§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Harper.]
§ 10.55 p.m.
§ Mr. Denis Coe (Middleton and Prestwich)In the recent debate on education, I drew attention to the fact that while 98 per cent. of children in State primary schools are educated co-educationally, only half of them, when they go on to secondary schools, will continue in co-educational secondary schools. However, from the age of 15 onwards, we expect our young people to work together and mix in colleges and universities and be capable of forming stable emotional relationships. My contention is that co-education at the secondary level helps to provide this link between the primary level and adulthood.
It is for this reason that I am initiating this debate. If I am correct, then I 191 believe that the opportunities for coeducation at the secondary level are poor in many areas. This is of added significance since, at this time, many local education authorities are deciding on comprehensive secondary reorganisation. My interest in this subject stems from personal experience both as a teacher—in co-educational and single-sex secondary schools—and, fortuitously, as a pupil in both types of school. I therefore start with a bias in favour of co-education.
It is difficult to discuss this subject in view of the limited amount of research which is going on into it and the fact that the research which is going on seems to be concerned only with academic comparisons. This appears to be the sole criteria. I argue that all educationalists believe that education is much wider than academic achievement. Preparing a child for life means developing his whole personality as well as his academic prowess. Mr. Derek Miller of the Tavistock Clinic has argued that because society has changed, so the emotional demands which adolescents make on schools have changed. Thus, schools must provide social networks for young people and act as an anchor point for psychological development. Whether a school is a co-educational or single-sex one, if it is bad it cannot achieve this development. If I am nailing my colours to the mast tonight in favour of co-education, I nevertheless pay tribute to the fine work which is done in single-sex schools, not least by those in my constituency
I wish to discuss the influence of coeducation under two headings: first, its effect on the social development of children and, secondly, its effect on the academic achievements of children. On the social development side, I believe that co-education provides a realistic environment for youngsters. It does so because there is no unnatural break from the primary stage, where companionship is accepted as being normal and desirable. If this is carried on into the secondary stage, this conveys to the child a stamp of official approval on this normal and desirable relationship. In other words, there is no suggestion, as there might otherwise be, that such a relationship is not quite nice. It helps, rather than hinders, a satisfactory attitude towards the sexual problems which face young adolescents.
192 For example, Mr. Miller argues on clinical evidence that the assertion sometimes made that co-education makes boys less manly is wrong and that the opposite is true; that boys feel more secure in their feeling of manliness. Mr. Miller also claims that early sexual behaviour is more common among girls educated at single-sex schools. These are some of the problems which are not always recognised as much as they should be.
Co-education means that the family unit can be maintained, with brothers and sisters going to the same school. This consequently means that parents are more easily involved in the life of the school, with the result that, being more easily identified with the school, family life is closer, since interest is concentrated on one school and not on two or three. I believe that co-educational secondary schools give particular help to a large number of children who are denied a complete family background by the absence of one parent for one reason or another—bereavement or some other family difficulty—and this is particularly so for girls.
Also I cannot help feeling that the staff of common rooms in co-educational secondary schools are likely to be happier than in single sex schools. They will be more outward-looking, and if this is the case it will have a beneficial effect upon the children.
Again the range of common activities which boys and girls can enjoy together are so much greater in co-educational secondary schools. I find it one of the most attractive features of the co-educational school to see the way in which musical, dramatic and social activities can be enjoyed together. Therefore, I believe for all these reasons that the development of the personality can take place best within the environment of a mixed secondary school.
If we look at the academic development, we find, as I said earlier, that the sole criteria for judgment between single-sex schools and co-educational schools is academic achievement. I would argue that there is a danger in assessing any difference of standards solely on the basis of segregation. In fact, if we look at academic standards in secondary schools generally, we find that they are affected by a number of 193 other factors—for example the percentage of academic intake which differs considerably in different parts of the country, the difference in the tradition and standing of particular schools, the quality of the staffs, and the dominant social class.
