oservices

THE l.Jt>.IlVERSITY of NOTTINGHAM

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
This Copyright Notice is ilppended to this file
under the CLA Trial Licence.
Staff and students of the University of Nottingham are reminded that copyright subsists in this
extract and the work from which it was taken. This Digital Copy has been made under the
terms of a eLA licence which allows ONLY students registered for this Course (see below) to:
• access and download a copy
• print out a copy
Students not on the Course may view the item but ltQI download or print it.
This Digital Copy and any digital or printed copy supplied to or made by you under the terms of
this licence are for use in connection with this Course of Study. Students registered for this
Course may retain such copies after the end of the Course, but strictly for your own use.
All co·pies (including electronic copies) shall include this Copyright Notice and shall be destroyed
and/or deleted when required by the University.
Except as provided for by copyright law, no further copying, storage or distribution (including
bye-mail) is permitted without the consent of the copyright holder.
The author (which term Includes artists and other visual creators) has moral rights in the work
and neither staff nor students may cause, or perm it, the distortion, mutilation or other
modification of the work, or any other derogatory treatment of it , which would be prejudicial to
the honour or reputation of the author.

Course of Study: PGCE(I)

. . ..-..._. -._... i
-. -+-- - - - - - - - -- - -~ - -.~ . --- _ ..

I Course Code: X38X

- - . .- .J
Name of Designated Person _ Paul Thompson
I Authorising Scanning: ,
---- --- _. --- - ""1
I TH:le of source: ! The Morality ·of the School
(e.g. book or joumal title )

Title of extract: I Values behind the practice

(e.g. of chapter or article)
..- - - - . - - - . - -
I Author(s) of Work: I Mike Bottery
(e.g. book authors or editors)
I - - _ . . .- ...
Author( s) of extract:

6-16

\ Publisher: Cassell

Name of visual creator:

1 ~~'Y if extract is an~ma~e~
School of Education Scanning Checklist
File to be scanned: Values behind the practice

Task II

I am a "designated person" previously notified to the IS Copyright Officer

/
I have read the guidelines in the eLA Trial Pack and understand the key requirements and
terms and conditions of the Licence with which I need to comply
/
I have checked UNLOC and there is no existing accessible electronic copy available to
University staff or students
./
I can confirm that the item is currently owned by the University i.e. within UNLOC or
owned by the School of Education
/
I have checked that the item was published in the UK, or is on this list of participating
publishers in the USA: bttc: llwww.!:;la.!:;o.ykLS:UDQQrtlUSQublishecs.html /
I have checked that it is not an excluded work at:
httQ: LLwww. !;;I~.!;;Q, U~LSJ.!QRQctLgxcluded. html and
bttQ: LLwww. ~Ia.co. ukLI icenS;i ngLheLhe s!;;a nni ng. html /
The size of the extract to be scanned is acceptable under the licence, i.e. no more than one
whole chapter of a book; one whole article of a journal issue; up to 10 pages of a short
story or poem from an anthology, so long as the total extract does not exceed 5% of any
original work. /
I have completed a Copyright Notice Form which will be used as the front p'age of the
scanned document
/
I have checked that the quality of the material is good enough for scanning i.e. is very
close in appearance to the original /
I confirm that this scanned material will only be made available through a secure
authenticated access system to registered students on the Course of Study for which the
item was scanned
/
Signed --t-e--A.I..p~--.J~L!\,jrw.,~,------ Date 5",Il..oJ
Chapter 1

