23 -29 May 2002 Issue No.587 Chronicles	Current issue Previous issue Site map
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875		Recommend this page

Al-Ahram: A Diwan of contemporary life (442)

Schools of thought

The autumn of 1929 was the season of pressing educational concerns. Among the issues were conditions governing admittance into secondary school, the creation of teacher training institutes and the law on compulsory education. In Al-Ahram, intellectuals wrote their opinions, some widely divergent. As Professor Yunan Labib Rizk* discovers, there were plenty of class struggles

---

Click to view caption Ihsan Mohamed El-Qawsi

Occupying extensive space in Al-Ahram in 1929 were commentaries and analyses of various educational issues which made headlines that year. The topics under review frequently turned into heated debates among such intellectual luminaries of the time as Mansour Fahmi, Mai Ziyada, Ihsan Mohamed El-Qawsi, Ismail El-Qabbani and Amir Baqtar. While some of the questions under scrutiny were highly abstract and theoretical and, consequently, solely of interest to specialists, others were of immediate, practical importance.

Al-Ahram addressed one major concern, that of secondary schools, in its editorial of 2 October 1929 under the headline, "The current educational problem and the means to alleviate it." Parents were increasingly voicing the grievance that government secondary schools were not admitting many children who had obtained the primary school certificate that year, the writer observed. A similar crisis had arisen two years earlier, although the then Minister of Education, Ali El-Shamsi, managed to have new classrooms built in the existing secondary schools. Nevertheless, he added, existing public secondary schools were very few -- only 20; seven in Cairo, two in Alexandria and the rest spread out among the provincial capitals. Even though classroom enrolment was allowed to rise to 50, making the classrooms unacceptably overcrowded, the available space could only accommodate a relatively small proportion of the large numbers of primary school graduates.

The fault for this situation, in the writer's opinion, dated back to the policies promoted by the erstwhile British adviser to the Ministry of Education, Douglas Dunlop. For an extended period around the turn of the century, Dunlop wanted to stop government schools from becoming "a factory" for the production of government employees and civil servants. He thus introduced measures to ensure that these "factories produce only a certain number of graduates every year."

Now, the solution was to introduce the necessary reforms to restore confidence in the public school system. "Towards this end a number of concerned individuals have suggested that instead of giving financial assistance directly to the principles of those schools to spend as they wish, it should be allocated towards hiring competent teachers."

To complement this suggestion, the editorial writer urged the Ministry of Education to instruct municipal councils around the country to open more schools. He further appealed to "philanthropic and academic groups" to establish a "community-based Ministry of Education" to work towards fulfilling the nation's need for primary and secondary schools.

Not all agreed that the solution was so simple. Writing under the headline, "Expanding classroom size and building more schools is not enough," the famous commentator and poet Mai Ziyada held that the problem was not in quantity. "Diversifying our schools to provide for more and varied agricultural, technical an occupational training has become inevitable. This is the natural result of the national awakening, of the ubiquitous call for freedom. This is how to emerge from stagnation to opening the doors of possibility," she wrote.

A more significant contribution were the four articles by "the eminent Ihsan Ahmed El-Qawsi" who appended her signature with the accreditation, "Baccalaureate in Literature and Licentiate in Education." Parents' grievances were legitimate," she wrote, "and addressing their concerns required radical measures that would change the atmosphere of the schools and the methods of instruction so as to conform with the spirit of the age and advancements in modern educational sciences." Reforms would have to extend from "altering the curricula in a manner consistent with the needs of the country and the diverse aptitudes of the students to mobilising public concern and cooperation towards raising the standard of government schools and increasing the number of schools in order to solve the current crisis and better disseminate culture and learning throughout the country."

El-Qawsi advocated a pedagogy that brought out and developed students' individual aptitudes to the utmost. She recommended emulating the system in the United States, "which has universalised secondary education, having rendered it free of charge, thereby bringing it within reach of all classes and individual members of society." She also lauded the fundamental changes that were introduced into the American educational curriculum. Whereas it had formerly offered a purely classical education, "subjects were dropped and others introduced. The criterion in the selection process was the practical value of a subject in modern life."

