Present problems in the democratization of secondary and higher education

232 Pages·2005·12.73 MB·English

Present problems
in the democratization of
secondary and
higher education
by
A. le Gall
J. A.L auwerys, B. Holmes, A. B. Dryland
S. Mattsson
Unesco Paris 1973
The development of higher education
Titles in this series
Published by Unesco:
The development of higher education in Africa
The teaching of sciences in African universities
Training university administrators: a programme guide
Present problems in the democratization of secondary and higher education
Published by Unesco jointly with the International Association of Universities
Access to higher education :
Vol. I: Director’s report, by Frank Bowles
Vol. 11: National studies
Higher education and development in South-East Asia:
Vol. I: Director’s report, by Howard Hayden
Vol. 11: Country profiles, by Howard Hayden and the Office of the Study in
Kuala Lumpur
Vol. Ill: Part 1, High-level manpower for development,b y Guy Hunter. Part 2,
Language policy and higher education, by Richard Noss
Summary report and coilclusions
Teaching and learning: an introduction to new methods and resources in higher education,
by Norman MacKenzie, Michael Eraut and Hywel C. Jones
Some other publications on higher education
Industrial sociology, by J. H. Smith. (Unesco, 1961. The University Teaching of
Social Sciences series)
Business management, by Roger GrCgoire. (Unesco, 1966. The University Teaching
of Social Sciences series)
World survey of education, Vol. IV: Higher education. (Unesco, 1966)
A survey of the teaching of physics at universities. (Unesco, 1966. The Teaching of
Basic Sciences series)
International law. (Unesco, 1967. The University Teaching of Social Sciences series)
Social science in higher technical education-an international survey. (Unesco, 1967.
The University Teaching of Social Sciences series)
Access to higher education in Europe. 1968.
University libraries in developing countries. 1968.
Methods of establishing equivalences between higher education diplomas and degrees.
(1970. Association Internationale des UniversitCs. Studies on International Equi-
valences of Degrees series)
International equivalences in access to higher education, by W.D . Halls. (Unesco,
1971. Association Internationale des UniversitCs. Studies on International Equi-
valences of Degrees series)
Mathematics applied to physics. (Unesco, 1970. The University Teaching of Basic
Sciences series)
Les laboratoires d’dectricitid e I’enseignements upirieur. (Unesco, 1971. The University
Teaching of Basic Sciences series)
Published by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization,
Place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris
Printed by Maison #Edition, Marcinelle
English edition: ISBN 92-3-101068-9
French edition: ISBN 92-3-201068-2
LC No 72-97137
@ Unesco 1913
Printed in Belgium
Preface
For some time now, democratization of education has been prominent in the
concerns of educators throughout the world, particularly in respect of the
need of individuals and groups to highlight their identity and assert their role
in society. Education is the means to facilitate this identification and this
assertion. Democratization must now move from an abstract concept towards
a practical and active approach through participation by all concerned.
The present publication is part of the operation undertaken by Unesco in
this direction; through numerous conferences, among them the Conference
of Ministers of Education of European Member States of Unesco on Access
to Higher Education, Vienna, 1967, and the International Conference
on Education (thirty-second session), Geneva, 1970, aimed at improving
effectiveness of educational systems, particularly through reduction
of wastage at all levels of instruction, and through successive publications
including Access to Higher Education by Frank Bowles, published jointly
with the International Association of Universities, Unesco has
attempted to arouse sensitivity in responsible educational circles concern-
ing the problems of democratization: It is now launching in-depth research
on the various aspects of the problems with a view to disseminating the
results.
This publication is composed of three studies by experts, preceded by an
introduction prepared by the Secretariat; the first study was carried out by
A. le Gall, Inspector-General,M inistkre de Yeducation Nationale, Paris;
the second by Professor J. A. Lauwerys, Director of the Atlantic Education
Institute, Halifax, and his colleagues, B. Holmes and A. B. Dryland; and
the third by S. Mattsson of the Ministry of Education, Stockholm. The points
of view adopted by the authors, the facts stated or the opinions expressed
with regard to those facts, as well as the presentation and content of the
material in general, do not imply the expression of any opinion on the part
of the Secretariat of Unesco.
