The Struggle For The History Of Education By Gary Mcculloch Summary
The book The Struggle for the History of Education by Gary McCulloch, published from Routledge Taylor & Francis Group in 2011, maps out the nature of the field and seeks to highlight the sites of struggle. This book suggest that the history of education might seem sedate to the outsider but is actually all about struggle and the object of study is in continual flux. Education is, as book traces, a site for social progress, change and equality, struggles for democracy and the fight for social justice. It argues for a clearly articulated vision for the field, and one effort in that direction. Author also underlines the need both to learn from colleagues in faculties of education and teach these colleagues about
…show more content…
It tells about the historiography and the contributions of earlier scholars such as Leopold von Ranke and the “scientific” approach to historical writing. As it characterizes this, it is the “Acts and Facts” approach to history. The book also contains reviews, the transition from Ellwood Cubberly’s progressivist approach to US history of education to Bernard Bailyn’s critique, to Lawrence Cremin’s critique, to the Marxist analyses of Michael Katz. It documents a similar intellectual pattern in the United Kingdom and in New Zealand.
The book advocates the struggle for educational reform and the useable past is particularly engaging. One of the critiques that McCulloch makes of contemporary educational policy is that of historical amnesia, with governments often reinventing the proverbial wheel. The book also argues that “the role of the history of education in the struggle for educational reform has been contested and denied not only by policy makers, but also by a number of historians of education who prefer to avoid giving excessive attention to the …show more content…
The theme of struggle is very appropriate. The book is particularly strong in outlining the diversity, broad nature and nodes of conflict, within the field. It also makes an excellent case for the future health of the history of education. I think where the book could be improved is to move beyond the “anglosphere” or even to different parts of the “anglosphere.” There is scant mention of Canadian contributions to the field, and virtually nothing beyond the British, American, Australian, and New Zealand context. Contemporary news is full of the rise of Chinese and Indian academic institutions, whither the history of education in these two important academic constituencies? This however is a minor quibble. As far as contributions of earlier scholars used in explaining about the historical writing is concerned is commendable. The detection used by the contributors is clear and loud. The unfussiness of the language makes it painless to comprehend what the writer is saying. The manner in which the contributors have clearly put forward their ideas together in every chapter with series of sub-title is also commendable. This ploy brings about fluency and clarity in the
It tells about the historiography and the contributions of earlier scholars such as Leopold von Ranke and the “scientific” approach to historical writing. As it characterizes this, it is the “Acts and Facts” approach to history. The book also contains reviews, the transition from Ellwood Cubberly’s progressivist approach to US history of education to Bernard Bailyn’s critique, to Lawrence Cremin’s critique, to the Marxist analyses of Michael Katz. It documents a similar intellectual pattern in the United Kingdom and in New Zealand.
The book advocates the struggle for educational reform and the useable past is particularly engaging. One of the critiques that McCulloch makes of contemporary educational policy is that of historical amnesia, with governments often reinventing the proverbial wheel. The book also argues that “the role of the history of education in the struggle for educational reform has been contested and denied not only by policy makers, but also by a number of historians of education who prefer to avoid giving excessive attention to the …show more content…
The theme of struggle is very appropriate. The book is particularly strong in outlining the diversity, broad nature and nodes of conflict, within the field. It also makes an excellent case for the future health of the history of education. I think where the book could be improved is to move beyond the “anglosphere” or even to different parts of the “anglosphere.” There is scant mention of Canadian contributions to the field, and virtually nothing beyond the British, American, Australian, and New Zealand context. Contemporary news is full of the rise of Chinese and Indian academic institutions, whither the history of education in these two important academic constituencies? This however is a minor quibble. As far as contributions of earlier scholars used in explaining about the historical writing is concerned is commendable. The detection used by the contributors is clear and loud. The unfussiness of the language makes it painless to comprehend what the writer is saying. The manner in which the contributors have clearly put forward their ideas together in every chapter with series of sub-title is also commendable. This ploy brings about fluency and clarity in the