Hadow (1931)

Notes on the text
Preliminary pages Membership, Analysis, Preface, Introduction
Chapter 1 The history of the development of the conception of primary education
Chapter 2 The physical development of children between the ages of 7 and 11
Chapter 3 The mental development of children between the ages of 7 and 11
Chapter 4 The age limits for the upper stage of primary education
Chapter 5 The internal organisation of primary schools
Chapter 6 Retarded children in the primary school
Chapter 7 The curriculum of the primary school
Chapter 8 The staffing of primary schools and the training of teachers
Chapter 9 The premises and equipment of primary schools
Chapter 10 Examinations in primary schools
Chapter 11 Summary of principal conclusions and recommendations
Chapter 12 Suggestions on the curriculum of primary schools
Appendix I List of witnesses
Appendix II Physical development of 7-11 year olds (Harris)
Appendix III Mental development of 7-11 year olds (Burt)
Index

London: HM Stationery Office

Chapter 4 The age limits for the upper stage of primary education
[pages 59 - 72]

49. We adhere to the view which we have stated at some length in our Report on the Education of the Adolescent (1926) that primary education should be regarded as ending at the age of eleven. We think that normally all children should go forward at that age to some form of secondary education. We note with regret that some authorities, in their schemes for reorganisation, appear to have deliberately departed from the principle of the break at the age of eleven. For example, several urban authorities seem to contemplate the transfer of about 70 to 80 per cent of the pupils at about the age of eleven, the remainder, consisting of the more backward pupils who have failed to reach a certain degree of attainment in a general examination in English and arithmetic, are regarded as not being capable of profiting by advanced instruction and their promotion will accordingly be retarded. We consider that proposals of this character are contrary to the whole spirit and intention of the recommendations in our report. (1)

The change to the atmosphere of a new school at the age of eleven is particularly desirable in the interests of the more backward pupils, who should benefit greatly, not only from the change in methods of teaching and general educational environment, but also from the increased facilities for practical work and the wider social life (2) that would be open to them in the school for older pupils. We accordingly consider that, in the interests of primary and secondary education alike, the transfer from the primary to the secondary school (3) should take place some time between the ages of eleven and twelve. (4)

There is everything to be gained in our view from emphasising that the primary school for pupils between seven and eleven in particular possesses a distinctive aim and function of it own. (5) Our evidence indeed suggests that the process of reorganisation has already been notably successful in the establishment of the primary school as a definite unit in the educational system with an opportunity of usefulness which the smaller 'all age' school, at least, did not have. In such a school the teacher is dealing with a homogeneous group, with reasonably similar educational needs, and can develop a special technique for the purpose. Nor need it be feared that the brighter pupils will suffer by being retained in the primary school till the age of eleven. If necessary, an additional class or section for them can be provided at the top of the school, and they can always be afforded opportunity for individual study. They will be less likely to mark time than if transferred to a school for older pupils at an earlier age; it will be better for the more nervous and highly strung, and for the more precocious who are liable to 'slow up' afterwards; and it will be better for the 'modern' schools because the transfer of pupils at eleven, with a high level of attainment, will give an upward trend to the teaching on the literary 'side,' and probably on other 'sides' of the school. The retention of these pupils in the primary school until they are of an age to take part in the games, in the school societies, and in the practical work of the 'modern' school, appears therefore to be a necessity in the interests of the pupils themselves and in the interests of the school.

It was urged both by administrators and teachers that an exception might be made in favour of those pupils who, at about the age of ten, were proceeding direct to grammar schools. Having in view the existing organisation for the more academic type of education given in grammar schools, and the wide age range of the schools, we do not dissent from this suggestion.