The Secretariat wishes to express its deep appreciation to the authors for
having previously accommodated its suggestions while the scripts were under
preparation, and wishes to record its gratitude to them for the studies they
prepared. It is hoped that these studies will promote reflection on the subject
among educational philosophers, planners, administrators, professors and
students, and, above all, furnish a practical guide to action for the use of
those responsible for determining educational policy.
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this
publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the
part of the Unesco Secretariat concerning the legal status of any country
or territory, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers.
Cont ents
Foreword 9
Part One: Differentiation and democratization in secondary
and higher education, by A. le Gall
I. Introduction 23
11. Standards of living, the primary school and initial differentiations 27
111. Structural factors affecting differentiation in lower secondary education 35
1v. Functional factors affecting differentiation in lower secondary education 48
V. Structural factors affecting differentiation in upper secondary education 62
VI. Functional factors affecting differentiation in upper secondary education 69
v11. Differentiation in higher education (Section 1) 76
VIII. Differentiation in higher education (Section 2) 92
IX. Higher education: continuity or innovation 109
X. Differentiation and extramural education 114
XI. Lifelong education and the struggle against differentiation 118
x11. The living conditions of students: aid systems and differentiation 123
XIII. Conclusion 139
Part Two: Secondary schools and the democratization of higher education,
by J. A. Lauwerys, B. Holmes, A. B. Dryland
I. Introduction 145
11. General considerations 150
111. Second stage, first level 153
IV. Second stage, second level 157
V. The new common school 163
VI. Teacher education 165
VTI. Social aid 172
VIII. Vocational and educational counselling 179
IX. Evening and correspondence courses 187
Part Three: State study assistance in Sweden and the other
Scandinavian countries, by S. Mattsson
I. Presentation 199
IT. Brief historical account of Swedish State study assistance 20 I
111. The Swedish educational system 204
IV. Background of the educational welfare reforms of 1964 209
V. Present forms of State study assistance in Sweden 212
VI. Right to State study assistance for studies abroad 227
VII. Facilities for State study assistance to aliens in Sweden 228
VIII. Total expenditure on study assistance in Sweden 229
IX. Administrative organization 230
x. Study assistance in the other Scandinavian countries 23 1
Tables
Part One
1. Drop-out rates in primary education (estimates expressed as percentages) 30
2. Brazil: percentage of children 7-14 years old not receiving education,
according to father’s educational level 32
3. Federal Republic of Germany: type of school attended by certificated
leavers from upper secondary education. Statistics and forecasts 39
4. Transfer from primary education to the first stage of secondary education 42
5. France: pupils’ social and economic background and their choice of
‘streams’ 45
6. France: repetition rates in lower secondary education (State education) for
1968/69 61
7. Differentiations in upper secondary education 63
8. France: rates of repetition in the long upper secondary course (State
education, 1968/69) 71
9. Ratio of students to total population by country 77
10. Rise in the number of students in higher education in Africa 98
11. Poland: number of students 1967/68 and number of students awarded
certificates 1966/67 17
12. Higher-education grants in thirty-eight countries 24
13. France: relationship between father’s social and employment category
and access to higher education 39
Part Three
1. Relation between taxable income and gross income, Sweden, 1970 (figu-
res in kronor) 21 5
2. Total expenditure on study assistance in Sweden (1970/71) 229
3. Calculation of educational loans in Finland 236
Foreword
The notion of differentiation, applied either to an individual or to a social
phenomenon, usually evokes two opposite and even seemingly contradictory
responses. The first lays stress on the differentiations of all kinds innate in
an individual. Whatever the reason for their presence, they are held to be
features which must change or disappear under the pressure of predetermined
social moulds, the influence of which is justified according to the principle
of equality. The second response also singles out individual differentiations
for chief attention, but on the contrary, emphasis is placed here on the
respect which society must accord to them, because it is considered a
violation of the principle of liberty to seek to suppress or change purely
individual characteristics from the outside.