Values Behind the Practice

Travelling can be a pleasant and profitable occupation for its own sake. One can
enjoy and benefit from the experience without being too much co ncerned with the
final destination. Indeed, for some people, the travelling may be the only thing that
really matters. The means become the end or purpose of the journey.
Having said that, the travelJing may become much more pleasant and profitable if
the tra~e]]er knows where to depart from and has learned something about the places
to be visited on the way, and if this trave l is placed within an overall framework
which sees it as going somewhere - a final destination. The journey would then be
enjoyed and the reasons for it understood. An extra dimension would have been
added.
Auempling to decide upon the correct relationship between morality and schooling
can be rather like this. To make as correct a decision as possible one needs to be
aware of how present attitudes within society came to be held. One also needs to
know about the values, sets of beliefs and ideologies which motivate people at the
present time - and so where th ey want to go. Added to this, it is very important to
be aware of present constraints acting upon society - what forces outside people's
control are pushing them in one direction rather than another. Unless such factors
are taken into account, the travelling - the day-to-day running of the school - will
not be understood , and in the long run "may well be damaging to its recipients.
It is doubtful if any school or teacher is in the worst-cilse posi tion just painted.
But it is uncomfortably true that the sheer pressure of the school's day-to-day running
can prevent the taking of a measured look at issues like those raised above. Some
teachers may even be surprised to find that their practices do not coi ncide with their
avowed aims, or that they are repeating the mistakes of the past through not being
aware that these mistakes have been made before.
This and the next chapter, then, will ask the question: where are you going? The
present chapter wiU look at the kinds of educational values and ideologies it is
possible to hoJd, and the kinds of relationship between morality and the school that
are likely to follow . The next chapter will place such beliefs in an historical perspec-
tive and show that the problems teachers face today are both the same as and
different from those of the past. They are the same · because the same questions
recur. But they are different because social , economic and political conditions alter,
and so the problems may present other faces.
However, before taking an historical perspective on the relationship between
8 The Morality of the School

morality and schooling, we begin by describing and analysing the major educational
ideologies which have generated such relationships in the past, and continue to do
so now.
Everyone, in some form or another, has certain basic beliefs about education -
about the type of knowledge to be valued, the role of the child, the teacher and
society in the process, the type of society to be aimed for and ultimately the preferred
relationship between morality and schooling. These normally cohere into particular
philosophies of education. It is important, then, to realize and to reHect upon one's
own beliefs.
This can be achieved by means of the following simple exercise. Below are three
groups of statements. Read the eight statements in group A, and assign fifteen marks
between the eight statements in the group. You may give approximately equal weights
to each statement, or assign the entire fifteen marks to just one statement, or give
the bulk to just one or two about which you feel particularly strongly. Once this is
completed, do the same for groups Band C.

Group A

1. All aspects of individual development are important.

2. Children must be given an understanding of the timeless depths and mysteries
of knowledge.
3. Learning should be an active social process which is guided but not dominated
by teachers.
4. Children should make their own choice of topic to study.
5. Schools must produce a well-trained motivated workforce which can compete in
international markets with other industrialized countries.
6. Teachers should help pupils in the process of understanding, appreciating, criti-
cizing and, when older, changing society's norms and institutions.
7. Schools must be involved in the selection of elites, for different levels of ability
require different provision.
8. Pupils must be given the kinds of practical skills which will equip them to earn
a living once they leave school.

Group B

1. A school should be democratically run, with rules and punishments negotiated

and agreed by all its members.
2. Certain kinds of knowledge have more value and are more important than other
kinds.
3. In a rapidly changing world, it makes little sense to transmit bodies of knowledge
established in a previous era.
4. The school should be seen as one part of a machine furthering the economic
prosperity of this country.
5. Only a minority of people are capable of contributing to the pool of worthwhile
knowledge.
 Values Behind the Practice 9

6. The school should organize itself upon th e principle that the interests and needs
of the child are paramount.
7. The curriculum should be organized in a rational and democralk way so th at
current ins titutio ns and norms may be ana lysed, criticized, and , if necessary,
alternatives suggested.
8. The curriculum should be cen trally concerned with th ose areas of knowledge
which cont ribute to the weahh-producing aspects of socie ty.

