Tripartite System of Education - Assignment Example

Tripartite System of Education Tripartite System of Education Introduction This paper presents a proposal to reintroduce the tripartite system of education that was in use in England and Wales during and after the World War II from 1944 in to the 1970s (Nind, Rix, Sheehy, & Simmons, 2003, pp. 37). This education system was also replicated in Northern Ireland between 1947 and 2009. The proposal will endeavor to discuss the tripartite education system by highlighting its background, strengths and weakness as well as the reasons for supporting this system. The essay will also explore some of the weaknesses and criticisms that the system has received, some of which led to its abolition in 1976. Summary The tripartite education system introduced three levels of state funded education in England and Wales comprising of Primary school education, secondary school education and further or higher education. Primary school, also known as grammar school education was the first stage of learning, accommodating children up to the age of 11. It was further subdivided into three levels namely infant, nursery and junior levels (Bailey, 2010, pp. 26). The Secondary school or technical grammar schools represent the second level, which initially enrolled children between 11 and 15 years, although this was later increased to 16 beginning from 1973. Further education or Secondary Modern School, unlike the other two levels, was optional and admitted students beyond 16 years of age (Tomlinson, 2005, pp. 48). The tripartite education system was introduced in England and Wales as a response to the Prime Minister’s desire to create an inclusive society where each individual would have equal opportunity to enjoy advantages and privileged available in the country (Baldock, 2011, pp. 13). There was a great desire among the English people to create an identity of their own through the education system that would help individuals transition from the effects of the World War II to live independent lives. The tripartite system was then identified as the best alternative to empower the British society and promote development of skills among the emerging crop of youths in the country. This system was spearheaded by people in the country such as Sir Cyril Burt, a prominent psychologist and Herwald Ramsbotham, president of the Board of Education at the time. The Tripartite system was relatively successful in the beginning before education became highly politicized in England and Wales, leading to abolition of the system and introduction of the Comprehensive System. Background Before the Education Act of 1944, there was no universal education system in Britain. Education was basically an ad hoc creation that differed from one region to the other across the country. A majority of schools during this period were either created by the local government or private entities and had their own educational values. Basic education was relatively inaccessible because it was expensive while secondary school was mainly a preserve of the upper class and a few middle class individuals who could afford. In the 20th century, many countries in Europe including France, Sweden, Germany, and Italy began establishing state funded education systems. England sought to adopt a similar move by implementing a state-run education system. This resulted in the birth of the Butler Education Act of 1944, which greatly revolutionized the education sector in various aspects such creating a ministry of education and making secondary education a right to every individual in the country. The origins of the tripartite education system can be traced back to 1940 when Winston Churchill took over as Prime Minister. The Board of Education met in the same year and began deliberations on how to improve the education system in the post war era of England and Wales. The Board later released several recommendations in a confidential Green Book titled Education after the war, in July 1941. Most of the recommendations in the Green Book later formed a larger part of the Education Act in 1944, which established the Tripartite Education System. Sir Cyril Butt, an influential psychologist, was also a leading figure in the movement that led to creation of the tripartite education system (Wilkinson, & Pickett, 2010, pp. 83). He was of the opinion that educational ability was an inheritable trait that could be accessed through exams. He, therefore, believes that the education system centered around exam performance would help to recognize students with great educational abilities and give them greater chances of advancing their knowledge (Meighan, & Harber, 2007, pp. 63). The students who underperformed in the exams were given a chance in technical schools to advance their technical skills. The main objective of this education system was to afford individuals an equal opportunity to advance their knowledge and skills as early as age 11. At the time of drafting the Education Act, there were several theories of education alluding to the fact that students had different learning abilities and differing aptitudes. These theories prompted the government to seek for an education system that would help each student realize their potential from the education they received. Exams were identified as the best method of testing student’s abilities and allocating each of the students an appropriate school where they would learn easily and advance their knowledge and skills. The 11+ exams then became the basis of allocating students to secondary schools based on merit. Advantages and Strengths of the System Like any other major government policy, the tripartite education system had its strengths and challenges. One of the strengths of the system includes the fact that it recognized merit in education. In the tripartite education system, pupils and students were enrolled to their respective schools based on merit after sitting for their 11+ (plus) national