In 1940, John and Morag Aitkenhead set up Kilquhanity School in rural Galloway, inspired by the writings of A.S. Neill and the practices at Summerhill School. In 1962, Aitkenhead wrote that he had swallowed ‘hook, line and sinker’ Neill's theories and that ‘but for him and his example, there could never have been this free school in Scotland’. Historians and commentators have tended to share his view, for example, describing Aitkenhead as a ‘disciple’ of Neill and Kilquhanity as an (...) ‘approximate’ of Summerhill with its weekly meeting, informality of relations between adults and children and a valuing of freedom and happiness over academic achievement.However, this article, drawing on primary research with ex-pupils and staff, uncovers significant differences of philosophy and practice between the two schools, particularly in relation to pupils’ contribution to the Kilquhanity School community through the daily practice of ‘useful work’. These differences raise questions about the positioning of Kilquhanity as simply a less well-known and less radical ‘Summerhill in Scotland’ and expose an often neglected fault line within the progressive and radical movements with which both schools are associated. (shrink)

After Cambridge, Morton became a teacher at a grammar schoolMorton, Arthur Lesliechildhood (grammar school) in Steyning, Sussex. He was unhappy in conservative Steyning but there were outlets. He started readingMorton, Arthur Lesliereading interests as a teenager the Communist press and met the bohemian poet and publisher Victor Neuburg (aka “Vickybird,”Neuburg, Victor (aka Vickybird or Vicky) former disciple of the occultist Aleister CrowleyCrowley, Aleister). Neuburg’s home became a hub for the few people with any left-of-centre views. Morton discussed William BlakeBlake, William (...) and English radical history with Neuburg and began publishing historical materialist understandings of the history of magicMagic. The two became lifelong friends and the relationship was an early example of Morton being able to interact critically with people of different ideological persuasions. Around this time, Morton also started publishing works of literary criticism, including a defence of EliotEliot, T.S. and his vision of Europe, which led to a friendly but professional relationship between the two as Morton undertook reviews for EliotEliot, T.S.’s The CriterionThe Criterion. Morton supported the General StrikeMorton, Arthur LeslieGeneral Strike (1926), support forGeneral Strike (1926) of 1926 which led to his redundancy in 1927. He moved back to SuffolkSuffolk and started working at A. S. NeillNeill, A.S.’s progressive Summerhill SchoolSummerhill School. The school attracted a small collection of Communist teachers, including Bronwen JonesJones, Bronwenwho MortonMorton, Arthur Lesliemarriage to and relationship with Bronwen soon marriedMorton, BronwenJones, Bronwen and with whom he had a son. (shrink)

A volume in Landscapes of Education. In From Socrates to Summerhill and Beyond: Towards a Philosophy of Education for Personal Responsibility, Ronald Swartz offers an evolving development of fallible, liberal democratic, self-governing educational philosophies. He suggests that educators can benefit from having dialogues about questions such as these: 1). Are there some authorities that can be consistently relied upon to tell school members what they should do and learn while they are in school? 2.) How should the imagination of (...) social theorists be both used and checked in the development and implementation of innovative educational reforms? 3.) How can teachers in personal responsibility schools help their students learn? These questions are representative of problems that Swartz raises in his book. Swartz identifies four educational programs as personal responsibility schools. These are Little Commonwealth (Homer Lane); Summerhill (A.S.Neill); Orphans Home (Janusz Korczak) and Sudbury Valley School (Daniel Greenberg). Swartz then suggests that these learning environments create social institutions that are liberal, democratic, and self-governing and therefore endorse the policy of personal responsibility. This policy states: All school members, students included, are fallible authorities who should be personally responsible for determining their own school activities and many policies that govern a school. Schools which incorporate this policy can interchangeably be referred to as personal responsibility, self-governing, or Summerhill style schools. In providing an historical and philosophical understanding of Summerhill style schools, Swartz suggests that these educational alternatives have intellectual roots in the ideas associated with Socrates as portrayed in Plato's Apology. Specifically, in personal responsibility schools teachers are not viewed as authorities who attempt to transmit wisdom to their students. Rather, self-governing schools follow the Socratic tradition which claims that teachers can be viewed as fallible authorities who attempt to engage students in dialogues about questions of interest to students. The interpretation of Plato's works used by Swartz can be found in Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies. Swartz has also been significantly influenced by the educational writings of Bertrand Russell and Paul Goodman. Goodman's Compulsory Miseducation makes it clear that schools which follow in the tradition of Summerhill compete with the educational programs that are an outgrowth of John Dewey's writings. In summary, Swartz's book aims to engage educators in dialogues that will lead to improved educational theories and practices. (shrink)