To one administrative feature of the present arrangements for the admission of pupils from the primary schools to grammar schools, we wish, however, to call special attention. Some witnesses, in advocating the definite age break at eleven, spoke of the transfer to modern schools of some pupils at an earlier age as being liable to cause two breaks between the ages of nine and eleven. They said that these brighter pupils thus promoted would probably compete for 'free places' from the modern school, and so pass on in a short time to grammar schools. We cannot express too strongly our view that where an annual examination is held for the purpose, inter alia, of awarding scholarships to grammar schools, such a test should take place in the primary school. It would intolerably disturb the ordered curriculum of a modern school if pupils in the lower forms were shortly entering for a 'free place' examination. The possible transfer of certain pupils from a modern school to a grammar school, or vice versa, at a later date, is another matter. For this some different procedure will be required. (6)

50. It is very difficult to give from the available data, statistical and otherwise, any clear and coherent picture of the existing arrangements in England and Wales for the education of young children up to the age of eleven. All over the country, public elementary schools are being gradually reorganised on the lines indicated in our Report on the Education of the Adolescent, that is to say, on the basis of a break for all children at the age of eleven. The difficulties which confront urban education authorities in carrying out this policy are not so grave as those encountered by county authorities, especially in areas which are mainly agricultural. In general, it may be said that in urban areas, apart from the surviving 'all age' boys', girls' and 'mixed' schools for all pupils above the infant stage, authorities tend to adopt one of the following types of organisation for the education of children up to the age of eleven:

(i) Separate infant schools or departments for children up to the age of seven or eight, from which the pupils pass into distinct schools organised either as mixed schools or as schools for boys and girls respectively. There is reason to believe that in a certain number of urban areas the break between the so-called junior and infant departments and the senior department is still fixed at the age of about nine in accordance with the recommendation in paragraph 6 of the Board's Circular 1350 of 28 January 1925, which has since been withdrawn. We consider that seven should be the normal age of transfer, but that this should not be regarded as so definite an age break as in the case of the upper age limit of eleven. Arrangements might be made for the earlier promotion and the later retention of exceptional children. We think, however, that eight is the latest age at which children should be retained in the infant department.

(ii) Combined infant and 'junior' schools for pupils between the ages of five and eleven.

(iii) 'Junior' schools containing infant classes, but also receiving entrants at the age of seven or even eight from contributory infant schools.

It should be pointed out that these different forms of organisation for the education of young children up to the age of about eleven in urban areas are often based, not so much on any preconceived educational theory as to the merits or demerits of separate departments for infants and 'juniors', as on the character of the available school accommodation, the number of children of infant and 'junior' ages, and the necessity of providing for young children suitable accommodation within a reasonable distance of their homes.

In the rural portions of county areas the large schools usually contain an infant department under a separate head teacher. Most country schools, however, are combined schools either of infants and 'mixed', or, where reorganisation has already taken place, of infants and 'juniors'. The infant class or division is placed under a separate teacher and frequently contains children up to eight years of age. In the very small schools with one teacher only, an attempt is usually made to group the children in at least three sections, the lowest consisting of children of the ages of five and six, the next of children of the ages of seven and eight, and the highest of children between the ages of nine and eleven.

51. In the matter of organisation for children under the age of eleven, the only acutely controversial point is whether schools for children up to the age of seven and for children from the age of seven to that of eleven should be separate schools, or whether adequate provision might not be made in the same school for children between the ages of five and eleven. We have shown in Chapter 1 that the broad distinction between infants and older children or 'seniors' emerged at a very early stage in the development of elementary schools in England and Wales, and was accepted almost as axiomatic by many of the urban school boards after the passing of the Education Act of 1870. Even in the smaller rural schools there was generally an implicit distinction between the infant class or division and that for the older children, who are often described as the 'seniors'. Thus hitherto the majority of children in public elementary schools, at any rate in urban areas, have had one break in their education at about the age of seven or eight. The fact that there will now in future be a definite break at the end of the primary stage at eleven, has caused a number of educational administrators and teachers to reconsider the earlier break at about the age of seven, on the ground that it is probably undesirable that a child should have two definite breaks in the course of its education. It will therefore be convenient at this stage to summarise briefly the arguments for and against the provision of combined schools. In the great majority of rural schools the question does not arise, since in practice it is often only possible to organise separate departments or schools for infants and children over the age of seven in populous areas. Those who advocate combined schools defend them on the following grounds: (i) any break in a young child's school life is likely to retard progress and should, if possible, be avoided; (ii) there is no cogent psychological evidence pointing to the desirability of a break between the infant and upper stages of primary education, since no abrupt change in mental development takes place at about the age of seven, and the mental growth of the child between the ages of five and eleven is gradual and continuous; (iii) past experience tends to show that separate 'junior' schools are unsatisfactory; (iv) it is highly desirable that the transition from the infant department to the department for pupils between the ages of seven and eleven should not be too abrupt; (v) if infants and children over the age of seven be organised in separate schools, the infant school will often be too small.