A new curriculum required new pedagogic approaches to contend with the more practical sciences that were being introduced, as well as new textbooks. But what she particularly admired was the "diversity of curricula, offering a flexibility that permits students to select courses that best suit their individual needs and proclivities," and "industrial guidance which has become one of the most important factors in secondary education."

In Egypt, El-Qawsi observed, many students left school before completing their secondary studies, generally because of economic reasons. A more flexible, diverse and stimulating curriculum, she believed, would encourage students to remain in school or at least ensure that "they would have obtained the maximum benefit from their education" if they are forced to drop out.

The question of curricula led the educationalist to a discussion of the functions of secondary school education. It should equip students for life in their society, in which respect it was important to remain cognisant of the constants of a particular society and elements that were undergoing continuous change. Secondary schooling should also inculcate students with "a social spirit," so as to generate greater sense of unity of purpose and mutual commitment in society. Developing such a spirit was essential at a time when one of the most fundamental changes occurring in Egyptian society was increasing diversification, for which reason secondary school education also had to channel students according to their individual capacities.

As it prepared students for pursuing higher education, secondary schools had to ensure a logical progression from one level to the next. This could entail modifications to the curriculum as well as to the screening system, in accordance with which students would advance or be phased out "because their natural abilities would not permit them to keep pace with their peers." In the latter case, El-Qawsi was quick to add, "this does not mean that they (the slower students) should be deprived of an education."

Another important function of secondary schools was to furnish "diagnosis and guidance." She explains, "Individual diversity in aptitudes and skills presupposes that every individual should engage in those occupational activities that they can perform better than others." Secondary school, therefore, "should offer the necessary subjects needed for the diverse fields of life and grant students the opportunity to test their strengths and discover and develop their interests. However, the responsibility of the school does not end here. It must also contribute to forming students through diagnosing their psychological frame of mind and personal circumstances so as to better guide them to their optimum performance."

In the last of her four articles, El-Qawsi turned to the increasing demand for higher education, together with the limited place available in higher educational institutions. It was a problem that required one of two solutions. Either the curricula should be modified to ensure that secondary school graduates were practically equipped for productive work, that is "if we do not want secondary schooling to be restricted to those who aspire to higher education." Or the government should build new schools around the country for students who, for one reason or another, cannot pursue higher studies, and in which students will be given the necessary theoretical instruction and practical exposure in fields of activity which best suit the region in which the school has been established. "Such schools exist in France, Germany, Britain and the US where it was perceived that practical education should meet the diverse needs of society."

On 19 October 1929, the front page of Al-Ahram featured a lengthy interview with an individual it dubbed "the Great Educator." The man favoured deferring the abolishment of teacher academies and the establishment of a college of education until a more appropriate time.

The system of teacher academies still prevailed "in countries that have preceded us in this domain, because the making of teachers requires a special process of refinement to instill in them a love of the system that they, in turn, should impart to their students. This is not the task of a university. Add to this is that the department of higher studies in the Modern Institute of Education only admits individuals who have completed four years of university. This condition deprives a large segment of the populace from access to such a college in view of the attendant need to be able to afford university tuition fees." At that time, instruction in teacher academies was tuition-free, in addition to which the government also offered monthly allowances in order to encourage enrolment in these academies.

The admission problem with the graduate studies department of the proposed college of education was one reason why "the government allowed it to go to its grave before it was born." However, the project had other disadvantages. For one, the undergraduate department, which produced primary school teachers, was also destined to fail. On the one hand, the curricula were inappropriate and on the other, "the avenues to professional advancement will be closed to the graduates of this department, restricting their entire careers to primary school education and dashing their hopes for the future."

Taking the opposing stance was Ismail Mahmoud El-Qabbani, who would later acquire widespread fame as a practical educational theorist and would eventually become the deputy minister of education following the 1952 Revolution. In a series of articles appearing under the headline, "On founding a college of education," El-Qabbani criticised those who allowed political party affiliations to govern their judgment. The founding of a college of education had been a pet project of the previous cabinet, and El-Qabbani writes, "Although I never supported that government or its party, one's aversion to the political comportment of the government is one thing and one's judgment on significant educational enterprises is another."