Group C

1. Maturity can only come about through the exe rcise of respo nsibilit y and freedom.
2. Public examinations should be used to assess the acquisition of knowledge.
3, Pupils should be seen as active in making sense of their learning, rather than as
passive recipients of transmitted knowledge and values.
4. Discussio n, criticism and creativity must be linked with the promotio n of econ-
omic goals.
5. The school should be an institution which fosters constructive criticism of society.
6. Schools should be seen as a means of changing society,
7. Disciplinary techniques should be chosen and imposed by those in authority.
8. Schools should be accountable to society for what they produce ; the quali ty of
their output can be assessed by objective criteria.

Marking

Now assign the marks from the statements to these views of education:
Cultural transmission Child-centred Social reconstruction GNP Code
A2 Al A3 A5
A7 A4 A6 A8
B2 B1 B3 B4
B5 B6 B7 B8
C2 CI C3 C4
C7 C5 C6 C8
The higher the mark , the more inclined one is to a particular ideology. The four
categorizations are developments of an initial typology by Malcolm Skilbeck (1976),
and a brief summary of the main points of each can be seen in Table 1.1 on p. 7. It
is important. however, to show in more detail how the adoption of anyone of these
ideologies will influence the way in which the relationship between morality and
schooling is perceived . Each of the educational ideologies. therefore , will be exam-
ined in some detail.
The cultural transmission model tends in practice to have two central tenets to its
belief system: (a) concentration on a society's cultural heritage; and (b) the associ-
ation of such a herilage with a small minority, its elite, who will be educated in such
culture, whilst the majority of the populace receives a different type of education
suited to its lesser intellectual capability. In ma ny cases this less intellectual education
10 The Morality of the School

is calculated to 'gen tle' the majorit y into acceptance of its (inferior) position in
society.
Clearly , notions of manners, hard work and obedience to authority will come near
the top of any list of values and morals to be transmilled 10 such a majority. However.
the two tenets - of a cultural heritage , and of an elite - are not necessary to one
another. It is quite possible to believe that a cultural herit age should be passed on
10 all of the population rather than to a select few , just as Ihe existe nce of an elite
does not have to be linked to the transmission of a cultural heritage.
It would seem, however, that the cultural transmi ssion model in its fully developed
fonn - the transmissio n of a cultural heritage to an elite - is antilhelical to Ihe ideals
of a democratic society. A more restricted version, concentrating purely upon the
transmission of a cultural heritage, is not so. The implementation of a National
Curriculum in Great Britain can be seen in this light. Such a core of subjects common
to all pupils assumes that there are certain areas of knowledge which should be
passed on to all citizens if they are to benefit from a full range of educational insights.
It is not, the refore , a code which need be he ld exclusively by conserva tive or liberal.
It can be seen as the natura l conclusion to a process of the comprehensivization of
schools, in that it provides all with fair access to society's past and present wisdom.
In like manner, the part of the cultural transmission model in the relationship
between morality and education deserves very serious consideration , for it could be
argued very plausibly that human beings would not be tully human without the benefit
of the accumulated moral and social wisdom and practice of previous ge nerations.
The cultural transmission model , however, has three major weaknesses. Firstly,
by stressing Ihe existence of solid and eternal facts and values which can be transmil-
ted from one age to another, it says little or nothing about the temporality of
knowledge and the impermanence of certain beliefs and values. Further, it gives no
yardstick by which to decide between the two , about what should be kept and what
should be discarded. In terms of values, it may end up at the popular level by saying
little more than 'this is what we did in the past, so we should do it now'. At the very
least, its proponents need to be critical of their own heritage.
Secondly, the cultural heritage transmitted to the present generation was not
consciously selected by previous generations as that which they would like to pass
on. Cultural or value transmission is not the clean-cut affair somelimes simplistically
painted. What has come down is not just the carefully selected gems of insight into
the human condition necessary for the furtherance and developm ent of civilization,
but to some extent the product of accident, vested interests, fas hion and what fitted
in with the prevailing beliefs of the next generation on. Ignoring this dialectical
element distorts the truth of the genesis of cultural and moral beliefs , and thereby
presents a false model for schools to adopt.
Lastly, each creative act in this cultural transmission was the prod uct of a critical
analysis of what had gone before. The crealors took what was on offer, saw things
from a slightly different angle and produced something related to but distinctly
different from that which had gone before. If they had not done so, culture would
have remained stagnant at Stone Age cave paintings or belief in evil spirits. The
cultural transmission model makes little or no mention of this. And yet such creativity
is not the preserve solely of the l'olstoys, Newtons or Mozarts of this world. It
applies in less distinguished form 10 Ihe 'normal' adult and child as well. Those who
adopt a transmission model generally picture the child as a receptor, passively accept-
 Values Behind Ih e Practice 11