This paper revisits the battle between Summerhill School and the Department for Education and Employment following the damning Ofsted inspection in 1999 that demanded changes to the school’s practice. The focus of the discussion is Paul Hirst’s involvement in the subsequent inspection of Summerhill following the school’s victory against Ofsted in their 2000 appeal at the Independent Schools Tribunal. Drawing on contemporary commentaries on the Ofsted inspection and the court case, alongside Hirst’s work on curriculum and early criticisms (...) of this work, I explore what is meant by ‘a broad and balanced curriculum’—a phrase that lay at the heart of Ofsted’s case against Summerhill. The discussion will question some of the commonly posited oppositions between ‘progressive’ and ‘liberal’ education, and will suggest that such a framing of the issues is an unhelpful way to understand the radical challenge posed by democratic schools such as Summerhill. In focusing on the daily life and ethos of Summerhill as part of an attempt to build and nurture a democratic community, I explore the possibility that Summerhill’s broad conception of learning and curriculum, reflected in the school’s organization and ethos, lends itself to a less narrow and more socially oriented conception of curriculum that is in line with Hirst’s later work on social practices. (shrink)

A. S. Neill, founder of Summerhill, the most admired and most feared of all progressive schools, was famous as a schoolteacher, educational reformer, and author of illuminating and stylish books about education and the mind of the child. But few people know he was also a dedicated, prolific, uninhibited, witty and often mischievous letter writer. This selection of gems, first published in 1983, has been chosen from hundreds of his letters by his biographer. It includes letters about education, children, (...) politics, writing, fatherhood, the Bomb, old age and death. ‘All the best, Neill’ was the familiar ending of his letters to the famous – H. G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, Henry Miller, Paul Goodman, Wilhelm Reich, Homer Lane; to important educators – W. B. Curry of Dartington, John Aitkenhead of Kilquhanity, Bob Mackenzie of Braehead, Dora Russell of Beacon Hill; to unknown friends, parents, and even casual correspondents. To read these letters is to share the company of a great and always delightful man, who wrote each one with the same commitment and gaiety. (shrink)