All these are factors which are difficult to measure when trying to assess the relative academic achievements of different schools, particularly between mixed schools and single-sex schools. Therefore, the evidence I have been able to discover is very limited and often conflicting.
A number of findings have been based an O level results in the G.C.E. On these it would seem that boys in coeducational grammar schools are better than boys in boys' grammar schools. Yet a recent survey has tried to show that the very opposite is the case, and there are similar difficulties in assessing whether or not girls in single-sex schools do better than girls in mixed schools. Again there seems to be a conflict of evidence. In any case, the difference between the two is so small that I believe that the social reasons that I have advanced outweigh any slight disadvantage, if there is one, in academic achievements.
There are one or two other points of significance. We are told that qualified female staff are becoming more and more difficult to obtain for single-sex girls' schools and that this must obviously affect the quality of the education which can be given there. I believe also that the range of courses in co-educational schools will tend to be greater, and also that the traditional barriers between different courses are being broken down so that we do not just talk about woodwork for boys but wood sculpture for girls as well. The use of buildings in co-educational schools is probably much more effective than it is in single-sex schools. For all those reasons I believe that it is desirable that we should have co-educational secondary schools.
I should now like to look at the national and local picture concerning the actual provision of co-educational education. For the years 1964, 1965 and 1966 the percentage of mixed secondary schools in relation to the total number of secondary schools maintained by local education authorities was 54.87, 55.56 194 and 56.89 respectively. In other words, there is a slight movement towards an increase in the provision of co-education. However, when we examine the number of mixed secondary schools maintained by each individual local education authority the variation is truly immense.
Out of 45 county authorities, only seven are below the national average of 56.89 per cent. Kent—3..5 per cent., and Cheshire—36.3 per cent. are the lowest, while Suffolk, East-90.9 per cent.; Leicestershire—88.9 per cent., and Bedfordshire—87.9 per cent. are very much above the average. The Welsh counties have an even higher percentage. All thirteen are above the national average, and Anglesey, Cardiganshire, Flintshire, Merioneth, Montgomeryshire and Radnorshire are all 100 per cent. co-educational. I think that I should move my family to Wales.
In the county boroughs and inner and outer London education authorities the position gives me much less satisfaction. For example, in England, out of 99 local education authorities, 73 are below the national average and the percentages are even more startling Hastings and Smethwick have no mixed secondary schools at all, and they are closely followed by, for example, Birkenhead—5 per cent.; Bootle—6.3 per cent.; Gloucester—7.7 per cent.; Portsmouth—7.4 per cent.; Southend—5.9 per cent.; Wigan—6.7 per cent., and Bromley—6.1 per cent. At the other end of the scale, we have places like Bury and Oldham with 100 per cent., followed by places such as Barnsley—83.3 per cent., and Preston—81.8 per cent. The county boroughs in Wales range from 18.2 per cent. for Swansea to 80 per cent. for Merthyr Tydfil.
These figures demonstrate that in most centres of population the opportunities for parents to send their children to co-educational schools are not very great. Unfortunately, I cannot see any quick change in this state of affairs, yet the question is of paramount importance at this particular time, because local education authorities are changing to comprehensive secondary education. It is difficult at this stage to assess the figures for comprehensive secondary school education, but it is interesting to notice that counties such as Anglesey and Leicestershire which are highly comprehensive are also highly co-educational.
195 The national figures, however, are not all that encouraging. For example in the three years I have quoted—1964, 1965 and 1966—the national figures for comprehensive schools which are also co-educational were 67.18, 70.61 and 67.67 per cent. It is by no means certain that the change over to comprehensive education in the county boroughs will necessarily mean a change to co-education.