52. We will deal first with the argument that any break in the child's school life is likely to retard progress. On a first view, there seem to be some disadvantages in a break at the age of seven since there may be a certain amount of dislocation in the child's progress on passing from one type of school to another, due to the sudden change in the methods of teaching causing some mental and emotional disturbance. Several of our witnesses pointed out that the Board, in their Circular of 28 January 1925 (No. 1350, which has since been withdrawn) had recognised the disadvantages of the double break in the school life and had recommended departments for children between the ages of five and eleven in large schools. In the New Prospect in Education (1928) the Board abandoned that position and stated that, in the light of further experience, it was not possible to press this preference, and that the balance of advantage would now usually be regarded as lying with an organisation providing separate successive departments for infants and 'juniors'. It is no doubt true that the reasons for the break at the age of about seven are not so cogent as are those for the break at the age of eleven, but the assumption that continuity of method and treatment is necessarily sacrificed by the establishment of separate departments for infants and children between seven and eleven respectively does not seem to be well founded, provided that, as we recommend elsewhere, changes in teaching methods are made gradually. (7)

53. Next we will deal with the argument that there is no cogent psychological evidence pointing to the desirability of a break between the infant and the upper stage of primary education, since the mental growth of the child between the ages of five and eleven is gradual and continuous. The psychological data which we have summarised in Chapter 3 indicate that mental growth on the intellectual and emotional sides is a gradual and continuous process, and that there are no sudden breaks and abrupt transitions in the intellectual and emotional development of young children up to about the age of eleven. It is therefore impossible on psychological grounds alone to make out so strong a case for a break at the age of about seven, as for the later break at the age of about eleven. On the other hand there is strong reason for regarding the age period between seven and eleven as a distinct stage in the physical development of the normal child; (8) and even on psychological grounds a fairly strong case can be established against large schools for pupils between the ages of five and eleven. As is shown in Chapter 3 (9) there is a wide range of individual difference in capacity between children that tends to expand steadily from year to year; and it might be urged that it is much more difficult to make satisfactory provision for teaching them in a combined school than in two distinct departments.

The psychological evidence indicates that what is really injurious to a sensitive child is an abrupt change in methods of teaching, in discipline and in general environment. In a well planned school for pupils between the ages of seven and eleven, however, the transition need not be more abrupt than would be the change from class to class in a combined school. We agree with the County Councils Association that there should not be an inflexible rule for separating infants and children over the age of seven, and for determining the size of infant departments. But when the difference in the general habits of mind and emotional interests of children over the age of seven and of infants respectively is considered, as well as the range of mental capacity in children between the ages of five and eleven, there appears to be a good case even from the psychological point of view for the organisation of separate departments, if the numbers justify it, provided that the transition in teaching methods and general discipline is made as smooth and easy as possible for the pupils. We discuss this point further in Section 58.

54. Those who adduce the argument that past experience has shown that the separate 'junior' school is a failure are undoubtedly thinking of the so-called junior school which came into existence before the principle of the break at eleven recommended in our Report on the Education of the Adolescent was generally adopted. For instance, as we have shown in Chapter 1, a form of organisation was adopted in some public elementary schools (10) consisting of an infant department for children up to the age of about seven, 'junior' departments for children between the ages of seven and nine, and 'senior' departments for all children over nine. In some instances these earlier departments retained pupils to the age of ten, but even then this only provided a three years' course, and most of them appear to have kept their pupils for about two years only. Such schools were comparative failures for several reasons. They were frequently used to relieve the pressure upon other departments; it was very difficult to plan for them a curriculum which had within itself a sufficiently definite educational objective, and they were often merely schools in which children passed one, two or three years on their way from the infant school to the 'senior' stage. It is therefore, in our view, misleading to institute any comparison between these older types of 'junior' school and the new primary school, providing a course of four years for pupils between the ages of seven and eleven. The new school will have a reasonably long course. It will be filled with pupils systematically drawn from one or several infant schools, and it will have a definite objective.