El-Qabbani reminded readers that the idea of founding a college of education had its origins three years earlier when professors from the Higher Teachers' Institute unanimously agreed that their old and outmoded system was incapable of producing teachers "imbued with scientific spirit and love for investigation and discovery." Nevertheless, many still had major reservations about founding a college of education. First, the concept of such colleges was still under study in Europe and, secondly, instruction would be in English although graduates would be taught in Arabic.

The first contention, he countered, was quite simply inaccurate and based on a careless reading of the reports submitted by the Swiss educational expert brought over by the minister of education to study the issue. If people had read these reports thoroughly they would have found frequent references to the many already existing colleges of education in the US, Germany and Austria. With regard to the language of instruction, El-Qabbani pointed out that although it was true that most of the subjects in the humanities department would be taught in English, "because that department produces English teachers above all else," in the science department all subjects would be taught in Arabic, with the exception of certain classes in history and geography, as students from both departments attended these lectures.

In a second article, El-Qabbani charged that opponents of the new college were rigid and averse to change. Indeed, they reminded him of some of the people in his village when fresh water was first introduced. He recalls how the villagers "cursed that sinister innovation and blamed it for all the evils and illnesses that befell them. And why should they not, now that they found themselves deprived of the sweet waters of the Nile? After all, is there any water equal to these silt-saturated waters? Is there any other water that can simultaneously quench thirst and build up muscles?"

Clearly, El-Qabbani continues, the resistance to change does not prevail among only common folk. It is to be found among all "who are unable to abandon the familiar and whose minds cannot stretch to imagine the new." As a result, "just as a child is paralysed by fear of the dark, their judgment is clouded by that natural fear of every unknown that looms before them, and they wail for rescue from that fearsome thing to which they are unaccustomed."

Another argument made by the opponents of the college was that the teacher academies had reached their peak through "rational opinion and insight" after studying European counterparts, and that this was manifested in "the many teaching and administrative posts occupied by the graduates of these institutes in our country." But, if that is the case, El-Qabbani asks, why is the nation still bemoaning the inadequacy of the educational system? Certainly, the problem cannot reside with the Egyptian child, for "intellectually he is not resistant to learning and psychologically is not resistant to proper upbringing. What then accounts for the failure that crowns the efforts of our schools?"

As they would be the first to be affected by the new university college, students from the teaching academies spoke out in defence of their institutes against which, they charged, a field day had been declared by anyone with the paltriest knowledge of their affairs. In their letter to Al-Ahram, which took up more than a page, they asserted that the Egyptian University failed to provide certain prerequisites for producing suitable teachers. Among these was a system that inculcated a spirit of social responsibility, a work ethic and a more practical focus on the elements of teaching. In all events, they claimed, "the academic degrees the university offers in the humanities and sciences are by no means less demanding than the humanities and science diplomas of the teacher academy."

The dispute between the proponents and opponents of the teacher academies and the Institute of Higher Education remained for some time to come. It was only much later when the academies and the institute were merged into a single faculty of education that the controversy ended.

On 19 November 1929, Al-Ahram initiated the discussion on compulsory education with its announcement that the Ministry of Education's supervisor for primary education was doing his utmost to finalise a bill to institute compulsory education, to be presented to parliament in the hopes that it would be put into effect at the beginning of the following year. "Egypt is looking forward to the day when this law is passed and on that day we will declare a national holiday to mark the burial of illiteracy," the newspaper declared.

Not all received the news with equal enthusiasm. Prominent among these was the eminent Mai Ziyada, who addressed the issue under the lengthy headline: "The Ministry of Education and compulsory education: We all want to eradicate illiteracy, but on condition that education does not become a cause for the spread of unemployment."