What can be done about this position? I recently asked my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State what general advice he has given to local authorities on the desirability of establishing co-educational secondary schools. He replied that he had given none, and that this was a matter for local authorities to consider in the light of local circumstances. In view of the figures I have quoted, I believe that advice—not direction—should be offered. What is required, first, is an authoritative full-scale inquiry, and I ask the Minister tonight to impress on his right hon. Friend the need for such an inquiry so that such authoritative advice would be available to local education authorities. Thinking on the subject is so often clouded by prejudice and tradition, without a real appreciation of the full implications on the development of the child, that only an authoritative inquiry could dispel it.
I end as I began. Education is aimed at developing the potentialities of the child to the full. Therefore, I think that we have to be certain that the setting in which we are trying to do this is the one most likely to achieve the aim. I believe that co-education in secondary schools will help in this process. I hope that I am proved right. But it is at least certain, from the figures I have given, that there is need for greater opportunity for co-education in many areas and for a great deal of research into this vital problem.
§ 11.10 p.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science (Mr. Denis Howell)I am sure that we are grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Middleton and Prestwich (Mr. Coe) for raising this subject and, indeed, for the Questions he put which led him to this debate on a most interesting and important topic, on which he speaks with great personal knowledge and practical experience. 196 Although, in fairness, I have to put both sides of the argument because, as he himself has suggested, this is not something in which my right hon. Friend can impose his will, my hon. Friend made a very convincing case.
I also congratulate my hon. Friend on this debate because in the last three years there has been more proper debate about the content of education than we have had probably in the previous 30 years in this country, and those of us who are passionate educationists must be heartened that this House should debate not just the structure or organisation or salaries of education but also the important principles involved in the practice and content of education.
The information we were able to send my hon. Friend proves to the hilt his contention that there is a tremendous variety of practice among local authorities in this matter. I will not give the figures he quoted again but I agree with him wholeheartedly that Wales comes out of this—if one is a co-educationist—very honourably, for 15 out of 17 of its local authorities have more than half their children in co-educational schools.
On the whole, the counties of England similarly come out well: 40 out of 45 are over the half-way mark. But from this point of view the boroughs of England present a disappointing picture and it is here perhaps that much of the propaganda work has to be carried out for co-education. Only 26 out of 78 boroughs in England have a co-education provision of more than 50 per cent.
I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned that this is a secondary school problem and not a primary school problem. But the figures for the primary schools are amazing, for they are 99.9 per cent. for infants' schools in England, 99.5 per cent. for junior and infants' schools and 91 per cent. for junior schools. The battle, if one can call it that, has been well won in that sector.
My hon. Friend also mentioned the difficulties in relation to comprehensive reorganisation. It is part of our case that the movement towards co-education is being considerably advanced at present. It is true that, in the last two or three years, there has not been a significant improvement in the figures but, as we get further into secondary reorganisation, it is clear that the momentum is 197 gathering, and this should be seen throughout the country as the reorganisation schemes take effect.
If my hon. Friend initiates another adjournment debate and puts down Questions in three or five years' time, he will, It am sure, be struck by the amount of advance we shall have made by then. Although I have to be careful about my right hon. Friend's duties and his position in relation to local government, nevertheless there have been some very interesting experiences with some of these reorganisation schemes. All the following authorities have proposed to base their secondary reorganisation plans on co-education and to amalgamate single sex schools—Worcester, Ealing, Croydon, Normanton, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, Gateshead, Sunderland and St. Albans. Hertfordshire. There are others, but I mention those because in each case there were objections against reorganisation proposals, and my hon. Friend will be glad to know that in each case the Secretary of State over-ruled the objections on the ground that the proposed amalgamation was an integral part of the reorganisation plan. That is perhaps the most heartening evidence which I can produce for my hon. Friend.
I should like to mention some of the principles which have to guide us in the matter. There seem to be three main principles to which my right hon. Friend should have regard. There is, first, the extremely important matter of the right of parental choice. I know that we all pay regard to parental choice and would not wish the Secretary of State to disregard it, except where it proved to be absolutely essential to do so, as in the cases which I have mentioned. The opposition to the movement towards co-education would be strengthened if it involved closing schools to which parents were understandably attached.