55. There was general agreement among our witnesses that it was desirable that the methods of teaching employed in the better infant schools should be shaded off gradually. The advocates of the combined school for pupils between the ages of five and eleven urged that there was a real danger that the separate school, instead of carrying on the work of the infant school in a sympathetic spirit and making the fullest use of the skill acquired by the best infant school teachers in the training and instruction of young children, might become merely a department in which the elements of formal knowledge were imparted. We are convinced from the emphasis laid on this consideration by the great majority of our witnesses, speaking from different points of view, that there is a certain danger in cases where separate schools for infants and children over the age of seven have been established, that the transition may, in some instances, be too abrupt. While admitting, however, that it may be easier to solve this particular problem in a primary school taking pupils from five to eleven, we think that, if the separate school be adequately staffed, and teachers acquainted with the best modern methods of teaching young children placed in charge of the lower classes, the difficulty would largely disappear. (11) It might be urged, on the other hand, that if the 'junior' school is to be regarded merely as an extension of the infant school, and if one of its main functions is to conserve infant school methods and atmosphere, at any rate for its younger pupils, it may well fail to attain its proper objective. If the head teacher of the combined school were a person specially interested in modern infant school methods, she might be apt to look at older children from the standpoint of the infants. The classes for children between seven and eleven, whether they be organised as a separate school or form part of a combined school, have a function of their own to discharge. Without sacrificing any of the excellent work done in the infant school, they have, at the same time, to educate children in such a way that they will be fit at the age of eleven to benefit from the work and the life of the next stage.

There is some force in the consideration urged by several witnesses that in a large primary school for pupils between the ages of five and eleven the wide age range would often tend to make the later stages of the course the main objective of the school and that the shadow of a free place examination might fall even across the path of the younger children. Lastly, it might be urged that, since the basis of the whole argument is the excellent work at present done in some infant schools, a proper appreciation of that work would lead to the preservation of the infant school as a separate entity, and that it is desirable, where the numbers of children render this course possible, to organise the infants separately.

56. Finally we deal with the argument that if infants and children over the age of seven are organised in separate schools, the infant school will often be too small. The age range in the infant school is about two and a half years, and as the birth rate has been falling for some time past, the size of many separate infant schools is smaller than in former years. This diminution is felt most in urban areas and these are the areas in which nursery school facilities are particularly desirable. Any decline in school population with the setting free of some classrooms might afford opportunities for development in this direction. Only a few nursery schools have been established as separate institutions. Nursery classes attached to infant schools have been adopted as an alternative. Such nursery classes form part of a separate infant school, but it is difficult to envisage a primary school with nursery classes having a total age range of about eight to nine years (2 to 11).

From the point of view of the interests of the infants, the following considerations might be urged in favour of separate infant schools: (i) the training given in the best infant schools is largely dependent upon atmosphere, and it is found in practice that this atmosphere is difficult to maintain when older children are present; (ii) the difficulty of a common playground for infants and children over seven, in cases where the playground accommodation is so limited as to necessitate all children using it at the same time, is serious, as even under the most careful arrangements the older children are apt to be rather self-assertive and inclined to bully the little children; (iii) the older children in a good infant school, especially about the age of seven, often display a remarkable spirit of independence and initiative, owing to the fact that they are in the top class. In a primary school containing both younger and older children they could hardly occupy such a position and the valuable ethical effects of this arrangement would be lost.

57. We think that a very strong case can be established both from the point of view of the physical and mental development of young children and on general educational and administrative grounds for the organisation of infants and children over the age of seven in distinct departments or schools, where the numbers justify such an arrangement. We accordingly recommend that, in areas where it is possible, there should be separate schools for children under the age of seven.