Paul Goodman, 1960’larda modern Amerikan toplumunun organize sistemi içerisinde dönemin gençliğinin sorunlarını ön plana çıkaran ‘Growing Up Absurd: Problems of Youth in the Organized System’ (Saçmayı Büyütmek: Organize Sistemde Gençliğin Problemleri, 1960) eseri ile sosyal bir eleştirmen olarak ön plana çıkmıştır. Amerikalı bir düşünür olan Paul Goodman’ın kısa öyküler, romanlar, şiirler ve makalelerden oluşan çalışmaları, siyaset, sosyal teori, eğitim, kentsel tasarım, edebi eleştiri, hatta psikoterapi gibi geniş bir yelpazeye dağılmıştır. Onun temel argümanı (1960: 9-10) tek bir merkez etrafında örgütlenen teknoloji (...) toplumunun başarısızlıklarını eleştirerek, mevcut düzenin insanın doğasına uygun bir biçimde yeniden inşasını vurgulamaktadır. Goodman’ın yeniden inşa süreci içerisinde insan doğasına önem veren faaliyete dayalı anarşist ideolojisi, sorumluluk duygusunun homojen bir şekilde bireyler arasında paylaşılması gerektiğini vurgular. Goodman merkeziyetçi olmayan siyaset anlayışı ile kendisini Amerikan siyasetinin ve kültürünün karşısında yer alan bir pozisyonda konumlandırmaktadır (Honeywell, 2011: 1). Diğer bir deyişle Goodman (1960: 36), anarşist geleneği formüle etmek amacıyla yirminci yüzyıl Amerikası’nın içinde bulunmuş olduğu mevcut durumdan yola çıkarak eleştirilerini ademi merkeziyetçilik, katılımcı demokrasi, özerk toplum temaları üzerine temellendirmiştir. -/- Goodman’a göre, sosyal, kültürel, ahlâk ve eğitim gibi alanlarda uygulanan kurallar günümüz devletlerini etkisi altına alan kapitalist düzen tarafından belirlenmektedir (Bakır, 2016: 110). Bu durum Goodman’ın da içerisinde bulunduğu anarşist düşünürler tarafından kabul edilebilecek bir husus değildir, çünkü anarşistler mevcut düzenin ve sosyal yaşamın otorite ve itaat yapılarıyla güçlendirilen belirli yaklaşımlar ile kontrol altına alınmasını, insanların fikirlerini özgürce ifade edemeyeceği, bir nevi entelektüel bir hapishane içerisinde yaşaması anlamına geleceğinden dolayı karşı çıkmaktadırlar (Sheean, 2003: 122). Aynı nedenlerden dolayı Goodman, modern liberalizm ve Marksizm gibi alternatif radikal ideolojileri yerinden yönetim düşüncesi ve sosyal mühendislik konusundaki eğilimleri dolayısıyla reddetmektedir. Goodman için anarşizm, özgürlük ve toplumsal değişime yeterli düzeyde arka çıkabilecek tek ideolojik çerçeve olarak görülmektedir. Ona göre (2010: 143), “anarşizm ya da daha iyisi, anarko-pasifizm (toplumsal değişim hareketleri içerisinde örgütlü şiddete ve kurumlara karşı çıkan anarşist anlayış) günümüzün gelişmiş toplumlarının bürokrasilerini, karar verme konusunda aşırı merkezîleşmelerini ve sosyal mühendislik gibi problematik durumlarını ve tehlikelerini tutarlı bir şekilde öngörmüştür”. -/- Siyaset, sosyoloji ve felsefe gibi çeşitli alanlar içerisinde etkili olan anarşist kuramlar, radikal bir söylem olarak eğitimcileri ve araştırmacıları yeni öğretilere ve uygulamalara teşvik etme konusunda itici bir güç oluşturabilmektedirler. Anarşist yaklaşımlardan eğitim kuramı ve araştırmalara yönelik daha belirleyici bir rol alması beklenmektedir, ancak bu yaklaşımlar mevcut radikal akademik görüşü büyük ölçüde etkisi altına alan Marksizm’in eğitim alanında göstermiş olduğu aynı etkiyi gösterememiştir. Anarşist düşünceleri eğitim alanı içerisinde daha etkili ve görünür kılabilmek amacıyla Paul Goodman, Francisco Ferrer ve Alexander Neill’ın ileri sürmüş olduğu çeşitli düşünceler, girişimler ve uygulamalar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu doğrultuda Goodman’ın anarşizme ilişkin düşünceleri ile bu çalışma sıkı bir anarşizm tahlili, eleştirisi ve felsefesinden öte anarşist anlayışın eğitimdeki uygulanabilirliğine yönelik bir soruşturma içerisine girmekte ve anarşist yaklaşımın mevcut eğitim sistemlerinden hangi yönleriyle farklılaştığını, sonucunda etkili bir eğitim anlayışı ortaya koyup koyamadığını tartışmaktadır. (shrink)

