David Bradshaw 1940 - 1947
from History of Education Researcher, No. 90, November 2012
Below: Article: The History of Education Society by David Bradshaw.
David Bradshaw (1929—2011)
David Bradshaw (1929—2011)
was born in Rushden, Northamptonshire. He attended Wellingborough Grammar
School from 1940 to 1947, took
a history and teaching diploma at the University of Sheffield 1947—51
followed by National Service from 1951
to 1953. David’s
lifelong passion for education was probably influenced by an impressionable
meeting he had, as an eight-year-old, with an HMI at Higham Ferrers elementary
school; in the autumn of 1941, to
his delight, this same inspector reappeared at his grammar school.
David’s distinguished career was occupied with teaching and educational leadership in schools, colleges and universities. After teaching positions in Norwich and Bristol, he worked at a teachers’ college in Winneba, Ghana, from 1959 to 1963, an experience which fed into a later MA thesis on the history of education in Ghana. On returning to Britain, he took up a post as a senior lecturer at C. F. Mott College in Liverpool, 1963—67. It was while working here that David played an important role in the foundation of the History of Education Society, being elected to serve as its first chair, an experience he describes in his article.
After moving to Sheffield City College of Education, where David became deputy principal, he went on to become principal of Doncaster College of Education and, from 1976 to 1989, the principal of an enlarged Doncaster Institute of Higher Education, the basis of today’s Doncaster College. From this grounding, he took a keen interest in wider educational and social matters and became an influential member of regional and national bodies. He served as Secretary of the Association of Colleges for Further and Higher Education between 1982 and 1989, chaired the Yorkshire and Humberside Further and Higher Education Committee from 1984 to 1989 and acted as a magistrate for eight years. Sir Keith Joseph appointed him as a member of the National Advisory Body for Public Sector Higher Education in 1983 and, three years later, he was awarded an OBE for services to education.
On taking early
retirement, at the age of sixty, David continued to pursue his educational
interests. He was involved in the development and early years of the Queen’s
Prizes for Universities and Colleges (1994—2002)
and also worked as a consultant with the RSA and Department for
Education and Employment (DfEE). But his most notable and sustained contribution
was to the University of Sheffield where he served on the Council, Convocation
and the Executive Committee which he chaired from 2006 to 2009.
In addition, he was on many University committees and working
parties, especially those devoted to the welfare of students: university halls
of residence, teaching and learning, an English language teaching centre and the
development of a health centre. In 2003,
he was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Letters (LittD) by Sheffield
University for his ‘remarkable’ contribution.
in educational administration and leadership was complemented by his writing and
active support for history of education. He wrote and edited numerous articles
and books, many of which connected with his professional life, for example, on
transferable intellectual skills, personal qualities and teamwork. An interest
in history complemented an awareness of contemporary changes in education,
evident in the collection he edited, Bringing Learning to Life: The Learning
Revolution, the Economy and the Individual (Falmer, 1995). He was also a keen member of the editorial board for
a new history of Sheffield University which was authored by Helen Mathers (Steel
City Scholars: The Centenary History of the University of Sheffield (James
and James, 2005)). As a staunch advocate of the importance of history of
education, he encouraged younger scholars and remained inspired by the international
breadth and the new areas of research emanating from the History of Education
Society which he had helped to establish.
In a note found after his death, ‘About myself for last things’, he hoped to be remembered also for his liking of funny stories and his love of hill walking, music poetry, fine art and cricket. He took great care of the individuals within the organizations he led, remembering their personal battles against hardship and poor health. In some ways, his own success surprised him and he felt honoured to take up the positions he was offered in life. His final comment noted an ‘ongoing search for knowledge at its growing edge’. David is survived by his wife, Ping Bradshaw, and his sons, Steven, Mark and Tim.
© Tom WoodinWith thanks to Ping Bradshaw
Article: The History of Education Society
History of Education Researcher, No. 90, November 2012
The History of Education Society.
Its Prehistory, Foundation and Early Years1
Chairman of the History of Education Society, 1967—1975
For many years, personal experience has been recognized as a valid foundation for wider historical understanding. As someone involved in the History of Education Society at its inception, my intention here is to trace the historical context in which some teacher-training colleges offering two-year courses of training developed to a position where a few could offer postgraduate certificate in education (PGCE) courses and more of them BEd degrees. That achieved, they became able to work in partnership with universities and this was the basis on which the History of Education Society was formed. The paper goes on to describe how the Society began to establish itself in the broad field of historical studies.
Individual connections between training colleges and universities went back into the nineteenth century. However, it is convenient to begin the relationship in 1929 when the Board of Education delegated its responsibility for the examination of teachers in training to qualify to enter the profession to eleven regional boards organized around universities. Five were operational in 1929, and all eleven by 1930. It had taken three years to hammer the scheme out, but it was the beginning of connections that grew and lasted for forty years.
