EdTA

Liberal Education

The Case for Liberal Learning

Michael Oakshott (1901 - 1990) was a strong advocate for a liberal education. A professional academic and philosopher, Oakshott wrote on a range of themes including the specific challenges for maintaining a liberal view of education in modern times. He is regarded as a conservative in the sense that he pays significant attention to the value of what has preceded, and underpins, what makes for a civilised society. This is one of the recurring points made by advocates of liberal learning; that civilised democratic societies are predicated on well-educated population. The concern is that where there is a lack of liberal education fundamentalism, totalitarianism and infantalism are more likely to emerge. There is also a secondary concern which is that in the absence of liberal learning, education, and by extension, human experience, remains solidly positioned in the functionality of life; education becomes utilitarian. In other words if education is not primarily orientated toward a civilised life, then it will serve little more than a functional purpose, for example, readiness for employment.

Oakshott, and others, including E.D. Hirsch, propose that not to provide a liberal education is a dereliction of duty on behalf of those who have experience of it. That such with-holding has a detrimental impact on sustaining and enriching the human experience. The notion of inheritance is important in this approach, but this refers to more than simply the acquisition of ‘knowledge’. It refers to a distinctive experience that combines the sharing of knowledge with a process of being ‘taught by’. It is too reductionist to describe liberal education as simply ‘learning stuff’.

Oakshott refers back to the 14th century as the point at which the classical works of ancient Greece and Rome were re-discovered as crucial sources of profound insight, philosophy and knowledge about the human condition. Such a renaissance of classical appreciation brought into sharp relief the prospect for human life being more than the sum of work and activity; that there was more to life than functionality. In classical civilisations the purpose of education was essentially directed at improving the human condition in terms of higher thought, awareness and purpose. This capacity to extend a quality of life beyond the menial tasks of survival marked the human species apart from any other living organism. Clearly such a perspective aligned with the dominant theocracies at the time which harnessed such higher capacities with God-given qualities, but it also gave rise to an educational mission by which individuals could experience a kind of freedom. Importantly, the freedom to choose a way of realising one’s humanity beyond the limitations of needing to meet basic needs. Education was not only associated with civilisation, but what it meant to be a free person; fully human.

An important feature of liberal education is the positioning of the school, or university. Oakshott emphasises just how necessary it is for places of learning to be secluded, separate from the familiar world;

Each of us is born in a corner of the earth and at a particular moment in historic time, lapped round with locality. But school and university are places apart where a declared learner is emancipated from the limitations of his [sic] local circumstances and from the wants he may happen to have acquired, and is moved by intimations of what he has never yet dreamed
(Oakshott, 2001 p.11)

The intention is that the classroom becomes a sheltered place where the noise of the immediate and present world is kept at bay. It is a place where the student can begin to learn what it means to be free to choose in such a way of living a good and elevating life;

We catch a glimpse [of true educational purpose] when we recognise that choosing wants to satisfy is also something that has to be learned... [which is] the continuous intellectual adventure in which human beings have sought to identify and to understand themselves.
(p.13)

One of the underlying assumptions of the liberal tradition is that it appreciates that the past has a value which can be overlooked by the novelty of the ‘new’. Whilst there may be valid reason to prepare students for the reality of the various roles and functions which await them in adult life, the liberal educator is acutely aware of the limitations of an education system which reduces itself to only addressing these utilitarian objectives. Instead the liberalist returns to the notion of inheritance;

Every human being is born an heir to an inheritance to which he can succeed only in a process of learning...and inheritance of human achievements; an inheritance of feelings, emotions, images, visions, thoughts, beliefs, ideas, understandings, intellectual and practical enterprises, languages, relationships, organisations, canons and maxims of conduct, procedures, rituals, skills, works of art, books, musical compositions, tools, artifacts and utensils...
(p.37)

