Fallacies: some thoughts on two recent education stories

Over the May Day weekend two educational stories have come to light.  The NAHT union conference has decided to investigate the benefits of scrapping the six-week summer holidays and University fellows with a PhD in maths or physics are being urged to become school teachers in England to inspire youngsters to study the subjects.  I’m getting a strong sense of deja vu…I’ve been hearing both of these points ever since I became a teacher and, as far as I can see there is little in what is being proposed that is different from the arguments that were deployed in the 1970s.

Is the current system of school holidays fit for purpose?  Of course it isn’t.  No one would designing a school holiday regime from scratch would have terms and half-terms of uneven length.  Higher education generally operates ten week terms though from what ex-students have said, given the paltry amount of teaching they got, it could have been accomplished in two.  Yes I know higher education is about more than teaching and learning—as should all education—but this is hardly value for money…but that’s a different issue.  Would it be better say to divide the school year into six terms of six or seven weeks?  Would it improve student learning and teacher sanity?  Well certainly the latter but as far as learning is concerned the jury appears still to be out.  We already have a varied system of school terms with often neighbouring areas having slightly different term and particularly half-term dates and government gave academies and free schools in England permission to vary term times earlier this academic year.  But the main concern for the National Association of Head Teachers appears to be the burgeoning cost of holidays during school breaks—they can easily be double those in term time—and its solution according to Russell Hobby is:

‘We would like to see local or regional co-ordination, but at that point you could also have the opportunity to have a staggering of holidays around the country.  So if different parts of the country within local authority boundaries or regional boundaries had slightly different holiday times I think that would ease the pressure on the prices of holidays as well.’

He said the change would take away some of the excuses that both parents and teachers made about missing school days.  I’m afraid I don’t see the economic logic in his argument.  Even if you staggered school holidays—and there is a case for secondary schools breaking up for the summer in late-June or early-July and coming back mid-August to fit in with the examination cycle—that would not prevent an increase in the cost of a holiday but will simply lengthen the time that leisure companies can charge a holiday premium.  It is, as the companies continually say, a matter of supply and demand. 

In my experience, there have always been staff shortages in one area or another in schools.  This has been the case particularly and persistently in Mathematics and Physics.  Why would you want to teach if you have a degree in these subjects when your skills earn better pay and conditions by working in other areas of the economy?  The government’s solution—yes yet another initiative in this area all of which have previously largely failed—is to pay ‘experts’ £40,000 a year as research fellows to conduct master classes for pupils in networks of schools, set up free online maths and physics resources for schools to use, and teach lessons that stretch more advanced students.  Usual response from the teaching unions with the Association of Teachers and Lecturers saying that the experts should be trained as teachers before being allowed to educate children.  Well that probably will guarantee that the scheme never gets off the ground!!  The response to the story on the BBC website is equally negative…experts won’t be able to communicate with students and so on. 

We spend an inordinate amount of time and money teaching teachers to teach and a lot of it is wasted.  To teach effectively you need to know your subject and be able to communicate it interestingly to students in ways they can understand…you can improve a teacher’s ability to do this but if they can’t communicate effectively in the first place it really is a waste of time.  The best teachers I know are great communicators and who make learning interesting and fun for the students and they get great results.  They may or may not be experts in their fields but they have the confidence and communication skills to get the subject across.  Now you can’t teach that.

The Rum Rebellion: Appointing William Bligh as governor

In the early years of the settlement, particularly during the three years between Governor Phillip’s retirement in December 1792 and the arrival of Hunter his successor in mid-1795, when Grose and then Paterson administered the colony, alcohol, generically referred to as rum, was a readily tradable item in the barter-based, economy operating beyond the bureaucratic, requisition system at the government store.  Rum became a substitute for currency.  The shortage of currency in the colony was aggravated by the fact that William Bassett Chinnery[1], the agent appointed by the British Government to operate the colony’s accounts from London was in the process of embezzling some £80,000.[2] The NSW Corps officers’ early trading success was based on the fact that were paid in London and could draw bills that would be honoured there. They alone had access to sterling for purposes of trade and a trading cabal that operated as an extension of the officers’ mess was able profitably to exploit a monopoly position in rum and other goods and they vigorously defended this under both Hunter and King. This was no longer the case in 1808 as competition now ensured that monopoly profits were substantially reduced, although high prices were retained by the penumbra of illegality that surrounded the trade. 

It is likely that William Bligh was selected by the British Government as governor because of his reputation as a strict but fair disciplinarian though in the public and subsequent historical consciousness he will forever be remembered for the infamous ‘Mutiny on the Bounty’. The critical figure in his appointment was Sir Joseph Banks who had accompanied Captain James Cook on his first voyage and was the government’s unofficial adviser on matters relating to Australia. Banks had formed an intense dislike of John Macarthur. This occurred in 1801 when Macarthur, already one of the wealthiest men in the colony, applied for permission to export some of the king’s merino sheep to NSW and for an enormous land grant to help establish a wool industry. Banks did not favour a large land grant to one person but thought the wool industry should be developed by an English company. He also knew that Macarthur, due to a thrusting desire for personal enrichment, was a disruptive force in the colony. When Macarthur’s requests for sheep and land were granted, Banks was upset and recommended Bligh for the job of governor because he though he could deal with Macarthur. On 15 March 1805, he wrote to Bligh requesting him to consider the post. He wrote that King’s successor must have the following qualities:

…one who had integrity unimpeached, a mind capable of providing its own resources in difficulties without leening on others for advice, firm in discipline, civil in deportment and not subject to whimper and whine when severity of discipline is wanted to meet emergencies.[3]

Sir Joseph Banks

Banks proceeded to offer a number of inducements for Bligh to accept. The Governor’s salary would be doubled from £1,000 to £2,000 and, in addition, Banks believed Bligh need spend less than half of this because he would have ‘the whole of the Government power and stores’ at his disposal. His seniority and pension rights would continue. Banks even added that there would be better marriage prospects for his six daughters in NSW. He was not simply using his influence to help Bligh; he was exerting pressure on Bligh to accept the governorship. He was not ignorant of Bligh’s reputation as a disciplinarian: he chose him for that reason. Bligh, Banks believed stood a good chance of standing up to and reining in the maverick NSW Corps, something that his predecessors had been unable to do. So did Earl Camden, Secretary of State for War and the Colonies, who wrote to Banks that he was recommending Bligh for appointment because of Bligh’s ‘merit & ability & of the character he bears, for firmness & Integrity’.[4] Bligh was persuaded and left for Sydney with his daughter, Mary Putland, and her husband who died on 4 January 1808 of tuberculosis. Bligh’s wife remained in England.[5]

Even before his arrival, Bligh’s style of governance led to problems with his subordinates. The Admiralty gave command of the Porpoise and the convoy to the lower ranked Captain Joseph Short and Bligh took command of a transport ship.[6] This led to quarrels which eventually resulted in Captain Short firing across Bligh’s bow in order to force Bligh to obey his signals. When this failed, Short tried to give an order to Lieutenant Putland, Bligh’s son-in-law to stand by to fire on Bligh’s ship. Bligh boarded the Porpoise and seized control of the convoy. When they arrived in Sydney, Bligh, backed up by statements from two of Short’s officers,[7] had Short stripped of the captaincy of the Porpoise that he gave to his son-in-law.[8] He also cancelled the land grant Short had been promised as payment for the voyage[9] and shipped him back to England for court martial, at which he was acquitted.[10] The president of the court, Sir Isaac Coffin, wrote to the Admiralty and made several serious accusations against Bligh, including that he had influenced the officers to testify against Short. Bligh’s wife obtained a statement from one of the officers denying this and Banks and other supporters of Bligh lobbied successfully against his recall. The secretary of state thought the dispute arose from ‘very trivial causes’ and ‘proceeded to a length to which it could not possibly have advanced had you both been impressed with a just sense...of the propriety...of preserving a good understanding with each other.[11]

---

[1] William Bassett Chinnery, who was appointed Agent for New South Wales on 1 May 1787, was enabled to embezzle more than £80,000 of Treasury funds prior to his dismissal on 17 March 1812. For Chinnery’s private life and his love of music, see, Yim, Denise, Viotti and the Chinnerys: a relationship charted through letters, (Ashgate), 2004. Chinnery was able to avoid detection for a long time because the accounting and control systems used at the British Treasury and the function and operation of the Audit Office established in 1785 were inadequate.

[2] See Scorgie, Michel E., Wilkinson David J. and Rowe, Julie D., ‘The Rise and Fall of a Treasury Clerk:  William Bassett Chinnery’, paper presented to the Conference of the British Accounting Association, April 1998; compare with Scorgie, Michel E., ‘The rise and fall of William Bassett Chinnery’, Abacus, Vol. 43, (2007), pp. 76-93.  See also ibid, Whitaker, Anne-Maree, Joseph Foveaux: Power and Patronage in Early New South Wales, pp.155-156.

[3] This crucial letter was first quoted, in full, in the HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. xxxv–xxxvi. The editor gave no specific location for this letter, but stated that he had had access to manuscripts in the possession of W.R. Bligh of Sydney, William Bligh’s grandson. Bligh presented some of these to the Public (now State) Library of New South Wales in 1902 and they were transferred to the Mitchell Library in 1910. This letter was not amongst the collection and its present location is unknown.

[4] Camden to Bligh, 18 April 1805, ML Banks Papers, Series 59.01.

[5] Bligh’s commission, instructions and additional instructions are in HRA, Series I, Vol. 6, pp. 1-19.

[6] Short to Secretary Marsden, 12 March 1806, HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. 31-34, Bligh to Secretary Marsden, 30 May 1806, HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. 81-84 and Bligh to Castlereagh, 1 April 1806, HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. 55-57 provide the protagonists’ stances. Short to Bligh, 15 May 1806, HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. 74-75 explains Short’s position and his offer of an apology.

[7] Lieutenant Tetley to Bligh, 15 November 1806, HRA, Series I, Vol. 6, p. 40 and Daniel Lye to Bligh, 22 November 1806, 9 December 1806, HRA, Series I, Vol. 6, pp. 41-42.

[8] Bligh to Secretary Marsden, 12 December 1806, HRNSW, Vol. 6, pp. 208-221 details the enquiry.

[9] Bligh to Windham, 5 November 1806, HRA, Series I, Vol. 6, p. 30.

[10] Rear-Admiral Isaac Coffin to W.W. Pole, 13 December 1807, HRNSW, Vol. 6, p. 388.

[11] Windham to Bligh, 31 October 1807, HRA, Series I, Vol. 6, p. 80.