This article explores the context for the accompanying suite of papers on creating and sustaining democratic spaces in education. Prompted by the centenary of Summerhill, the internationally famous democratic school founded in Suffolk, England, in 1921, by A.S. Neill, this collection of papers explores and broadens out the central questions at the heart of experiments in democratic education. We suggest that, at a time of distrust in and questioning of the central institutions of democratic government, and in the wake (...) of challenges to the mainstream system of state schooling, these questions are more relevant than ever. We argue that detailed attention to the everyday practice of creating democratic spaces in a variety of educational and social contexts can highlight the myriad ways in which educators, students, families and communities can keep democratic values and principles alive, thereby enriching our discussions about the meaning and value of democratic education. (shrink)

I explore democractic communities using the classroom community as a metaphor. I suggest that democracies do justice to individuals as well as groups, because of the democratic focus on the interconnected, interdependent, interactive relationship that exists between selves and communities. However, the concept of ‘community’ has problems and contradictions as well. Through the examples of Summerhill and Montessori schools it is easier to see a necessary quality of democratic communities that needs highlighting. That quality is caring. Making the connection (...) between democracy and caring is what this article uniquely offers to the lively discussion on communities and selves. (shrink)

Prompted by the centenary of the founding of Summerhill, in my contribution to this JOPE Suite on Democratic Education, I briefly explore both the admiring reciprocity and the subsidiary but significant differences of praxis between A.S. Neill and Alex Bloom, two remarkable pioneers of education in and for participatory democracy as a way of life. Because A.S. Neill's work is internationally renowned and Alex Bloom's has yet to re-establish the worldwide recognition it had in his own lifetime, my emphasis (...) is on the contribution of Alex Bloom, in large part because he is amongst the most radical pioneers of democratic education the UK state sector has ever known. To a significant degree, the aspirations and actualities of Bloom's work rebutted Neill's insistence that pioneers within the state sector of education could not innovate in ways that would significantly challenge the status quo. Indeed, Alex Bloom extended participatory democratic educational aspirations in ways which Neill did not. Most importantly, these not only entailed a commitment to community engagement, they did so in conditions of abject poverty and profound psychological trauma following the ravages of the Second World War London Blitz with its attendant evacuation and subsequent return to the ruins of their former homes.In the first section, I take as my starting point Alex Bloom's strongly supportive review of A.S. Neill's book The Problem Family and Neill's visit to Bloom's school in the East End of London, some five years later. Foregrounding the dialectic of practice and aspiration, I touch on some of the key issues that emerged for both Neill and Bloom at that time.Challenging Neill's later affirmation that the only significant freedom one can introduce into a state school is ‘a free attitude on the teacher's part, his or her being on the side of the child’ and his reported view that Bloom and others might be able to experiment in methods of teaching or ways of organising the timetable, ‘but not in methods of living’, the second section explores the nature and interrelationship of six key strands woven into the fabric of Alex Bloom's truly remarkable work that exemplified the grounded possibility and vibrant actuality of participatory democracy as a way of living and learning together that prefigures a more just, creative and caring form of human engagement.Locating the foundation of Alex Bloom's praxis within the 20th-century personalist philosophical tradition and its Adlerian psychological counterpart, the brief concluding section draws in particular on the work of John Macmurray who argues, as did Bloom in his own writing and his daily praxis, that ‘The first priority in education—if by education we mean learning to be human—is learning to live in personal relation to other people. Let us call it learning to live in community’. (shrink)