The role of the teacher is to undertake this task of providing such an inheritance. Oakshott cites an oriental image whereby the child owes its physical life to their parents, but initiation into what it means to be human is owed to the teacher, who is seen as the ‘agent of civilisation’, (p.39). The work of the teacher is to often bring to the surface what remains hidden or not in common use. Being only familiar through education with what is apparent means engaging in a distorted sense of the inheritance; it needs to be made explicit. The liberal educator knows that such a task involves hard work and this can be eased through technique and organisation, but the essential challenge of the pupil is to apply themselves to the task. Teachers are most effective when they teach by example, which is a common phrase but refers to more than simply behaviour. It means the teacher enacts, or inhabits the virtues of the ‘good life’ which comes from a liberal sensibility, not therefore in only imparting knowledge but by becoming what it means to know it. In an opaque image, Oakshott explains; ‘Not the cry, but the rising of the wild duck impels the flock to follow him in flight’ (p.60).

References:

Traditional Teaching

A more contemporary promoter of a liberal education can be found in the work of Prof. Anthony Radice:

I was once asked to provide a definition of traditional teaching in one tweet, and I described it as ‘knowledge for the mind, and discipline for the will’. A traditional teacher sees their role as primarily the transmission of valuable knowledge and secondarily the formation of good habits. These two goals involve a struggle against the natural ignorance and arrogance of the human race. Education is a battle against nature, not an embracing of its providential designs. The philosophy that Hirsch has labelled ‘providential individualism’ must be rejected.

Forming Good Habits
Knowledge cannot be acquired without good habits. A pupil who does not concentrate, who does not work hard, who interrupts teachers and peers, will remain both ignorant and arrogant. In order for knowledge to be acquired, egotism must be overcome; the pupil must begin to realise how ignorant he is and that others know far more than he does; he must realise that in order to obtain the knowledge which his superiors have mastered, a long, hard struggle will be needed. A rigorous programme of academic study develops all four of the great human virtues: prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude. A pupil must make prudent decisions about how to spend his time best; he must do justice to his teacher by obeying instructions and showing gratitude for the gift of knowledge; he must be temperate, especially in his speech; he must show fortitude if he is to persevere in mastering academic subjects thoroughly. These virtues are not acquired overnight, any more than a thorough knowledge of history is to be obtained by reading a few articles on Wikipedia. They are acquired by a persistent effort to overcome egotism, by repeated practice under the guidance of authoritative instruction. To stand much chance of acquiring them, we need a community in which these virtues are viewed as the norm, and in which there are public consequences for being imprudent, unjust, intemperate or cowardly. Humanity is something which we must struggle to acquire under the guidance of an authoritative community, not something we are born with. This is much easier to understand when one is involved in the raising of children, especially when they are younger. It is abundantly clear to a parent of young children that they are struggling to acquire the habits of their tribe. They are imitating the speech and the actions of their elders. Without an authoritative example to follow and without the struggle to imitate that example, they would not reach maturity.

Transmitting Knowledge
Walking and talking are universal accomplishments for ordinary members of the human race. They are remarkable accomplishments; they are cognitive feats which are achieved through much struggle and repeated practice. They can be learned by most people without formal instruction, however, because the normal child is surrounded by examples and receives rapid feedback on mistakes, either because his words are not understood or because he falls flat on his face. Even these most universal of human accomplishments cannot be described as natural. To be human is to learn from others, to depend upon others, to submit to the authoritative example of others within a community, in order to grow and mature. This is even more true when we come to formal academic instruction, which opens new vistas to the mind which are outside immediate experience. Reading and writing are not universal accomplishments; they are more artificial than speaking and walking; that is to say, they are more uniquely human. Writing with an alphabet which represents the sounds of speech is quite a recent invention in the whole span of human history. It is a remarkably flexible and useful one, which opens up vast new possibilities for knowledge and understanding. But in order to acquire it, formal instruction is required. Children may prefer to run around and play with mud and sticks. They should certainly have time for doing such things. But they will never learn to read and write by doing them. To learn to read and write, they must submit to authority and work hard under the guidance of instructors. The traditional teacher recognises the importance of formal instruction, but also recognises its limits. He makes a clear distinction between work and play. Work requires self-discipline and effort. There is a place for play, once work has been completed. But they must not be muddled with each other, or neither one will be properly appreciated. The traditional teacher works intensively to transmit the knowledge which the child requires to be inducted into the adult community. He sees in the child a human being who is not yet fully formed, and accepts the responsibility of forming the mind of that child by introducing him to the great human accomplishments in literature, history, science and mathematics.