We wholly agree with the view put forward by several of the great organisations of teachers and administrators, and notably by the National Union of Teachers, to the effect that the 'primary school should be regarded as a unit in organisation with its own problems and technique. It was naturally dependent on the infant school, and must lead to the secondary school. Both these would affect to some extent both methods and courses, but should not be permitted to determine either.' In other words, however much the stage between seven and eleven be regarded as an independent entity, it must be recognised that it has intimate points of connection both with the infant stage and with the secondary stage of education.

As regards schools in the rural parts of county areas, we fully recognise that in most country schools at the present time it would be economically impracticable, owing to the small numbers of children, (12) to establish separate departments for pupils between the ages of seven and eleven. We think, however, that in all primary schools containing children up to the age of eleven, including even small rural schools, there should be a well defined line of demarcation between the younger and older children. To this end, we recommend that, wherever possible, the infants should be placed under the care of a mistress with special responsibility and special knowledge of modern methods appropriate to this stage. The teacher or teachers in charge of the pupils above the infant stage would thus be set free to study the special needs of the children between the ages of seven and eleven, and to plan appropriate courses of instruction for them.

58. Earlier psychologists, following a popular tradition, divided childhood into three periods of seven years each, making the breaks at the ages of seven, fourteen, and twenty-one, respectively; but the result of all recent experimental work indicates that though in the mental growth of any one individual child there may be periods of rapid progress and periods of stagnation, the mental development of children taken in the mass yields an almost straight line curve until about the age of twelve. Our psychological witnesses stated that it is certain that at the age of seven there is no change or crisis which in any way corresponds to the crisis or change of puberty. Nevertheless, a child of the age of four or five differs very noticeably from a child of the age of eight or nine. This difference is not merely one of amount of intelligence, it is also a difference of quality or kind. For instance, children of the age of eight or nine are noticeably less self-centred - new capacities have emerged, fresh interests have been acquired, and a different type of education is accordingly required for them. Nevertheless, the transition is gradual and the exact date for transference cannot be determined on purely psychological grounds. In view of the noticeable difference which at present obtains between the comparatively free methods of teaching in vogue in infant schools, in which the instruction largely follows the 'play way', and the more formal and intellectual methods of instruction employed in the upper stage of primary education, it is manifestly desirable not to transfer children from the infant department until they are ready to adapt themselves to a more formal type of instruction. The available evidence points to the mental age of seven to seven and a half years as being the normal age of transfer. Some students of child life have argued in favour of an earlier date for transfer. For example, Froebel and Montessori both believed that a sharp transition in mental growth might be observed about the age of five or six. Under existing conditions, however, the age of seven seems to be the earliest age at which the ordinary child can with advantage be transferred to the upper stage of primary education. From the psychological point of view, any sharp change in teaching methods is injurious to a sensitive child and may lead to depression, timidity, nervousness, nightmare, and even open rebellion. If, however, the existing difference between the teaching methods in vogue in the two schools be carefully shaded off, there is no reason based on psychology why promotion should not be made at about the age of seven instead of the later age of eight as some recent educationists have suggested. In this connection it was pointed out that even though the more formal work in the upper stage of primary education is now to some extent anticipated; in the top class of many infant schools (commonly called the standard class or 'Standard I') yet the teaching methods employed in the lower classes of the school for children between seven and eleven should not diverge abruptly from those in the top class of the infant school. Whatever age be chosen for the transference, the psychologist would plead strongly for a flexible interpretation. Our psychological witnesses urged that promotion should be determined by the mental age rather than the chronological age, though for administrative reasons a compromise might possibly have to be effected. (13) The actual development in capacity and character of the individual child was more important than the mere date of his birthday for determining the time for his transfer to the upper stage of primary education.

