The Enduring Nature of Egalitarian Education in Scandinavia: an English Perspective

FORUM Volume 51, Number 2, 2009 www.wwwords.co.uk/FORUM The Enduring Nature of Egalitarian Education in Scandinavia: an English perspective SUSANNE WIBORG ABSTRACT It is the aim of this article to contribute towards an understanding of why Scandinavia and England have achieved very different levels of social integration in their state school systems. Introduction From an English perspective, the Scandinavian countries appear to have a rather radical form of education. Throughout Denmark, Norway and Sweden, an almost universal public school from grade 1 to 9 or 10 with mixed ability classes has been introduced. The primary and lower secondary parts of the public school are integrated into one system of all-through education, where selection to further education is postponed until the age of 15 or 16. The private school sector is relatively small, and even though it has expanded to some extent over the last decade, especially in Denmark and Sweden, it still remains a limited sector. Moreover, the schools within the private sector are not elitist preserved for a wealthy class, but educational, political and religious in orientation, catering for those who wish to uphold certain values and beliefs. They do not operate a system of entrance exams in order to select the most “academic gifted” children; nor do they charge school fees that only wealthy parents can afford but variable fees based on parental income. Moreover, the schools are funded by the state up to 90 per cent. In this way, the egalitarian principle has been extended to the private sector. It is interesting to note in this respect that the Swedish private schools, Kunskabsskolan, which are currently receiving political attention in the United Kingdom, are basically comprehensive in their organisation. They divert from the comprehensive principle only by 117 Susanne Wiborg being privately managed and financed through a state school voucher system. The entire school system in Scandinavia – both the public as well as the private system – can thus be described as egalitarian in nature. This is in stark contrast with the English school system, where comprehensive education has not been fully adopted, but only partially introduced. Also streaming and setting are in use throughout the system including in the lower secondary phase. In addition, the private sector is, in contrast to Scandinavia, relatively large and the public schools and the remaining grammar schools are elitist in the true sense of the word. With these major contrasts in mind, it is the aim of this article to contribute towards an understanding of why Scandinavia and England obtained very different levels of integration in their state school systems. Political Liberalism: the early beginnings A striking contrast between the countries of Scandinavia and England is that the development of comprehensive education began much earlier in the former countries than in the latter. Already in the mid-nineteenth century, a political discussion had started in Scandinavia about the academic and social values of common schooling, and a few decades later, a partial comprehensive school system was in place. On the contrary, in England comprehensive schools were introduced only after the end of the Second World War. However, in doing this, England was no exception as most European countries, such as France, Spain and Germany, also only embarked on comprehensive education after the War. The Scandinavian countries are therefore quite unique by initiating a development toward integration of the school system at this relatively early time in history. Scandinavia, as well as most other European countries, had in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries parallel education systems, which consisted of an elementary school attended by children of rural and urban working classes, and a secondary school which enrolled children from the bourgeoisie. This system came under increasing attack in Scandinavia for the reason that it catered for only the upper strata of the society, leaving the main bulk of the population with merely rudimentary learning. Hence, it was suggested to use education as a means of creating ‘class circulation’, or, with a modern phrase, ‘social cohesion’. The way in which this was pursued was by introducing a middle school that would ultimately break down the parallel system. The lower part of the nine year secondary school was abolished in order for the middle school to serve as a bridge between the elementary school and what was now the upper secondary school. The middle school was introduced in Norway already in 1869, and later in Denmark, in 1903, and in Sweden a couple of years later, in 1905 (Wiborg, 2009). By then all the Scandinavian countries had introduced a partial system of comprehensive schooling. At the same time, private schools were in rapid decline due to lack of state funding in order to ensure that the elementary school would serve as a proper basis for secondary education. In this state controlled ladder system of education, children could, 118 EGALITARIAN EDUCATION IN SCANDINAVIA regardless of social class background, progress all the way through according to academic ability and aptitude. This system had at this time in history no counterpart in Europe. In England and continental Europe the eight/nine year secondary schools were maintained intact, though slowly opening up to pupils from “less fortunate” backgrounds, which upheld a parallel system of education. The middle school that created the ladder system of education in Scandinavia was introduced by the Liberal parties. The Liberal parties were politically dominant toward the end of the nineteenth century after successfully having fought against the Conservative parties: the parties that had supported and nourished the parallel system of education for decades. The Liberal parties were unique in being based primarily on the support of rural farmers and not the urban middle class, as they were on the continent and in Britain. The successful political mobilisation of the farmers into Liberal parties is a result of their previous organisation in farmers’ unions and organisations, which began already during the early decades of nineteenth century. In Denmark this was made possible due to the early abolition of feudal ties in 1788 which allowed the peasantry through landownership to improve their social and economic position. In Norway and Sweden the peasantry was never made subject to feudal ties but was always free (Bjørn, 1988; Seip, 1981; Carlsson, 1954). The schooling of the peasantry in public elementary schools, which resulted in the highest literacy rate in Europe, and the popular adult education received in the so-called Grundtvigian folk-high schools, integrated them gradually into the society as active political citizens (Korsgaard & Wiborg, 2006; Salmonson, 1968). The Liberals stood for economic liberalism, especially in respect to foreign trade, and limited state interference. However, shaped by the rural society’s communal way of living, the Liberals were in opposition to the bourgeoisie whose political, social and economical dominance they sought to curtail. Regarding education, the Liberals did see a role for the state to play as they wished to replace the elitist school system of the bourgeoisie with a system that would enhance the social mixing in the society. Hence they advocated a middle school that would link the elementary school and the secondary school together into a ladder system of education. Once the Liberal parties achieved governmental power, they immediately broke down the parallel system of education by introducing the middle school. It is striking, in fact, that this ladder system of education could be introduced taking into account that political Liberalism was not particular powerful in Scandinavia. The Liberal parties gained their strongest foothold in Denmark and were weaker in Norway and especially in Sweden, where the party hardly had any significance and was soon bypassed by the Social Democrats. Political Liberalism was according to Luebbert (1991) weaker in Norway and Sweden than in Denmark primarily because it was marked by stronger urban and rural cleavages. These cleavages became an obstacle for the Liberal parties to function as a united political force. By contrast, the Danish Liberal party was based on a rather homogeneous mass of the rural middle class (including small independent farmers) that enabled it to achieve a more 119 Susanne Wiborg sustained political influence. Moreover, the Liberal parties were in decline in the interwar period, due to loss of voters as a result of a fall in the rural population. In addition, the small holders broke out of the Liberal party to establish their own party and the nascent Social Democrats made attempts to organise the farm labourers in trade unions and politically. Society was developing too fast for the Liberals to remain a broad agricultural party presenting all groups within agriculture. The explanation of the successful introduction of the middle school does not, therefore, depend entirely on the strength of political Liberalism but rather on its form. This becomes evident when Britain is taken into account because political Liberalism in Britain made its strongest showing in all of Europe and yet this did not lead to any radical education reforms as seen in Scandinavia. Rather, the explanation seems therefore to lie in the different class base and ideological nature of British Liberalism. Liberalism has its roots in the freedoms and civic rights which were the legacy of the 1688 Settlement in Britain, and which gained in momentum during the eighteenth century, not least with Adam Smith’s thoughts on the liberal political economy. Initially, the political standard of the Whig aristocracy, and their allies amongst the landed gentry and the merchant and financial interests, liberalism by the mid-nineteenth century had become a bourgeois political creed, par excellence, supported by the manufacturers and the majority of the middle classes, as well as by substantial sections of the landed class which were won over to free trade in the 1840s.

Load more