"Where the classical tradition had been lost it was not easy to recovery, especially as the classics had now to contend not only with the ordinary parent anxious for a useful education for his son, but with a government uneasily conscious of Britain's weakness in scientific and technical education and willing to provide financial aid for this purpose, but with no desire to subsidize or even encourage the classics" (Clarke 97).
The above quote, taken from a chapter discussing schools in the 19th century, immediately brought to mind The Mill on the Floss. In this novel we find Mr. Tulliver, who could be considered an ordinary parent, wants Tom to obtain an education that would render him a scholar rather than a farmer. In fact Mr. Tulliver speaks of perhaps Tom becoming a "sort o'engineer" (11) among possibly other things. Eliot displays here the Victorian move toward the desire for more than a classical education, where science becomes of great significance to the Victorians. In fact over time scientific education became a priority in the educational system of Britain rendering other subjects less important. In thinking about this it is also interesting to consider as society's move towards science progressed, morals and society in general degenerated. In the rest of this post I am going to discuss some interesting facts that I found to support our claim that scientific education gained priority over liberal arts.
In 1869 the Endowed School Act was passed in Britain and this act gave schools the freedom to modify their curricula, which in turn allowed them to respond to the new demands for scientific subjects (Baron 50). A demand for scientific subjects prior to the 19th century was generally unheard of. Undoubtedly Darwin had played a large role in this move toward science. This was just the beginning of the changes in education. The Education Act of 1902 gave the local authorities responsibility for aiding voluntary schools which were starting to draw support for technical schools (Barton 53). Science and technical schools were peaking the interests of society which was drawing away from classical education. An even more interesting event that showed science's move toward becoming a priority in education was in 1963 when the "Ministry of Education" became the "Department of Education and Science". A significant sign that "shows pronounced concern with science and the close links between higher education and institutions for scientific research" (Baron 67).
Of great interest to me was when Baron spoke of the rise in delinquency between 1946 and 1956, a fivefold rise in youthful drunkeness, threefold increase in violent crimes and double the number of convictions of 17-20 year olds for sexual offences and disorderly conduct (37-38). He did not mention that there was a clear answer as to why there was a rise however, this was brought up while he was speaking of moral guidance in schools. Perhaps the push for more science could explain why moral guidance was lacking. More science would have meant less time for religion and literature, which meant less time for moral education. Is it far fetched to think that social degeneracy is a result of the move toward science? In fact I do not think that it is a coincidence that after Darwin, science took priority in education and since then we have seen the degeneration of society. Sure we have progressed in the sense that we are more advanced in our daily lives and the way things function however morally we have degenerated. This trend of degeneration only gets worse as technology and science advances. It seems the youth of today lack many morals that only one generation ago was present. Technology is a gateway to cheating (as previously discussed by Nathan) and easy access to socially degenerate material.
On a closing note I would like to quote Baron, "How to achieve progress, with out loss of identity and continuity, is perhaps the fundamental problem of the technological age" (15).
Works Cited:
Baron, G. Society, Schools & Progress in England. London: Pergamon Press, 1965.
Clarke, M.L. Classical Education in Britain 1500-1900. London: Cambridge University Press, 1959.
Eliot, George. The Mill on the Floss. 1880. Toronto: Penguin Books, 2003.
1 comment:
Thank you Hilary for showing the progress from the Victorian age to post-war England. I think that it shows the degeneration of education due to scientism. However, i think that in the case of Tulliver, he doesn't just want his son to be "o engineer" but a gentleman- one of these "fellows as talks fine and write wi' a flourish"(11). I think Mr. Tulliver expresses the concern of most lower middle class parents-- the concern that most students today are burdened with. They want you to be able to rise above them socially, to be well educated, but they also want you to learn something pratical that will ensure your financial future. For example my parents where perefectly happy when I was a business major and an english minor, but when I told them I was going to quit business, all I heard was: "how will you get a job with that degree?".
The other thing I found a bit shocking is that your article could think of no great cause for degeneracy in boys from 1946-156 (hint: when did WWII end). While I still think scientism is cheifly to blame, I think that it was greatly invigorated by the two World Wars, which are unfortunately not part of what we are studying. The ways those wars were faught changed the value of science. Horace wasn't going to help you make a better machine gun. When survival becomes your chief goal, inevitably liberal arts will be thrown out the window, perhaps to the detrement of morality. In times of war, it seems that science, or survival of the fittest, will always rear its ugly head.
Kristina
Post a Comment