59. It is true indeed that the process of education, from the age of five, to the end of the secondary stage, should be envisaged as a coherent whole, that there should be no sharp division between the infant, 'junior', and post-primary stages, and that the transition from any one stage to the succeeding stage should be as smooth and gradual as possible. The upper stage of primary education, though intimately connected with the infant stage and also with the secondary stage, should nevertheless be regarded as forming a well-marked period in the physical and mental development of the average child, demanding special treatment and special methods of teaching. Both the infant school and the different types of secondary school will, to some extent, affect courses and methods of teaching in the upper section of the primary school, but they should not be permitted to determine either. The primary school should not, therefore, be regarded merely as a preparatory department for the subsequent stage, and the courses should be planned and conditioned, not mainly by the supposed requirements of the secondary stage, nor by the exigencies of an examination at the age of eleven, but by the needs of the child at that particular phase in his physical and mental development. The primary school should afford time and scope for general development in preparation for the more varied forms of teaching that will be adapted to the special abilities and aptitudes of the pupils at a later age. It should arouse in the pupil a keen interest in the things of the mind and in general culture, fix certain habits, and develop a reasonable degree of self-confidence, together with a social or team-spirit. (14)

60. There was a general agreement among our witnesses that in all cases where there were separate schools for children below the age of seven and for children above that age, a close connection should be maintained between both schools. Teachers in the infant school should keep in touch with the teachers of the upper section of the primary school; and it seems highly desirable, as many teachers suggested, that frequent staff meetings should be held attended by both sets of teachers.

61. It is most important that the teachers in all types of secondary school should keep in close touch with the teachers of the contributory primary schools and departments. The Association of Education Committees and the Association of Municipal Corporations urged that conferences between teachers in primary schools and those in secondary schools of different types should be arranged periodically on the basis of small geographical areas. We endorse this, and suggest that local education authorities should take steps, as many of them have already done, to promote the holding of such conferences. Adequate cooperation between the different types of school is impossible without periodical conferences between the teachers of the various types of school, meeting equally on common ground. These conferences might be of different kinds: (a) conferences of infant teachers with teachers in the upper section of the primary school; (b) conferences of primary school teachers with those in secondary schools; (c) conferences of teachers from all types of school. Such conferences might, where it is considered desirable, be attended by officials of the local education authorities and, as occasion arises, by HM Inspectors. For purposes of coordination these conferences might also include at times members of training college staffs directly concerned with teaching methods. We also agree with the suggestion made by several of our witnesses that cooperation between primary schools and secondary schools might be further promoted if the teachers in the upper section of primary schools, both head teachers and assistant teachers, were from time to time afforded opportunities of seeing the work done in other types of school and vice versa.

Footnotes

(1) See also Chapter 5, section 66.

(2) See the section on Corporate Activities on pages 246-247 of the Report on the Education of the Adolescent.

(3) i.e. grammar schools, and selective and non-selective modern schools.

(4) In the areas of some Welsh authorities pupils who are passing on to grammar schools generally remain in the elementary schools till after the age of twelve. This is true both of rural, sparsely populated areas, and of most of the more populous industrial and urban districts, but the reason for it, in each case, is different. In the rural areas in Wales, it is due, in the main, to the late beginning of the country child's schooling. In the industrial areas, on the other hand, it is due to the inadequacy of school provision. Over 90 per cent of the secondary school population in Wales are ex-Public Elementary School pupils. There is, therefore, very severe competition for admission to grammar schools and for free places, and a large proportion of those who fail to secure admission at the first examination when they are eleven years of age, remain at the Public Elementary School for a second chance a year later.

(5) See also this chapter, section 59.

(6) See Report on the Education of the Adolescent (1926), Sections 97 and 156 and Recommendation No. 17.

(7) See sections 57 and 58.

(8) See Chapter 2 passim.

(9) Chapter 3, section 35.

(10) See Sections 13, 14 and 16.

(11) See Section 87, page 86.

(12) Official statistics show that in 1929 there were 12,085 public elementary school departments in the rural parts of county areas in England and Wales, and that of this number 8,974 departments had an average attendance of not more than 100. The average size of a department in these rural parts was 81. See also Chapter 8, footnote 6.

(13) See also Chapter 5, Section 63.

(14) Cf. Chapter 7 passim.