In Ziyada's opinion the proponents of the bill had not given sufficient study to its consequences. If they had they would realise that it would probably be wiser to defer the law on compulsory education for another quarter century. The nation's educational system was fundamentally flawed, and addressing this problem demanded attention to three major considerations: first, the social circumstances and educational aims of the student; second, the need to establish schools that conform to the nation's economic and commercial revival and, third, "since Egypt is by nature an agrarian country, most of the recipients of an education will remain in their villages and the degree of education they receive should serve to improve the various aspects of their lives and the milieu in which they live."

The commentator-poet then draws attention to the problem of idle degree holders. "If the purpose of education is to produce learned effendis whose general headquarters are located in coffeehouses or bars as they await jobs to descend upon them on the wings of merciful angels, then ignorance is preferable. If the purpose of education is to hurl scholars into the nation's capital and major cities, burdening these cities with idle hands while paralysing the countryside for lack of labour power and sufficient energies, then ignorance is better. If the purpose of education is to generate youths with kerchiefs dangling out of their breastpockets and neckties adorned with glittering pins, debating the views of Saint Simon, Rousseau and Bernard Shaw in gatherings they take to be their own special parliament, then ignorance is better than knowledge."

Locking horns with Ziyada over this issue was Amir Baqtar. A prominent expert in education, Baqtar received his PhD from Columbia University in New York in 1924, after which he embarked on a career in the American University in Cairo, becoming chair of its department of education and, eventually, dean of faculty in 1952.

Ziyada clearly misunderstood the notion of compulsory education, he charged. "She thinks higher education produces young intellectual men and women, versed in modern foreign languages and their literature, in the principles of political and economic sciences, natural and sociological sciences and mathematics. She believes compulsory education produces classes of white collar workers."

Not surprisingly, in view of his educational background, Baqtar draws on the American experience to correct this impression. "The American people are proud to engage in manual labour, into which domains they embark with cheerful faces regardless of the level they have reached in society. This is because their schools have inculcated in them respect for the dignity of labour and because the curricula are interspersed with various courses in industries and crafts. As a result, the young graduates from American colleges find no shame in washing dishes, working as porters or in mines because they consider the dirt that clings to their clothes in the course of such occupations to be clean and honorable dirt."

The American University professor could be witty, too, but in this case his sarcasm was directed at her. Compulsory education, he would have her know, is very simple. "It aims to educate all the sons and daughters of the nation, imparting to them the essential principles of reading, writing and arithmetic." By way of elucidating the importance of such instruction, he asks, "How are the people of our nation, in the cities and the countryside, supposed to read the bulletins posted by the Ministry of Health with regard to infectious diseases? How are they to understand the Interior Ministry's notices on security and locusts, or the schedules and directions in train stations, or the instructions posted in the courthouses? How do you expect them to beware of pickpockets when they are unable to read that simple sign that says, 'Beware of pickpockets!'"

Baqtar's views won acclaim from the parliamentary representative from Sirs Al-Leyan who wrote to Al-Ahram to say that he had begun to disseminate Baqtar's ideas among his constituency. He added that he observed an increasing trend among primary school graduates to shun the liberal professions and seek employment in other jobs, "regardless of how low their status."

Ziyada, however, appeared unconvinced, as is evidenced by a subsequent article to Al-Ahram, the headline of which sums up its substance: "Make compulsory education a remedy, not an ailment. Compulsory education cannot cure unless you link it with jobs." If Ziyada refused to throw in the towel, so did Baqtar, who charged that Ziyada's opinions on the subject were "unexpectedly reactionary" and that she only saw one side of the forthcoming draft bill.

While the row between the AUC professor and the eminent writer seemed to end in a standoff, the controversy over compulsory education remains alive today. But then, many other crucial educational questions remain bones of contention between advocates of change and those championing tradition.

* The author is a professor of history and head of Al-Ahram History Studies Centre.

Send a letter to the Editor Recommend this page

Egypt | Region | Economy | Opinion | Letters | Culture | Features Living | Travel | Sports | Profile | People | Time Out | Chronicles | Cartoons | Crossword

ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise!

WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg

Al-Ahram Organisation