The seminal McNair Report, published in 1944, strengthened the connection. It was set up 'to investigate the present sources of teacher supply and the methods of training teachers and youth leaders and what principles should guide the Board [of Education] in these matters in the future'.2 The report began by considering how recruitment to the colleges could be improved to raise the status of the profession and identified three essentials: 'the field of recruitment to the profession must be widened, conditions of service that deterred people becoming teachers must be abolished and the standing of teaching must be improved so that a sufficient number of teachers of sufficient quality will be attracted to teaching as a profession'. Among the deterrents was the pledge to teach if recruits were to receive a government grant. Introduced in 1890, the result was a teaching force that Professor W. H. G. Armytage called 'a conscript army'. So McNair also proposed that the colleges should be more associated with the universities through area training organizations (ATO) and this was implemented very quickly. The other critical recommendation was for the course of training to last three years from the age eighteen.
Address correspondence to: c/o Tom Woodin, Institute of Education, 20 Bedford Way, London WCIH OAL, UK
© David Bradshaw 2012
76 David Bradshaw
The 1944 Education Act recognized these problems, but the first task after the war was to improve the desperate shortage of teachers. The pre-war numbers of new entrants to the profession had not been maintained for five years, while retirements reduced the numbers in post further. Plans to recruit more teachers were well prepared by the end of the war and were implemented at once and enrolments in training colleges began immediately. But there was an additional problem as the first of two 'baby booms' developed. Live births in England and Wales in the 1930s had been between 600,000 and 700,000 a year, and this reduced number continued into the war with an even lower number in 1941. A small increase in 1943 presaged a huge growth that peaked in 1947 with 881,000 births and this added substantially to the number of new teachers needed, a situation that persisted when numbers reduced to below 700,000 in 1953. Existing colleges increased their capacity and new colleges were built, some of them temporary. As in the universities, the colleges enrolled many ex-servicemen, with shorter courses for some of them, and their teaching overseen by HMIs. Particularly gentle care was taken of ex-prisoners of war.3
Class sizes were another problem. The government set targets of no more than forty pupils in primary and thirty in secondary schools, but these were always difficult and often impossible to achieve during the years of growth. Primary schools were probably more affected than the secondary schools. The eleven-plus examination, which replaced the previous scholarship examination, provided control of entry into grammar and technical grammar schools where the targets were implemented. The rest of the sector had to provide for those not so selected, and here the introduction of secondary modern schools required new buildings as well as the adaptation of others. For a time, some standard six and seven children in elementary schools, now primary schools, continued in the schools where they had received all their education from the age of seven. A comparison of two schools in my native Northamptonshire illustrates the changes. On my return from National Service in October 1953, a vacancy had occurred in a primary school in Rushden, the town where I was born, and, at the same time, my wife was appointed to a school in lrthlingborough. Even after the raising of the school leaving age to fifteen in 1947, these schools followed much pre-war practice. I have been informed by members of the History of Education Society that similar instances occurred in the West Riding of Yorkshire and in Leicestershire especially in country districts. In fact, some of these all-through schools lasted until the 1950s.
Provision of school accommodation in the worst areas of nineteenth-century housing could be very shabby, but as families moved elsewhere class sizes were reduced. Old buildings from the turn of the twentieth century could be difficult to adapt to the requirements of the time. They usually had playgrounds with little or no room for new buildings and, for games, treks had to be made to council parks. The new council estates provided opportunities for all types of school buildings. These included, in the 1950s, provision for the comprehensive schools being developed in, for example, London, Coventry and Bristol. In Bristol, the actuarial provision was for an average of 2.4 children per family for these estates. I taught in one of the new schools in its early years when the average family was in excess of four children per family, but the new school buildings were developed with playing fields on the same site with space that could be extended. Although the Chief Education Officer in Bristol told a parents' meeting about the problems of planning that this
The History of Education Society 77
brought, the schools had space and the pupils were taught in classes within the targets. With a disproportionate number of young and particularly enthusiastic teachers, they were exciting places to work, with a feeling of academic success as children who had not qualified for a grammar school gained '0' levels and went on to 'A' levels and from there to universities and training colleges.
Steady growth in teacher supply supported all of these developments and the increasing standard of living brought a sense of optimism in the country. Harold Macmillan's 'You've never had it so good', although misquoted in the media, had some basis in reality. Confident that the birth rate had settled and the supply of teachers was assured, Lord Hailsham, then Minister of Education, announced to Parliament in June 1957 that all training college students would study for three years with effect from 1960. But the year before the announcement was made a second 'baby boom' had begun as live births topped 700,000, rising to almost 876,000 in 1963, and then declined until the birth rate fell below 700,000 in 1973. The surge meant that once again new teacher training colleges were needed and the capacity of others to expand would be called upon.