Having left the Daily WorkerDaily Worker, Morton returned to SuffolkSuffolk to live in LeistonLeiston and work at Summerhill. He was immediately involved in the small but thriving Communist movement in the town and in the propaganda paper, the Leiston LeaderLeiston Leader. Meanwhile, A People’s History of England had brought Morton a degree of fame and it began to influence a generation (and beyond) of Communist Party members and socialists. It effectively became the official history of England for the Soviet (...) UnionSoviet Union. This chapter looks at the reception of the book in pageants, reviews, reading groups, lectures, day schools, and the press to show where it was influencing alternative readings of English history. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:THE CURRICULAR ROLE OF RUSSELl?S SCEPTICISM MICHAEL J. ROCKLER Interdisciplinary Studies in Education / National-Louis Universiry Evanston, 1L 60201, USA I n The Prospects of IndustriaL CiviLization, written in collaboration with his wife Dora, Bertrand Russell wrote: The governors of the world believe, and have always believed, that virtue can only be taught by teaching falsehood, and that any man who knew the truth would be wicked. I disbelieve (...) this, absolutely and entirely. I believe that love of truth is the basis of all real virtue, and that virtues based upon lies can only do harm.· This passage reflects Russell's views on scepticism and education; he sought an educational system that would avoid indoctrination and would produce sceptical students. Scepticism, a central aspect of much of Russell's philosophic work, was a primary organizing principle of his writings on education. Russell, a major contributor to educational theory, produced two volumes on education that continue to have considerable relevance for teaching and learning in contemporary society. The first, Education and the Good Life (1926),2 inspired by the births of John and Katharine, focused on the education of young children. In Education and the Good Life, Russell identified the aims of education. These included the development ofvitality, the promotion of courage (which entails the absence of fear), sensitiveness and intelligence. When schools accomplish these ends, they produce young men and women of character who are able to contribute to the well-being of society. 1 (London: Allen & Unwin, 1923), p. 252. 2 Published in Britain as On Education: Especially in Early Childhood. The CurricuLar Role ofRusselL's Scepticism 51 Russell, who once stood for Parliament as suffragist candidate, believed in equality of education for both men and women. This position was well advanced for its time; it still encounters resistance today. As the Russells' children approached school age, he and Dora confronted the problem of their education. Russell did not want John and Katharine to experience the loneliness of education by tutors that he had faced as a child. He and Dora also wished to avoid conventional public schools because they wanted their children to be educated in a manner consistent with their sense of scepticism about society and about religion. Russell felt that exposure to any kind of traditional learning would cause his children to be indoctrinated with patriotic and religious points of view. On the other hand, he felt that the progressive schools that were available-including A. S. Neill's Summerhill-lacked intellectual rigour. As a result of these feelings and because of Dora Russell's interest in education, the Russells leased the estate of Bertrand's brother at Telegraph House in Sussex and founded what came to be known as Beacon Hill School in September 1927. With his experience at Beacon Hill in mind, Russell published a second book on education in I932-Education and the Modern WorLd.3 It argued against the notion of progressive educators that schooling should simply allow for natural growth. Russell rejected Rousseau's approach to teaching and learning, and he distanced himself from some of Dewey's early work as well. In Education and the Good Life, and in other early essays on learning theory, Russell had seemed impressed by the growing role of behaviourism in education. However, his experience at Beacon Hill and his reading ofpsychoanalytic literature weakened his acceptance of behaviourism. In Education and the Modern World Russell called for more awareness of the role of emotion in learning as well as an examination of the way in which repressed feelings affect action. Russell argued that conditioning cannot effectively develop character. Education and the Modern World ends on a discouraging note. Russell concludes that schools can only provide for full individual development if the state identifies its own interest with that of the 3 Published in Britain as Education and the Social Order. russell: the Journal of the Bertrand Russell Archives M.Masrer University Libraty Press n.s. 12 (summer 1992): 50-60 ISSN 0036-01631 52 MICHAEL J. ROCKLER child. Russell was pessimistic about this possibility. For this to take place, a number of things had to occur. First, farge scale wars had to be eliminated. Second... (shrink)

This book is much in the tradition of Paul Goodman and Edgar Friedenberg in that it accepts their critique of what is wrong with American education. But then it goes on to share a utopian vision of how it could and should be--a vision featuring a Summerhill-like, multi-media, "total environment" approach where life from birth to death is dedicated to the joys of learning. Leonard is currently vice-president of Esalen Institute and a veteran magazine journalist on education. He has (...) written with considerable skill and passion a book that is as engrossing as a good novel. The book is intoxicating in its suggestion that perhaps there is some way to preserve and kindle the creative zest which all children are born with, without killing it as we do now by regimentation. Leonard not only spins out his own vision of the future, but does some first class reporting on current experiments which point the way to it and on current policies which block it. No educator, could fail to enjoy or benefit from this book.--S. O. H. (shrink)