ing those values taught. But even a cursory glance at the finding5 of wo rk of psychol·
ogists like Piaget (1932) and Kohlberg (1981a) in the field of moral development
suggest that the process is much more two-way. On these accounts, the individual is
active and interactive with the values transmitted , each person's understanding of
them being subtly different. This diffe rence depe nds upon what eac h person selects
as important and releva nt features of a situation. Such interaction must be recognized
in any adequate account of a viable educational - and moral educat ional- viewpoint.
The second ideological standpoint described is the child-centred model. This ideo-
logy is strongly at odds with a conception of humanity as being bad by nature.
Rather, this badness is seen as th e product of being a member of society. Hum ans,
the refore. are seen as basically good, society as corrupting thai nature. So one can
see two major strands of the child-centred ideology here, an anti-society , individualist
stance and a belief in the inherent goodness of humans.
Unlike the cultural transmission mOdel, with its stress on objective knowledge to
be transmitted, the emphasis and attention here is upon children, on their unfolding
natures and their subjective interests, This being the case, the material for children's
education must come from within their own experience. As this will vary from child
to child, so the impressive edifice of a cultural heritage erected by the cultural
transmission model is shown to play but a very small part in children's education .
Children, moreover, are perceived very differently. Rather than being the passive
imbibers of predetermined materials, children are now seen as active and involved ,
constructing from their own vivid and authentic experiences personal and lndividual
realities, very different from the objectivist picture painted by cultural transmission
theorists. Each child will have different interests and different experiences, each
interpreting them differently. This being the case, each construction of reality must
of necessity be unique. The picture of education has moved from one painted at the
level of society to one painted at the level of the individual child.
It is sometimes thought that the role of the teacher then becomes fairly peripheral
to the educative process , being little more than its facilitator. This, however, need
not be the case, for he or she may instead be seen as planner I constructor and
developer. The teacher must be aware of each child's developmental possibilities,
interests and capabilities. The teacher must then so structure conditions surrounding
the child that the best possible use is made of the environment. In this way, the
pupil's interest and spontaneity will be channelled into areas -which will be of most
benefit to him or her.
As with the cultural transmission model, so the child-centred one need not be the
doctrine of the liberal. David Cooper (1987), for example, has attacked the notion
of multicultural education from a child-centred standpoint. He argues that one needs
to begin the child's education from where the child is, what he or she understands,
and that multicultural education can be nothing more than a 'Cook's tour' which
leaves the child bewildered and confused simply because education is not located
within the child's Own cultural experience, Whilst there is an enonnous amount to
quarrel with in such a view - the assumed lack of understanding by the child, lack
of teaching ability by the educator and unbridgeable divisions between materials
from different cultures - the point is simply that one must not assume that child
centredness is an essentially liberal doctrine. It can be used by either end of the
spectrum, and attacked by either end as well!
The relationship which the child~centred educator sees between morality and
12 The Morality of the School