At the same time, a number of colleges that had been single sex became co-educational in keeping with a wider national trend. All colleges of education received a copy of a book published by Lund Humphries, the Handbook of Colleges and Departments of Education, which came out annually, and from this it is possible to track the development of changes in students' gender, numbers and accommodation. The students themselves, in colleges in Oxford and Cambridge, were demanding mixed colleges. C. F. Mott College in Liverpool, established immediately after the war, had been a college for women and started accepting male students in 1960. The Lady Spencer Churchill College in Oxford was for women students until it amalgamated with Oxford Polytechnic in 1977.
The 1960’s: A Decade of Change
The Ministry of Education had emphasized the importance of main and subsidiary courses when the extension to three years was introduced. Some college principals were strongly in favour of this distinction; for example, Dr Herbert Wing, the Principal of Sheflie1d City Training College, wrote an article in the Times Educational Supplement in support of main courses in 1962. However, other principals were not so sympathetic, especially where their students were preparing for work in infant and primary schools. Emphasis on the academic was found to be unhelpful. The principal of a college of education at Poulton-le-Fylde intended that teaching would be done through a 'Hub and Spokes' method, the latter involving choices between three or four subjects rather than a much larger range prepared in the old primary schools.
The fundamentals of educational theory and their application were also in need of greater substance. The standard, sometimes only, text in many colleges was first published in 1935. Written by a husband and wife team with the eponymous title of Hughes and Hughes, a fourth edition appeared in 1961 when some of the contents were already out of date and far better texts were available and in use, at a time when wider reading on the part of students was expected.
After the war a university education was developing as an aspiration for middleclass parents. Headmasters and headmistresses (single-sex schools were still numerous) encouraged it, knowing that grants to cover the essential costs of living and
78 David Bradshaw
learning for students were available from LEAs. The grants were on a sliding scale so that parents, according to their income, might have to provide up to 80% of subsistence and other costs, but everything was provided for students from homes on low incomes. Bright children from the working classes began to have access to good opportunities that would have been beyond the grasp of earlier generations. Similar opportunities applied to the training colleges. University entrance based on matriculation by a good school certificate that included at least five 'credit' passes in specified subjects was accepted for university entrance until after the war. Now standards of entry were rising as 'A' level courses, introduced in 1951, replaced the Higher School Certificate. The three-year courses recommended by McNair began in 1960. By 1963 more than 80% of university entrants had two 'A' levels or more and, in the training colleges, the figure was close to 40%, and a further 20% had one 'A' level pass. For those with the lower pass levels, teacher training colleges were a second choice and some went on to obtain a degree.4
The academic emphasis continued to concern primary school head teachers. Colleges could find it difficult to recruit staff with both primary school experience and the required quality of educational theory. The qualifications of the Froebel Institute and College of Preceptors still remained in use, but they lacked some of the rigour and scope of the advanced certificates and MEd courses that were increasingly available through the university institutes of education. Consequently, both these qualifications were preferred by colleges. This created new problems. Many of the colleges founded in the post-war period had less than 200 students. They needed specialists in physical education, music and art in particular, but staff might teach more than one subject. Not all lecturers were fully equipped to teach at the level now needed for people who were becoming increasingly knowledgeable as they began to look outwards into a wider world.
However, only 1% of students in training colleges were graduates in 1963 and further substantial changes were on the way. Harold Macmillan's government set up a committee under the chairmanship of Lord Robbins, the Principal of the London School of Economics, with the brief to ‘…. Report on the pattern of full-time higher education in Britain in the light of national needs and resources ...'. Shortly after the committee had been set up, the University Teachers' Group held a conference chaired by W. R. Niblett, Dean of the London Institute of Education, whose findings were published with the title The Expanding University. A chapter on 'The Universities and other Institutions of Higher Education', included the paragraph:
The principle by which Training Colleges have in the last dozen years become more associated with universities through Institutes of Education has done a good deal to raise the prestige and the attractiveness of the teaching profession. But teaching, even so, is still not getting its share of the able people it imperatively must attract if the country is to have an adequate proportion of teachers of high quality. The status of Training Colleges and indeed of other institutions [of higher education] needs raising much further.5
It seems likely that the book influenced the Robbins Committee. When it was presented to Parliament in October 1963, the Report proposed comprehensive changes to higher education that embraced universities, colleges of further education and training colleges. The government accepted the recommendations very quickly and implementation followed. The proposals for training colleges provided for them to become colleges of education and to have their own governing bodies
The History of Education Society 79