Conclusion
Life is so much simpler when one recognises that hard work is needed to accomplish anything of value. Hard work can then be embraced wholeheartedly, and this leads to a deeper happiness than mere diversion or entertainment can ever bring. A traditional understanding of education means that both teacher and pupil know that they are doing something serious and important, on which the continuation of human civilisation depends. Everything they are doing has a purpose, and it is a purpose which goes beyond mere individual gratification, and raises every person to real human dignity, as a member of a community who makes a contribution to its present health and its future existence

Dr Anthony Radice, The Traditional Teacher, Downloaded here

The Gove Reforms

Michael Gove was the UK’s coalition government education secretary, (2010 - 2014). He was instrumental in bringing about a fundamental change in English schooling and one of the key features of his education vision was for a return to a liberal education. For a recent presentation by Gove, advocating the principles of liberal education see the video here. Whilst it is clearly politically motivated, the speech nevertheless advocates for a liberal education.

Whilst my attention in this module has focused on a Western view of liberal education, the general principle of a traditionalist view of education can be found across a range of non-Western cultures. For example, pursuing a ‘good life’ through studying traditional practices and knowledge can be found in Confucian education (see: Non-western Educational Traditions, T. Reagan, (2005) ISBN 0-8058-4857-6) and, in the Indian context, the work of Singh, (see: The Educational Heritage of Ancient India: How an ecosystem of learning was laid to waste, S. Singh, (2017) pub. Notion Press, ISBN 978-1-947586-52-9)

Liberal Learning: Critique

The liberal tradition is highly seductive for at least two reasons. First, it appeals to, and can be manipulated easily in supporting those who advocate a position of ‘power over’. Second, it throws up some pedagogical problems especially around curriculum and passivity. In some respects its attraction lies in the notion that there was a better time ‘way back then’ and assumptions that the contemporary complexities of relativism and constructivism do not relate to those distant times. In other words, classical and traditional eras were as subject to the mis-use of power and oppression as currently. What this means is that invariably the golden era, much heralded by liberalists, was dominated by patriarchal, European norms and values. The classical sources are predominantly male and privileged whilst the weak or vulnerable, or marginalised or ‘othered’ are women, non-white and poor.

Despite Oakshott and others’ best efforts, the pupil in the liberal education is passive. Passive in the sense that they are seen as awaiting and being subject to the inheritance (whether or not they ask for it, need it or want it!). Clearly this starting point is in direct opposition to those advocating a student-centred approach in which the pupil is regarded as a co-constructor of meaning; this is a key discounting in the liberal frame of reference. Certainly in the UK the liberal approach is entwined with class and the mainstay of the ‘content’ heavily favours an upper and aspirant middle class view of the world. It is the manners and arguments of the classical thinkers, the aristocrats of ancient times that form the basis of a liberal education, not the stories of working people. So there is a potential elitism, or exclusivity, that accompanies a liberal education.

A more practical problem with liberal approaches is the question of the curriculum; what is ‘in’ and what is ‘out’? Precisely what constitutes a liberal education? This has been especially pronounced in recent years with debates about including texts in an exam literature syllabus, and the lens through which history is taught. These practicalities can swiftly raise questions as to the relevance of the liberal tradition in contemporary times, that the march of relativism has so far advanced that it is no longer possible to reclaim a credible and coherent curriculum.

One of the confusions about critiquing liberal education is due to it being conflated with the concept of schooling. Supporters of the approach argue that what is often referred to as liberal education is actually a poor substitute designed to ‘fit’ inappropriately into schools. By doing so, the pure idea of liberal education is contaminated by a range of mechanistic issues around testing, social-political interventions and school organisation. This is especially frustrating given that liberal education is firmly opposed to being incorporated into the contemporary business of the world.