own learning, or a consultant in the classroom, are increasingly realised, and this has affected the style and mood of many classrooms. But the basic process, especially in secondary schools, is still largely the same, even in these 'prograssive' classrooms. Children tend to be learning the old subjects in new ways. From the point of view of what is being learned, rather than how it is being learned, the change is often more apparent than real. All of this tends to reinforce the point that it is difficult to get new things into the curriculum. This seems very gloomy for those who would like to see schools change social attitudes. Schools are not really geared to introduce children to attitudes not generally held by society. How could they be, where teachers themselves share, in general terms, the attitudes of the lower-middle class? How then, does one go about increasing the awareness of schools of their responsibility to educate children in such concepts as mental health, and to involve them in voluntary social service? A closer look at present practice might help.
As a preface to considering what schools do to make children aware of problems of mental health, it is well worth considering the desperate paucity of provision within the educational system itself, for dealing with disturbed children. Schools react only slowly to changes in what society thinks is important. The poverty of provision for disturbed children in the educational system, closely mirrors the general social situation. A child has to be very disturbed, and in such a way that he is violently disruptive, to stand a chance of being referred to specialist help. This specialist help almost invariably exists only outside the school, through child guidance clinics or special schools. Within schools, even counselling is rare, and is often part of the 'discipline' hierarchy of the establishment. My point is that the educational system, even in its own dealings with pupils, is not generally aware of the problems of mental health. So there is little wonder that the teaching of such an awareness to children is a rare commodity. There are, of course, some refreshing exceptions to all of this. Some schools do have good counselling systems, and do place strong emphasis on other than academic considerations. In general terms though, I think the criticism is fair. There is some current change in the schools in the general curriculum area which might be called 'social education' or social studies'. 'Social education' is a term in current use in schools, usually describing the belated 'socialisation' courses given in their last year to school leavers of lower ability. These courses
Tony Othen
Edward 'Nifty' Neat. Neal. 18. 18, reading a Edward'Nifty'
usually concentrate on careers guidance, work experience, educational visits, and often, an introduction the social services, in the sense of how to fill in a return, how to claim Social Security benefits, and so on. Much may be said about such courses that is beyond the scope of this article. But I would like to use the term 'social education', or 'social studies' in the more general sense of 'learning about society'. It is in this area, among others, that change is taking place in schools. Until recently, learning about society largely went on through the media of history, geography, and religious education lessons. The study of contemporary society was?and indeed in many, perhaps most schools, still is?limited to the 'non-academic' child or was non-existent. But with the growth of academic sociology and related social science subjects in the universities, providing a slow but increasing trickle of graduates into teaching, and the growing general social awareness of the importance of social studies and interest in the study of contemporary society, it was only a matter of time before these subjects found their way into the curriculum in some form. As this happens, there is real hope that concepts like mental health may be subjects for classroom activity. There are, of course, many areas of controversy here. What should social studies replace, for example. History, geography and religious education are the most vulnerable time-tabled subjects, but the subject teachers are mostly unwilling to give up areas in which they have the security of expertise and exto
tax
letter to to bedridden 74 yearold Mrs P. Poppins in Barnstaple. year-old
>
*
it4%l**{ ?