and academic boards. Robbins approved of the aim of colleges to teach one or two main subjects to a standard approaching that of a pass degree. Most significantly, Robbins recommended that the colleges should teach for a Bachelor of Education degree. This last recommendation was made after one cohort of three-year students had qualified, between '969 and '970. So the committee's confidence in the potential of the colleges was very reassuring to those who taught in them. As all training colleges began to teach a three-year course some were able to run postgraduate certificate of education courses. At C. F. Mott College it began in 1965, and it was beginning at Sheffield City College of Education when I arrived there in 1968. It commenced in Redland College in Bristol in the same year. Further considerable changes began in 1975 when colleges amalgamated and others closed.6
Almost simultaneously, Harold Wilson's determination that adults should have access to higher degrees led to the Open University with a totally new approach that enabled men and women to learn after their day's work and during their holidays, but with the proviso that they would spend two weeks studying, usually in a university, where they would meet lecturers appropriate to their work, receive lectures, write about them and have them discussed. The Open University was agreed in Parliament in 1969 and began work in 1970, and became one of several opportunities in the 1970s.7
The universities with ATOs took time to consider the additional responsibilities before beginning the essential process of preparing curricula for the BEd degrees. At this distance in time I can only comment on my own experience of the process followed in Liverpool for establishing the curriculum for studies in education. This has a direct bearing on the foundation of the History of Education Society. At the time I was working at the City of Liverpool C. F. Mott College of Education and was already teaching the history of education to three-year course and PGCE students. Our head of psychology and I represented the college on the working group set up by the University of Liverpool. A lecturer in education chaired the group and started by telling us that the curriculum for education was mainly based on psychology. When we began to discuss that and other matters that had been presented, my colleague immediately explained why the study of the history of education was necessary. He was joined by some of the other members who represented other colleges, including Tony Bishop from a Church of England college. I added detail to the case, but the argument had already been won and was accepted without difficulty.
The place of history of education was greatly strengthened when, in 1966, J. W. Tibbie's The Study of Education was published. 'Discussion of the nature of the Study of Education', he wrote in the introduction, 'has been sharpened since the publication of the Robbins' Report" and he defined four disciplines as the foundation of the study: philosophy, psychology, history and sociology. Tibbie was a Professor of Education at Leicester University and it was one of his academic staff, Brian Simon, who wrote the chapter in the history of education. This began, 'There is no need to make out a case for the study of the history of education as an essential aspects of the courses ... It has long been accepted as such in most universities and colleges of education ... But there is room for considerable discussion of what is taught'.9
The universities, with responsibilities through the ATOs, responded differently to the BEd, some offering pass degrees, others general and some honours with
80 David Bradshaw
variations in the detail. Sheffield University assumed that preparation to enter the profession was already adequate and required candidates to study only their main courses. The quality of the students in those universities that had not awarded honours at the outset was soon apparent and a majority of them moved to honours degrees within a few years. The other main difference in the early years was that some universities added one BEd year after the three-year course examinations while others selected students to begin the BEd curriculum at the beginning of their second year. Five universities awarded the degrees in 1968 and sixteen more in , 1969. These developments led directly to the formation of the History of Education Society: the journey to its foundation was now over.
Articulation of the idea of forming a society for the study of the history of education, which led to the foundation conference, can be dated as October 1966. Three, perhaps four, of us who had worked on the BEd History of Education curriculum had met informally to prepare its content. These meetings were, not surprisingly, valuable, and I had begun to form the view that a larger group to share experience and ideas might be helpful. I had worked in Ghana for four and a half years before I joined the staff at C.F. Mott and had begun researching an MA by thesis on 'The History of Education in Ghana with Special Reference to Teacher Education'. I completed the research and typing up during my first years at C. F. Mott. Professor Harry Armytage, my supervisor, and Brian Simon, the external examiner, conducted the viva examination that included a courteous, but memorably thorough, examination by Brian Simon.10 After the viva, Harry Armytage invited me to join him and Brian for lunch and, during the conversation, I suggested the idea of forming a History of Education Society. Both were interested, Brian Simon particularly, saying he would think about it and be in touch with me. About six months later he wrote enclosing a letter from Trevor Hearl, a lecturer at St Paul's college, Cheltenham, making a similar suggestion. Brian then wrote suggesting a meeting at his house in Leicester with Malcolm Seaborne, one of his colleagues at the Department of Education at the University, Nanette Whitbread of the City of Leicester College of Education, and Joan Simon, then working on a history to be titled Education and Society in Tudor England.' , So in the garden of their house on a sunny June afternoon in 1967 we developed the idea of a conference to discuss the ideas with colleagues from universities and colleges in the British Isles. We agreed the outline of an agenda and I offered to arrange for the meeting to be at C. F. Mott College where I knew my principal was very enthusiastic.