schoo ls is to some ex te nt problematic, taking at least two diffe rent possible courses.
Firstly , there is the individualist strai n, an imprecise blend of individual value devel-
opment through experie nce , and the expression of inborn sympathy for other people's
needs and difficulties. And secondly, there is also the more twentieth-century commu-
nilaria n approach seeing a devclopmenl of community values as preparation for the
cri ticism and reform of society.
There are at least four major difficulties with the child-centred ap proach.
Firstly, implicit in a lot of child-centred literature is the assumption that children
are 'naturally ' good . This stems largely from the writings of Rousseau. Such a view
is a welcome antidote to the belief that children are inherently bad, but it describes
the true situation no morc accurately. The re is now much psychological evidence to
suggest that at the earliest ages child ren are capable of producing both altruistic and
egoce ntric behaviours (see Chapter 7). If this is the case, then leavi ng children to
'do thei r own thing ' does not make much sense either educationally or morally. Much
more sensible is to decide on what one wishes the child to grow into, and then favour
behaviours which lead in that direction. Leaving the child to develop 'naturally' is
no morc than an abnegation of responsibility.
Secondly, it is surely a very li miting education which focuses on ly upon the child's
interests. Whilst it makes good sense to begin from where the child begins and move
out from there , the rea l danger with such a set of beliefs is that it could prevent the
child from appreciating others' thoughts, feelings and beliefs. One of the key concepts
in Kohlberg's (Kohlberg el aI., 1983) model of the moral development of the child
is the notio n of individuals being faced by 'optimum cognitive conflict' - being put
in a position where they are challenged to make better sense of moral beliefs th an
they do at present. Limiting children to their own in terests could leave many withou t
this opportunity .
Thirdly, it is not at all clear how child-centred educators are to answer the cha rges
of relativism in the ir approach to morality. How do they arrive at a standpoint where
they can evaluate what the chi ld should do , or indeed what society should do? To
say that society is inherently bad is no more than invective and helps us not at all.
Similarly. to state that the child is inherently good seems to say little more than that
whatever the child does of its own accord is good , and there are few who could agree
with that , in terms of either the child's own best in terests or th e rights of others. A
thoroughgoing child-centred educator would have to accept "that each child is a law
unto itself, and essentially there is no way of choosi ng between the values of o ne
and the values of ano ther. In which case, how does onc choose between the child
who helps others and the child who kills them ? Some of the chi1d-centred insights
are undoubtedly valuable, most notably in steering attention back to the right s and
needs of the individual, but on its own this approach does not seem to be able to
provide a complete answer.
Lastly, it is no t at all clear that the educational focus should be upon the individual
as such. If the cultural transmissio n model neglects the importance of the individual
in the linkage between morality and education, it could be argued that the child·
centred mod el exaggerates it. Too much emphasis upon the indivi du al can lead one
to neglect the needs of the society in which that person lives. No one is an island ,
and the linkage betwee n mora lity and schooling, it might be argued , should foc us
upo n the relationships within society which go to improve that socie ty . This leads us
directly into the third perspective.
 Values Behind lhe Practice 13

