Using The View That From 1833 To 1846 Essay Example
Using The View That From 1833 To 1846 Essay Example

Using The View That From 1833 To 1846 Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 4 (1039 words)
  • Published: September 3, 2017
  • Type: Report
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Between 1833 and 1846, education reform faced significant obstacles due to various factors. These included the efficiency argument, the economic argument, and the knowledge argument, which claimed that education was unnecessary for the working class. It is difficult to prioritize one factor over the others as they were all distinct but equally responsible for the delay in passing the Ten-Hour Act.

Source A agrees that the economic argument is the strongest for the growth and success of schooling for children. It suggests that more money is necessary, and while parents should provide a token sum, the government is the most crucial factor. Purely government legislation is preferred over substantial amounts of money as it alone would not suffice. The source hints at a reluctance by parents to send their children to school, limiting reforms and ind

...

icating a need for the government to spend money. However, it is cheap and aimed at the masses, making its credibility questionable. While it aligns with existing knowledge that the common conception was that the government did not want to spend money, it does not prove this to be true.

This text, originally published in 1833, discusses the lack of improvements in working conditions and education for the lower classes despite the implementation of the first Factory Act. This was also the time when a small education grant was given to religious societies running schools, indicating a desire for reform. The author of Source B, radical MP Hume, opposed the government's decision to vote for an annual grant of ?20,000, not because he disagreed with the idea of providing education to poor children, but because he believed in progressive thinking and did

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

not want to cling to outdated beliefs.

Instead of accepting the grant of �20,000 for furthering education, Hume wanted a substantially larger amount. He believed that a 'large sum' was necessary and other radicals agreed with him. Hume argued that if charitable donations could raise a significant amount, the government should be able to match or exceed it. However, Hume did not consider that those who donated significant amounts could easily afford it and wanted to do so, whereas the government was compelled to provide support even though at that time they did not do much for the general public. Many schools were entirely dependent on charitable donations, regardless of whether they were proper schools or Dame schools. Hume's goal was to support these schools to spread education to the masses.

It was suggested by the MP during a parliamentary debate that a commission or legislation should be established to manage the distribution of funds. This is a trustworthy source as the MP was still in power around the time of the first Factory Act and demonstrates how reform was restricted by the government's reluctance to spend. However, as it was said during a debate, it can be assumed that the statement was aimed at convincing others rather than being a well-thought-out opinion. This viewpoint is likely to be held by others since Hume would not have mentioned it otherwise, although some of the statement's intensity may have come from speaking in a debate rather than being wholly spontaneous.

William Cobbett, a radical and fervent Tory who held unusual views, argued in Source C that there should be no introduction of the grant, unlike Hume. Despite encountering difficulties

in his life such as imprisonment for libel, Cobbett believed in maintaining traditional ways without self-help or education. Consequently, education reform was not considered necessary by the ruling and middle classes according to Cobbett's perspective. This source deviates from Hume's stance and character, as both were radicals but differed in their opinions on the matter. Macaulay once deemed Cobbett insane during his lifetime due to his eccentricities.

Despite trying to treat workers as equals in education by representing them, Cobbett ended up patronizing them with phrases like '[I do] not wish to degrade them'. As an MP, he was unable to accurately represent his constituents' views, especially before the 1832 Act. Cobbett's belief that education was unnecessary limited partial reform efforts, though he was in the minority. He opposed government spending on creating a 'race of idlers' and believed that any amount of money, not 'one single penny,' was too much. During a crucial debate about a grant, Cobbett used the opportunity to express his increasingly bizarre views, likely delivering a prepared speech. He did not support reform and did not care if he impeded progress.

The extract from the 'Westminster Review', founded by Jeremy Bentham, highlights significant differences between Source D and C, as well as A and B. Bentham was a supporter of individual freedom and a philosopher with a strong utilitarian viewpoint. The journal was read by wealthy individuals who were not in everyday contact with those affected by these reforms. The Review argues that education requires only legislation, with the 'charitable public' providing the rest. This praise of the 'public' could easily sway wealthy readers towards the Benthamite viewpoint, and it criticizes

the government for doing less than required to start education. It is clear that Source D disapproves of the government's actions.

The article discusses the government's past wasteful spending and their disregard for the importance of basic education to improve economic efficiency. Bentham supported the monitorial system for its efficiency and cost-saving benefits. This source agrees with sources A and B regarding the provision of charity, but suggests a large one-time payment to initiate the system instead of small maintenance payments. However, all sources overlook additional factors hindering education reform, including religious issues, societal challenges, administrative concerns, and a reluctance to send children to school and lose income. This passage presents a biased view against the government's gradual reforms in education. Written in April 1834, it failed to foresee future progressive reforms enacted through numerous Acts and Bills culminating in 1846, which ultimately made education accessible to most children.

According to these sources, the reform of education faced multiple obstacles and although the government played a significant role in limiting it, there were other equally important factors. Despite facing opposition, the government persisted in passing reforms. As a result, by 1846, it can be said that the government no longer hindered the spread of education as much.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New