By this time J. W. Tibble had become the external examiner for education at C. F. Mott College. Only a few weeks after the meeting in Leicester, Tibble, when briefing us on his conclusions, included his findings on students' special studies. He said that he had not read all of them, a not unreasonable observation given the number of final year three-year students. But his sample showed a high quality that in some cases might have been entered as dissertation for an MEd. This said, I recognized the quality of work done by some of my students. Brian Simon might well have formed the same views as an external examiner of students' work elsewhere.
In preparing for the conference, we first needed to understand the range of approaches to the history of education being taught in the universities and colleges and asked them to complete questionnaires about their syllabuses. The replies were divided into three the three-year and BEd courses in the colleges and the range
The History of Education Society 81
of university courses. Analysis of this data was to be presented to the December conference.
One hundred and fifty people attended the conference where the presence of three professors of education, all known for their published works, gave the event some significance. Brian Simon's History of Education 1780-1870 (1960) and Education and the Labour Movement 1870-1920 (1965), the first two of his four-volume series Studies in the History of Education, were already well known.12 Harry Armytage's Four Hundred Years of English Education (1964) was becoming a standard work for students, while Civic Universities: Aspects of a British Tradition (1955), A Social History of Engineering (1961) and The Rise of the Technocrats (1965) had already widened the range of available sources and broadened the potential breadth of our interest.13 Kenneth Charlton's Education in Renaissance England (1965) was receiving notice and, in 2007, the book was reissued by Routledge.14 Malcolm Seaborne had also been researching the architecture of schools in the Leicester area and connecting the layout of buildings with their influence on how pupils were taught.
The conference began with discussions over the dinner table on a wet evening. Professors Armytage and Simon opened the conference on the Saturday morning by referring to the growing interest in the history of education and suggesting possible new approaches to content and teaching methods, an example being 'teaching history backwards' that was being tested out. Full discussion followed. Next came the analyses of syllabuses from Nanette Whitbread on three-year courses, me on the BEd and Malcolm Seaborne on the universities. Evidence of ongoing change ran through the presentations and, in the report of the conference, later published, the widespread activity in progress was summarized:
It was very evident that the content, teaching methods and structure of education courses in colleges are currently being reviewed and changed, and that the traditional treatment of history of education is being critically reconsidered. 'It's all in the melting pot' was a comment that was implicitly echoed by many colleges.15
For example, among the variety of three-year college syllabuses, it was clear that the traditional 'grinding out of acts and facts' was declining though not extinct. The replacements under discussion included: the ideas of great educators; social contexts; social and economic connections with history; association with comparative education and combinations with philosophy--all were under discussion within universities and colleges.
The three-plus-one and one-plus-three structures of the BEd added to the complexity. Some of the syllabuses were almost the same as for the three-year courses, but there were numerous new ideas relating to the educational needs of modern Britain; the outcome of social, industrial and technological progress; and social settings in the European context. In the three-plus-one format, history of education was optional in the fourth year in some colleges. Completed questionnaires from the universities were disproportionately fewer than those from the colleges. A small number offered the history of education as part of a first degree, most of them in Wales. On the certificate of education courses, the subject was both compulsory and examined, and there was a growing emphasis on economic and social contexts and the relevance of history to local issues. An optional additional special study, such as history in the locality, was common. For example, at Sheffield 'History of Education and Industrial Development' was a popular option.
82 David Bradshaw
On the university diploma courses for serving teachers there was usually a required course in an accepted discipline such as philosophy, psychology and history, with more time devoted to it than on the courses for the teacher's certificate, and it came with an assumption that any history of education learned on a teacher-training course would have been forgotten. The history of education was emerging as a chosen area of study for Master's and PhD theses. Overall, then, Malcolm Seaborne concluded, the history of education was widely taught and, as in every other branch of educational study, the traditions of the past were being challenged by new ideas.
One of two personal groups that I was responsible for concerned the British Colonies in Africa and their development. Ghana was the first to achieve independence two years before I had arrived there. My wife and I also went to Nigeria. In the North we stayed with friends we had met on the boat and we learned something of the schools there, my wife in particular going to watch girls learning English and the Koran. Moreover, as Principal of Doncaster College of Education, one of the education staff had been the headmaster of a school in Nairobi, Kenya, who was teaching education. We also exchanged experiences.16
After a vigorous discussion and lunch we moved to a lecture on 'Church and State' by Dr James Murphy from the University of Liverpool Department of Education. During the lunch interval I had been approached by a small delegation who asked if the lecture could be postponed until later as Liverpool or Everton, I forget which, were playing at home. I declined and the lecture was well attended, but in our annual meetings, usually in a city with a team in one of the football leagues, attendance at the afternoon annual general meeting could be somewhat sparse. 17
Harry Armytage chaired the meeting on the Sunday morning when the desirability of forming a society was discussed. After some discussion of what might characterize it, it was put to a vote and overwhelmingly carried. Next came discussions to agree the aims of the Society. These were: 'To further the study of the history of education, provide opportunities for discussion among those engaged in the study of the history of education, to organize conferences and meetings and to publish a bulletin'.