Formal classroom teaching is not enough to prepare children for life beyond school gates. Teachers need to be more aware of the energy and commitment of their pupils and be ready to direct them towards the expanding challenge of voluntary service. By their nature, schools are rarely in the vanguard of social change. They operate under conditions which strongly reinforce that most potent of phenomena, human inertia. With the exception of some idiosyncratic private institutions, schools exist to initiate children into an established adult society. What that society unquestioningly values will be prominent in the curriculum. What it once valued, but now questions, will probably also be there, because a body of personnel and expertise will have been developed within each school and, in the educational system in general, to deal with it. Religious Education and Classics probably fall into this category. The expertise in a subject area, which is the basic qualification of most secondary teachers, therefore in itself can be a strong conservative force. All of a child's time in school is normally accounted for. If he is to do something new, he must give something up. The pressure on a teacher's time is equally great. If he is conscientious he may spend up to sixty hours per week in work-related activity during term, including about twenty five hours in the classroom. The forces of conservatism are strengthened again. The conscientious teacher develops a stagger-on, hand-to-mouth philosophy which militates strongly against his radically changing his courses, or introducing something new. The less conscientious teacher, or the teacher who is merely tired of the struggle, is not likely to innovate much. So those who want to introduce new things into schools on a wide scale, face serious difficulties. Introducing children to a concept like mental health, or their involvement in community action, or volun18
tary social service, may be seen by no-one on a school staff, as part of his job. The central activity of schools is still classroom teaching. True some classrooms have changed in many ways in the last ten years. There is a diminishing quantity of traditional 'expository' teaching, in which the teacher addresses himself to a class of pupils who act as little more than an audience. The advantages of individualised learning, practical experiment, group discussion and project work, with the teacher as an organiser of the children's own learning, or a consultant in the classroom, are increasingly realised, and this has affected the style and mood of many classrooms. But the basic process, especially in secondary schools, is still largely the same, even in these 'prograssive' classrooms. Children tend to be learning the old subjects in new ways. From the point of view of what is being learned, rather than how it is being learned, the change is often more apparent than real. All of this tends to reinforce the point that it is difficult to get new things into the curriculum. This seems very gloomy for those who would like to see schools change social attitudes. Schools are not really geared to introduce children to attitudes not generally held by society. How could they be, where teachers themselves share, in general terms, the attitudes of the lower-middle class? How then, does one go about increasing the awareness of schools of their responsibility to educate children in such concepts as mental health, and to involve them in voluntary social service? A closer look at present practice might help.
As a preface to considering what schools do to make children aware of problems of mental health, it is well worth considering the desperate paucity of provision within the educational system itself, for dealing with disturbed children. Schools react only slowly to changes in what society thinks is important. The poverty of provision for disturbed children in the educational system, closely mirrors the general social situation. A child has to be very disturbed, and in such a way that he is violently disruptive, to stand a chance of being referred to specialist help. This specialist help almost invariably exists only outside the school, through child guidance clinics or special schools. Within schools, even counselling is rare, and is often part of the 'discipline' hierarchy of the establishment. My point is that the educational system, even in its own dealings with pupils, is not generally aware of the problems of mental health. So there is little wonder that the teaching of such an awareness to children is a rare commodity. There are, of course, some refreshing exceptions to all of this. Some schools do have good counselling systems, and do place strong emphasis on other than academic considerations. In general terms though, I think the criticism is fair. There is some current change in the schools in the general curriculum area which might be called 'social education' or social studies'. 'Social education' is a term in current use in schools, usually describing the belated 'socialisation' courses given in their last year to school leavers of lower ability. These courses
Tony Othen
Edward 'Nifty' Neat. Neal. 18. 18, reading a Edward'Nifty'
usually concentrate on careers guidance, work experience, educational visits, and often, an introduction the social services, in the sense of how to fill in a return, how to claim Social Security benefits, and so on. Much may be said about such courses that is beyond the scope of this article. But I would like to use the term 'social education', or 'social studies' in the more general sense of 'learning about society'. It is in this area, among others, that change is taking place in schools. Until recently, learning about society largely went on through the media of history, geography, and religious education lessons. The study of contemporary society was?and indeed in many, perhaps most schools, still is?limited to the 'non-academic' child or was non-existent. But with the growth of academic sociology and related social science subjects in the universities, providing a slow but increasing trickle of graduates into teaching, and the growing general social awareness of the importance of social studies and interest in the study of contemporary society, it was only a matter of time before these subjects found their way into the curriculum in some form. As this happens, there is real hope that concepts like mental health may be subjects for classroom activity. There are, of course, many areas of controversy here. What should social studies replace, for example. History, geography and religious education are the most vulnerable time-tabled subjects, but the subject teachers are mostly unwilling to give up areas in which they have the security of expertise and exto
tax
letter to to bedridden 74 yearold Mrs P. Poppins in Barnstaple. year-old
>
*
it4%l**{ ?