examinations. This was very important because the system recognized hard work and different abilities of students before admitting them to the schools that would facilitate them to realize their potential. The students who performed better would join grammar schools while the others would be enrolled in technical schools (Collini, 2012, pp. 54). The other major strength of the tripartite system was that it afforded equal opportunity for all students to access education. The system provided separate but equal opportunities to all students in the country (Jones, 2003, pp. 90). The Education Act stated that each school ought to provide an environment, which can accommodate all students in terms of the infrastructure put in place and the main objective of recognizing skills and talents of each student. The tripartite education system also promoted advancement of various skills among students apart from their academic development (Kassem, & Garratt, 2009, pp. 81). While the main objective of the education system was to determine the academic performance of students and categorize them accordingly for enrolment in secondary schools, the system also supported development of technical skills and talents among students from a very young age. Challenges and Weaknesses of the System Some of the challenges of the tripartite education system emerged from misconceptions and misunderstandings about the nature and impact of the education system (Marr, 2007, pp. 77). One of the issues of contention that led to the abolition of the tripartite education system was the misunderstanding of the need and the selection process for pupils to join grammar schools. The 11 plus exam was also perceived in some sections of the public as being very divisive and promoting labeling at a very young age among students. Another undoing of this education system is that it completely excluded the private sector from its scope. The ministry of education was only concerned with public education and could not, therefore, control private schools (Ellsmore, 2005, pp, 94). As a result, private schools continued to charge exorbitant fees and offering a better environment for education, which attracted the well off families. This led to great inequalities between students in government-sponsored schools and those from private institutions in terms of the quality of education. This was a major challenge because the tripartite education system was meant to curb these inequalities. The other challenge to the tripartite education system is that it did not have the backing of some of the local authorities in both England and Wales (Collini, 2012, pp. 26). This is because the government restricted its role only to provide funds for supporting the education system but left the responsibility for implementing the system to local authorities. In the process, some local authorities continued to support comprehensive schools, at the expense of the tripartite system like most of the local authorities. Reasons for supporting Re-introduction of the Tripartite System Having examined the tripartite education system in detail, it comes out clearly that the objectives and intentions of the system were aimed at improving the education sector in the country (Chitty, 2009, pp. 47). Eradicating the system from the educational framework in England and Wales was a major undoing for the country. The main reason the tripartite system should be reintroduced is the fact that it promotes equality among students. Despite the criticism the system received during its implementation, it remains the best education system for maintain equality (Ball, 2008, pp. 31). The tripartite system ensured that all students had their needs and abilities catered for in the course of their studies. The other reason the system should be reintroduced is that it was relatively successful in the postwar era (Ball, 2006, pp. 103). Most of the challenges and weaknesses of the system come from weaknesses in administration and implementation of the system rather than the objectives and intentions of the system (Frost, 2011, pp, 42). These challenges became predominant because there were no mechanisms to streamline the education system throughout the country. The level of technology in the education sector was relatively low (Bottery, 2000, pp. 74). Re-introducing the tripartite system today will be very successful because there are robust systems and mechanisms in place to manage and streamline operations across all schools. Bibliography Bailey, R. (2010). The Philosophy of Education: an Introduction London: Continuum. Baldock, P. (2011). Developing Early Childhood Services: Past, Present and Future Maidenhead: Open University. Ball, S. (2008). The Education Debate Bristol: Policy Press. Ball, S. J. (2006). Education and Social Class: The Selected Works of Stephen J. Ball Abingdon: Routledge. Bottery, M. (2000). Education, Policy and Ethics London: Continuum. Chitty, C. (2009). Education Policy in Britain Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Collini, S. (2012). What Are Universities For? London: Penguin. Ellsmore, S. (2005). Carry On Teacher! Representations of the teaching profession in screen culture Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Frost, N. (2011). Rethinking Children and Families: the relationship between childhood, families and the state London: Continuum. Jones, K. (2003). Education in Britain: 1944 to the Present Cambridge: Polity. Kassem, D. & Garratt, D. (2009). Exploring Key Issues in Education London: Continuum Marr, A. (2007). A History of Modern Britain London: Macmillan. Meighan, R. & Harber, C. (2007). A Sociology of Educating London: Continuum. Nind, M., Rix, J., Sheehy, K. & Simmons, K. (2003). Inclusive Education: Diverse Perspectives Milton Keynes: David Fulton & Open University. Tomlinson, S. (2005). Education in a Post Welfare Society Maidenhead: Open University Press. Wilkinson, R. & Pickett, K. (2010). The Spirit Level London: Penguin. Read More