Then came the election of a committee to run the Society, and Harry began by proposing that I should be the first president and asked for an endorsement by acclamation. I was amazed as I had expected one of the professors to be appointed, but Harry had ensured that any possible divisiveness in an election had been avoided. He was clearly determined to do this. Membership of the committee concluded the formal business. Having conferred with others, I asked Tom Cook from the Cambridge Department of Education to write a piece for the Times Educational Supplement where it appeared under the headline 'A New Society is Born' in the next edition. I had been appointed deputy principal of Sheffield City College of Education the previous September and the first meeting of the committee was held in the University of Sheffield. The committee was well balanced between university and college members, and all brought strengths, while the reputations of the three professors also established credibility. Brian Simon had been appointed vice chairman -. I had preferred 'chairman' to 'president' -Ian Taylor, Secretary, Trevor Hearl, Treasurer and Malcolm Seaborne, Editor of the Bulletin. With Harry Armytage, Kenneth Charlton and Nanette Whitbread also members, it had diversity of background with a compact size. We were aware of the imbalance
The History of Education Society 83
between men and women and attempted to find women, but enquiries to members who might have helped were not successful.
There were still key decisions to be made. We chose 'The History of Education Society' as our name for its potential inclusiveness and lack of national titles. We decided upon one residential meeting a year and, because of the timing of other meetings that some members also attended, settled on December as the most convenient month, and one summer conference. It was also agreed that there would be a one-day conference in different cities in the country where, before lunch, there would be a presentation by a known academic and, in the afternoon, break-out groups for members who could present their current research for discussion. The Bulletin was to be published twice a year and the colours for the cover decided. Finally the membership subscription was agreed.
The members had credibility in a number of areas including the additional discipline of psychology. Brian Simon's profound knowledge included published works such as Intelligence Testing and the Comprehensive School (1953) as well as the edited collection, Psychology in the Soviet Union 1919-1957.18 Although the Soviet Union's contributions to psychology were not well regarded by Western psychologists at the time, now there is considerable respect for the work of, amongst others, Lev Vygotsky. Kenneth Charlton was the Professor of History and the Philosophy of Education at Birmingham University and Harry Armytage was recognized in Sheffield as the University's leading polymath. Those of us from the colleges had degrees in history and had taught psychology as part of the three-year courses, while Ian Taylor had special knowledge of Scottish education.
The summer meeting of 1968 was held in Birmingham when David Newsome gave us a most accomplished lecture on 'The Platonic and Aristotelian Traditions in Nineteenth Century England'. This was followed by thanks, questions and rigorous debate. In the afternoon there was a variety of research for break-out groups. These were impressive and included 'Populations, Social Welfare and Schools in Pre-Industrial England' (Mr Lawson), 'War and the Curriculum 1800-1860' (Trevor Hearl), 'The Role of the Private Schools in the 19th Century' (Mr Harrison), 'The Literature of the History of Education' (Mr Michael Argles, Deputy Librarian of Lancaster University). Michael Argles was extremely useful in providing information in many areas of knowledge for the researcher and so helping to widen the available spectrum of educational history.
At the first summer conference I was asked by the Principal of Doncaster College if we would hold the next December conference in Doncaster. Now working in Sheffield, it was at a convenient distance, and Harry Armytage went with me to see the venue which was very suitable. The presentations at the December 1968 conference set the tone of the meeting and benchmarked subsequent ones. J. Stuart Maclure gave the first talk. Already well known and admired for his Educational Documents of England and Wales 18I6 to 1963, he had, during the week of the meeting, been appointed Editor of the Times Educational Supplement and he brought independence of mind and breadth of view.19 His title was 'The Control of Education' and he began by saying, 'It seems to me an open question whether English education is controlled at all', an observation that might give pause for thought today. Other papers presented at that meeting were John Stott on 'Scotland's ad hoc Authorities 1919-1930', and Leslie Wynn Evans about 'The Evaluation of Welsh Education
84 David Bradshaw
Structure and Administration 1881-1921'. The number of members from Scotland, Wales and England was a clear indication of the inclusiveness of the membership.
The existence of the Society certainly soon raised the profile of the history of education as an academic discipline. It helped to extend the knowledge of those who taught it and in turn helped students to understand the roots of the profession they were to join. Publications for the use of members grew, and at our next December meeting, held in Coventry, the papers of the Doncaster meeting were discussed and judged to be of a quality that merited publication. Methuen accepted them and, edited by Kenneth Charlton, they were the beginning of a series that continued for some years.