These two attitudes, which lay stress variously on one of the three features
of the problem-individual (‘natural’ or social in origin), structural and
functional differentiations peculiar to a social system-may both be con-
sidered as too schematic. On the other hand, when looking at the matter
from the point of view of education, which is assumed to help individuals
to attain to both personal freedom and social cquality, it is helpful to
develop this schematization. It highlights the possible consequences, for the
individual and for society, of the concepts implicit in the two responses
mentioned above, it helps to reveal the emotional elements concealed in
these notions and it makes it possible to tackle more purposefully the
essential political and practical problems that arise.
If, to begin with, differentiations in an individual, which condition his
subsequent development and contribute, in fact, to the maintenance of a
certain social determinism, are thought to be contrary to the principle of
equality of opportunity and if the belief is held that individual success is
assimilable to social succcss judged according to a single scale of values
obtaining in a given society, then an educational system should be adopted
in which everything is done to do away with differentiations. These will even
be deliberately ignored on entry into the system, so that individuals will be
educated to match clearly defined specifications of social utility. The myth
of social equality would be honoured, since everyone would receive the same
kind of education within each branch of the educational system and would
thus, in theory, have the same openings to success. The restraints of the
9
Present problems in the democratization of secondary and higher education
system would, in fact, be the same for everyone, whatever their social back-
ground or individual characteristics. Failure could then only be ascribed to
‘individual deficiencies’ and it is unlikely that their origin could-or would
deliberately-be thought of as residing in the very phenomenon it was hoped
to eliminate, namely differentiation.
Thus no traditional educational systems can be other than standardized
and static, with undifferentiateds tructures or, at best, structures differentiated
as little as possible and in an immutable fashion. In this case, individual
differentiations are consciously or unconsciously used as corresponding to
social rather than to individual functions. It is thought that differentiations
can be eliminated by denying them or by making them appear as
a posteriori explanations of phenomena which, in fact, are the burning
proof of their existence. As educational systems of this sort cannot be other
than formal or inward-looking by nature and as their stages, narrowing as
they rise, are thus invested with greater social prestige the nearer they are
to the summit, ‘the elect who have managed’ first to enter and then to leave
these systems as late as possible most frequently become the champions of
the existing state of structural differentiations. They are, indeed, convinced
that such systems are ‘neutral’,w hereas they transmit, in fact, with the aim
of social perpetuation, the values of one or more social groups to which, in
most cases, these advocates belong. A system of this kind thus not only leads
to immobility, but even tends to worsen the situation, since its Malthusian
nature leads it, for political motives related to limitation of the size of the
%lites’, to refuse to meet the increased demands made upon it. This
simply sharpens differentiations at the level of access, thus working to the
detriment of social groups who are, broadly speaking, always the same.
The consequences of such systems, from the educational and political
points of view, go a long way to explain the reactions which they have
aroused. These reactions result mainly from the development of social struc-
tures in industrialized countries in which the internal resources of the indivi-
dual are increasingly neglected in favour of an intensive utilization of his
productive capacities of every kind.l
A reaction has emerged against the traditional partitioning of educational
systems and against the early and definitive stunting of the development of
the personality occasioned by it. Educational theories and methods have
appeared in which individual differentiations,p sychological, sociological or
material, form the basis of new systems,t he structures and methods of which
1. Only the so-called developed, industrial countries are considered here, but it should
not be forgotten that the situation in non-industrialized countries is often worse.
This is a consequence, highly persistent, of the colonial era, responsibility for which
is no longer imputable solely to external forces. The problems of differentiation will
not be solved in these non-industrialized countries until radical educational solutions
have been found-solutions which, it can be feared, may not be applied under the
best possible conditions if their introduction is rushed because of the indefensible
nature of existing differentiations.
10