The social reconstruction model is an ideological perspective which does not seek
to impose society's values upon the individual , nor does the individual have to tread
a lonely and sOlitary path towards self~discovery. The individual and society arc seen
as being mutual1y beneficial. Society benefits through the focus on, appreciation of
and, where needed, change of values by its members for the betterment of its
members. By involving all its members in this cultural renewal, the model encourages
both stability and growth. The individual benefits through being exposed to and
critically appreciating the inherited values of the society, and through being accepted
and recognized as having an important contribution to make to the process of
renewal. The process and the product of education come together in a way which
does violence to neither concept.
S.ocial reconstructionism, then. shares some of th e properties of both the cultural
transmission and the child~centred models, but is different from both in a number
of ways. Firstly, it is an ideology which, much more than the previous two, is seen
as a vehicle for the change of society. Whilst the cultural ·transmission model is
essentially concerned with preserving the past, and the child~centred model is little
concerned with change in society per se, social reconstructionism sees the major task
of education as precisely this - the reform of society through education. Its subject
maUer, therefore, differs markedly from the other two models. Whereas the cuJtural
transmission model will view the transmission of the society'S cultural heritage as
education's main function, and the child-centred model look to a curriculum
developed from the child's capabilities and interests, the social reconstructionist will
see the curriculum as being composed of pressing social issues which need to be
resolved, and therefore will probably organize it on a topic-based approach. Like
the child-centred educator, the social reconstructionist will view the child as being
active and critical in his or her learning, but in a much more social and interactive
manner. The social reconstruction teacher will share values of both the child-centred
and the cuJturaJ transmission teachers - critical of existing society in many ways, but
a1so aware of the fact that there are many things within society worth preserving,
and acting as both selector of that which is to be criticized and changed and guardian
of that which.is to be valued and retained.
There are a number of possible criticisms of the social reconstruction model.
Firstly, there is the problem of the enormous responsibilities that are given to
teachers. Not only are they the selectors of social issues to be discussed (and the
definers of them as 'problems') and guardians of that which is to be preserved, but
they are also seen as possessing the critical acumen to perform these tasks, as well
as facilitators and constructors of relevant teaching materials. There are many -
including the teachers themselves - who would question whether teachers have the
abilities or the resources to perform such tasks. There is also the mora] question of
whether teachers, or anyone particular group, should be given this immensely
important, influential and potentially subversive role.
Secondly, there is the fundamental question of whether there is a need for change
to quite the degree normally envisaged in the proposals of the social reconstruction
model. There is a radicalism here which might seem inappropriate to many in the
stable western democracies, and which might also neglect the virtues of both the
cultural transmission and the child-centred models. Valuable aspects of the cultural
heritage of a country may be neglected in the passion for social reconstruction and
renewal, just as the needs and interests of the individual child may be neglected in
 J4 The Morality of the School

the movement 10 social reform. There is a need for balance between · all three
e lements.
Finally, there appears to be a n unresolved tension within the ideology itself over
the issue of leachers as cullural guardians. Whilst Ihe movemenl is profoundly
democratic in its aspirations, there is a large element of elitist philoso phy encapsu-
lated within it , for th e teacher is to be cast as the expert, th e guardian, the selector,
the transminer . It would seem that this ideology could slip all too easily from
democracy into elitism.
Where does the indi vidual school or teach er fit into all th is? It will be apparent
that if there is an implicit justification for a particular kind of relationship between
morality and th e school within these three educational ideologies, then it is vitally
important for the teacher and school to realize where they stand and where they
want to go.
Moreover, an awareness of the preferred ideological stand will make the teacher
and school that much more sensitized to attempts al imposing other ideological
definitions upon them. In this context, there is a four th ideology which has become
increasingly important in its influence over the last 10 to 15 years in this country,
which has had strong re percussions in the linkage between morality and schooling.
For want of a better term , this ideology will be called the GNP (gross national
product) 'code'. Its mai n features will be described here; its influence upon morality
and the school is reserved for the next chapter. Its ideology focuses upon producers
and consumers, upon technological sophistication and economic viability, and sees
the school essentially as being the training ground for the roles which pupils will take
up in the marke t-place once they leave school. In so doing, the school benefits society
by providing a well-trained, motivated workforce, which can compete in international
markets with other indust rialized countries such as the United States, West Germany
and Japan, but it also benefits pupils by providing them with the skills to fit in to
such a society, for they will be equipped for work and so able to earn a living and
live contented lives. The cuniculum consists of all that is conducive to the furtherance
of the nation's economic well-being, and tends to be technological/scientifidpractical
in orientation. The pupil is see n as a person to be trained to fit in to the economic
machine, and so initiative and active involvement are encouraged as far as these
attributes dove tail with ultimate occupational destinations. The teacher is a trainer
and transmitter, a constructor of appropriate (effective) teaching techniques for this
training and tra nsmitting, but essentially a fairly low-order member of the economic
hierarchy. The values seen as worth transmitting are those conducive to fitting the
child for his or her future role in society'S hierarchy, and vary with what is required
of that particular individual at that lime. Such values as respect, hard work, punctu-
ality and obedience may be prized, but so also may creativity and discovery. It is
very likely, though, that values like social criticism and self-expression are seen as
e ither undesirable or irreJevant.
The GNP code, then, is esse ntially technological/industrial in orientation. It has,
however , certain features of the other ideologies which confuse it with them. For
example, and as just noted, the values il Iransmits may be much like those of the
cultural transmission model - emphasizing hierarchy, obedience, respect, punctuality
and good manners. On the other hand , it tends to divert the curriculum away from
notions of cultural heritage to skills, issues and materials which are seen as more
' relevant'. Relevance, creativity and discovery are values also seen in the child-