The Society soon developed other sources of information of use to researchers and others: a series of guides and sources in the history of education; the titles and whereabouts of theses on the history of education and lists of Board of Education circulars. These were made available to university and college libraries as well as to members. Overall, knowledge of the Society and its value were growing. Then in 1971 we decided to sponsor a journal with Malcolm Seaborne as editor and Peter Searby the reviews editor.
The ongoing question of 'What is History?' was never far away. As Asa Briggs' keynote speech to the Society at the summer meeting in May 1971, entitled 'The Study of the History of Education', began, 'The study of the history of education is best considered as part of the wider study of the history of society, social history broadly interpreted, with the politics the economics and, it is necessary to add, the religion put in"." Briggs' extraordinarily perceptive view of the whole field of historical studies was to help the research and development of the Society. His lecture was published in the first edition of History of Education, and is still worth reading. This issue also included articles by Simon Schama on 'The Rights of Ignorance: Dutch Educational Policy in Belgium' and David Turner on 'The Open Air Movement in Sheffield'. Two articles came from universities and one from a College of Education. Articles and copies of books from historians who were not members soon balanced works by our membership. High standards were set and maintained. Both wings of the society were benefiting as universities began to recognize the discipline more seriously. The article by Simon Schama flagged our interest in European education: it was the beginnings of our overseas relationships and indicated the breadth of our interests. Accordingly, the third volume included an article by Lukasz Kurdybacha of the University of Warsaw, entitled 'The Commission for National Education in Poland 1773 1794' and was followed by others. Collectively, these early developments transformed the subject, widening the field of activity, developing a strong research profile and establishing it firmly among the other disciplines of education as a field of significance. Old traditions withered away rapidly.
The changing breadth of history was not new when we formed the Society. In a centenary lecture at the University of Sheffield in 2002, David Cannadine, then Director of the Institute of Historical Research, University of London, caught the iterative nature of the question with a quotation from Lord Bryce's Presidential Address in 1913, 'Our age has seen an immense expansion in historical studies ... So much so indeed that all the main lines of human activity are now coming
The History of Education Society 85
within the bounds of those scholarly endeavours that are being directed towards the past'. The history of education has played a part in this larger conception of history. The value of education continues to increase with the growth of worldwide interest in the Society. The Society's meeting in Sheffield in December 2009 showed the importance of understanding, when fourteen countries presented on the ways their countries understood and applied education.
Sheffield, May 2010
1 This paper was edited into its final version by Tom Woodin, assisted by Ping Bradshaw, Gary McCulloch and Susannah Wright. Other works by David Bradshaw include, 'The history of teachers training in Ghana: its relation to the development of education within the context of the country's economic development' (MA thesis, University of Sheffield, June 1964); 'Classifications and Models of Transferable Skills', in H. Eggins (ed.), Arts Graduates, Their Skill, and their Employment: Perspectives for Change (Falmer Press, 1992); and D. C. A. Bradshaw (ed.), Bringing Learning to Life: The learning Revolution, The Economy and the Individual (Falmer Press, 1995), see 'Introduction', 1 17, and 'Learning Theory: Harnessing the Strength of Neglected Resources', 79 92.
2 J. S. Maclure, Educational Documents: England and Wales 1816-1963 (Chapman and Hall, 1965).
3 Related to me by Mr R.J. A. Clark, principal of C. F. Mott College of Education, who taught in one of the temporary colleges that later became permanently established. I taught there from I963 to 1967.
4 For the detail, see The Higher Education Report, The Robbins Report (HMSO, 1963 19
5 W. R. Niblett, The Expanding University (Faber and Faber, 1962 119
6 The list of colleges with one-year course for graduates can again be found in the appendices of the Handbook of Colleges and Department, of Higher Education for I976.
7 Sir W. Parry, The Open University: A Personal Account (Open University Press, 1976). See also Open University Planning Committee, The Open University; Report of the Planning Committee to the Secretary of State for Education and Science (HMSO, 1969).
8 J. W. Tibble, The Study of Education (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966).
9 Ibid., 9.
10 A copy of this thesis can be found in the Sheffield University Library.
11 J. Simon, Education and Society in Tudor England (Cambridge University Press, 1966).
12 B. Simon, Studies in the History of Education, 1780 1870 (Lawrence and Wishart, 1960); Education and the Labour Movement, 1870-1920 (Lawrence and Wishart, 1965).
13 W. H. G. Armytage, Four Hundred rears of English Education (Cambridge University Press, 1964); Civic Universities: Aspects of a British Tradition (Ernest Benn, 1955); A Social History of Engineering (Faber and Faber, 1961); and The Rise of the Technocrats (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965).
14 K. Charlton, Education in Renaissance England (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965; Routledge, 2007).
15 N. Whitbread, 'History of Education in the Three Year Certificate Course', History of Education Society Bulletin, I (Spring 1968).