The second principle is the autonomy of local authorities, which my hon. Friend asked us to advise, recognising that they cannot be instructed. It is fundamental to the whole basis of educational administration that local education authorities have autonomy within their own fields, and so they should. One of the things needed is an informed public dialogue and controversy in this matter, probably particularly at election times. That is the meaning of demo- 198 cracy and if my hon. Friend has done anything tonight to further that, I am sure that he will be as delighted as we shall be.
Finally, we must not forget the position of the teachers. Some teachers are extremely uneasy about being asked to teach in mixed classes. They desire to teach only boys or only girls, for many reasons, and one has to respect their desires in this respect.
Briefly to sum up what seems to us to be the main case against co-education, before turning to the case for co-education and doing so as impartially as I can; girls and boys mature physically, mentally, emotionally at different rates and, therefore, it is argued they ought not to be at the same school, or in the same class together while that process is going on. It is said that it is all right to have co-education in primary schools and that after the early years of puberty it may be all right, but that this is an extremely important physiological consideration to be borne in mind.
Secondly, associated with this it is said that boys suffer because of the earlier intellectual and emotional development of the girls, and the opposite side of that coin is that girls often resent the sarcasm and insensitivity which they find in boys at this period of their lives.
There is then the subject of academic results, to which my hon. Friend rightly drew attention. I have to tell him that there is no evidence available to us at the moment which would convincingly prove that co-education produces any better academic results than do single sex schools. There is a little evidence the other way, but we and our inspectorate are inclined to discount it because it has never been properly assessed, and no firm sociological studies have been made. Perhaps one of the important by-products of the debate will be that we shall get such a proper assessment of the evidence. I have said that some teachers find it difficult to discipline a mixed class, and there are many religious schools with a strong preference for single sex education. That sums up the case against co-education.
My hon. Friend might think that in part this is based upon the prejudices of people and it probably is. Part of the price that we pay for living in a democracy is the right of people to 199 exercise their prejudice if they wish to do so. We have to be careful to hold the balance properly so that they can do this.
I now turn to the case for co-education as we see it. This is again based partly on social and partly on educational grounds. I agree that the school is a preparation for life. The social advantages of co-education are obvious for all to see, and separation of the sexes is really unnatural and illogical. Certainly children educated in single sex schools are more likely to grow up to be awkward in the presence of the opposite sex than those educated at coeducational schools. Secondly those who benefit from co-education enjoy much less of a strained relationship with their friends at a very sensitive time in their lives. The social advantages of coeducation were well summed up by my hon. Friend when he spoke of the development of the personality and its importance.
The educational advantages are first of all the interplay of different attitudes and styles on the mind, both of pupils and teachers, secondly a much wider choice of curriculum and thirdly the extra-curricular activities in such schools, particularly in plays and music societies and so on. Finally, some teachers, contrary to what is said by teachers at single sex schools, find that discipline is much easier in a co-educa- 200 tional school. The Schools Council is carrying out research into this and we await its findings with much interest.
One of my other responsibilities is the administering of the youth service. I have often said, and it is an argument here in favour of the case being put forward, that one of the most important things in life for this country is the need to have boys and girls brought together in a good, wholesome atmosphere, in circumstances favourable to the development of their personalities. I believe that the case for co-education has been made out. The movement towards co-education is gathering momentum and will continue to do so.
By causing us to debate this matter tonight my hon. Friend has performed an extremely useful service to his cause and perhaps more good will come out of it than in any other way. In the long run this debate, and this general propaganda approach to the problem will probably do more good than any direct intervention by any Department of State, or any attempt by a Minister of the Crown to impose his will. Since those possibilities are not open to us we must rest content for the moment upon my hon. Friend continuing to take advantage of his opportunities to further his cause.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-three minutes past Eleven o'clock.