-
 Values Behind the Practice 15

centred ideology, though located with the child as ends in th emselves, whilst with
the GNP code they are seen as a useful tool to the end of economic productivity.
It is possible yet again to see apparent contradictions in political orientations. Thus
O'Hear (1987) has criticized the GCSE in Britain precisely because of its relevance
- its failure to orient itself to the initiation of children into independent , non-rel eva nt
(not ifTelevant) bodies of knowledge - essentially the cultural transmission point of
view. Here, then, the GNP code can clearly be seen to be distinct from the cultural
transmission mOdel, in many ways its political partner. The GNP code has an orien-
tation very _much its own.
Now whilst it is recognized that parts of the educative process must concentrate
upon providing an industrial society with individuals equipped with the requisite
skiHs, this cannot be its whole or even its main function. There are th en a number
of criticisms which must be made of Ihis ideology.
Firstly, in failing to critically transmit the cultural heritage of the past, the GNP
code appears to fail to distinguish between means and ends in ideology. for it fails
to answer the question 'where are we going?'. We are certainly going somewhere by.
means of a healthy industrial base, but it is a culturally impoverished society which
sees a healthy economic position as being the principal end to aim for. By failing to
ask vital questions about ends, the GNP code does not begin to answer questions
about the basis of its own validity.
Moreover, it does not only fail to satisfy the requirements of the cultural trans-
mission model in terms of the denigration of transmitting the society's cultural
heritage . It also fails the child-centred and social reconstructionist educators. It fails
them by almost completely omitting from discussion the interests and insights of the
individual. Both child and teacher as active contributors are ignored, to be included
only minimally as functionaries within an overall grand design. Such a course, it
wouLd seem, is fertile ground for apathy, alienation and possible violence .
And finally, the GNP code is in total opposition in certain crucial respects to the
aspirations of the social reconstructionist, for it assumes that a particular form of
economic structure is the desirable state for a society, and thereby leaves no room
for the role of teacher or child in social reconstruction as there is essentially to be
no criticism, no reconstruction. Not only has the ideal society been defined, but it is
in existence - devoted to the pursuit of national weallh as its prime objective. It is
an ideology then which, if adopted in a thoroughgoing manner, contradicts the major
tenets of the other three ideologies.
Now it must repeated that there is room for all four models within a complete and
balanced ideology, and consequently in any theory of a proposed relationship
between morality and schooling. Cultural heritage needs to be retained and transmit-
ted. The interests and capabilities of the child need to be taken into account. The
school must initiate the pupiJ into rational criticism for the improvemenl of society
as a whole. Pupils must be given an education which enables them to gain a job once
they leave schOOl, and which helps them contribute to the society's economic health.
Danger arises when one ideology gains too much support , and stifles the insights of
the others. A large part of the argument of this book will be that the GNP code has
gained too preponderant a place in this country, and that its concepts and values are
being transmitted into schools in a manner which will ultimat.eJy cause great damage.
This has not happened overnight , but has been a gradual infillration which because
of its gradualism has gone undetected and unchallenged for too long.
16 The Morality of the School

It is part of the argument of this book, then, that there are a number of things
which can be done to defend a more balanced relationship between morality and the
school. Initial considerations must centre upon an understanding of the various
ideologies contending within the school and society. Any person interested in edu-
cation must be aware of their own ideological stand, as well as the stands of those
they may wish to criticize. This chapter has attempted to facilitate this awareness.
The kinds of linkages between morality and schooling which have been made in the
past, how these previous attempts have affected the present and what might be
wished for in the future should also be studied. This is the subject of the next chapter.