16 See E.J. King, World Perspectives in Education (Methuen and Co. Ltd, 1962). His biographical note states his sources of information came from first-hand observation in many of the counties visited, interviews with top executives and ministerial level, indigenous educationists visiting England, reports in the London Times and the Manchester Guardian. See also V. Mallinson, An Introduction to the Study of Comparative Education (William Heineman Ltd, 1957).
17 The detail of these early years appears in D. Bradshaw, 'The B.Ed Degree: Years of Progress', University Quarterly: Higher Education and Society, 26.4 (Autumn 1972) 449 - 466.
18 B. Simon, Intelligence Testing and the Comprehensive School (Lawrence and Wishart, 1953);.J. Simon, Psychology in the Soviet Union 1919-1957 (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1957). See also B. and.J. Simon, Educational Psychology in the U.S.S.R. (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1957) L. S. Vygoisky appears in the I965 edition.
19 Maclure, Educational Documents.
20 A. Briggs, 'The Study of the History of Education', History of Education, 1.1 (1972) 5.
25th Anniversary 2011
The 2011 AGM
marked the 25th Anniversary of Ghana School Aid with a display of photographs
and other memorabilia. In 1986 a reunion of people who had worked in the Gold
Coast/Ghana in 1986 led directly to the founding of GSA. This was initially due
to the inspiration and work of Eric Earle (still an active Committee Member),
Eric Cunningham (recently retired Committee Member), and the late Brice Bending
and Tom Southern. This is ably documented in an article in our last edition
2010/11 by Eric Cunningham.
Eric Earle addressed the AGM
and expressed his delight, as an originator of GSA, to see so many people at the
meeting, and that the work of the organisation was continuing under the able
chairmanship of Ted Mayne. Over the years we have raised around £200,000, all
from small donations. We have incurred minimal administrative costs, having no
paid staff. Our recent involvement with the Ghanaian diaspora including the St
Monica's Project and the Ghana Nurses Association are good developments,
representing the ongoing work of GSA.
During the afternoon we were
also addressed by a dozen or so members reporting on visits, a wide variety of
projects and links, updates on progress and offers of assistance, all
contributing to a lively and successful occasion.
Marion Mayne had baked a
cake in Ghana colours especially for the anniversary. The cake cutting ceremony
was performed by Wilhelmina Assamoyah, the representative of His Excellency the
High Commissioner of Ghana [photos p. 27].
It is with enthusiasm and
pleasure that I prepare this annual report on what has been a rewarding, busy
and in many ways a successful year. However, before I go into greater detail, it
is with regret that I report the deaths oftwo ofour stalwart members. Their
obituaries are included in this Newsletter. Pam Lewis, who was on the Committee
for more than twenty years, died in November 2011 and her passing has left a
huge gap which we shall find difficult to fill. Pam was always actively involved
with our work and for a long time acted as Secretary and organised single handed
our reunions. Even after she upped sticks and moved from Dulwich back to her
native Wales, she would dutifully attend all our quarterly meetings. Her funeral
was attended by several members of our Committee.
We also lost David Bradshaw,
another regular attendee at these reunions and a staunch supporter of our work.
David was involved at Winneba Training College and kept in touch with all that
went on in that area. His funeral was a sad occasion and well attended. It was
his wish that donations in lieu of floral tributes should go to Ghana School Aid
and with the family's agreement an amount was donated in its entirety to the
British Airways sponsored school. This enabled the classrooms extension project
to be completed which has been named the David Bradshaw Memorial Block. This is
a fitting tribute to a man who dedicated much of his life to education in the
Winneba area. [His widow Ping Bradshaw attended the AGM and read a letter of
thanks from David's son).
David was in Ghana between
1959 and 1963 at Winneba Training College as Tutor in Education and Educational
Psychology. He was also Acting Head of Post Secondary Teacher Training from 1961
to 1963. He was strong supporter of GSA and regularly attended our meetings. We
are delighted that donations at David's funeral and additional funds from GSA
were sent to a school at Kasoa, near Winneba, to enable the completion of much
needed additional classrooms.The Hartley Trust School (previously known as the
British Airways School) has erected a plaque in remembrance of David and
extended an invitation to GSA members to visit the school if they are in Ghana
David Bradshaw 1929-2011
Taken from an address by Dr
Fletcher for the University
with additional material by
David had a very
distinguished career in education after national service. He taught in Bristol
and then in Ghana for which country he formed a lifelong affection. But it was
on his return to this country that he commenced a most distinguished career
which was to last a quarter of a century in further education management most
notably as Principal of Doncaster Metropolitan Institute. He was awarded the OBE
in 1985 in recognition of his service and achievements. Following his
"retirement" he joined the Council of the University of Sheffield,
where he had been a student, and served fourteen years contributing to many