Integration and the Education State. Institutional History and Public Discourse in England, France, Germany, and the US

Abstract

Social integration through education and education policy serves as a panacea against the multifaceted social ills of modern society. As a means of integrating the nation-state through culture and ideology, as a key tool for improving political power and legitimacy through educational meritocracy and credentials, and through fueling and stimulating economic growth via human capital investment, education policy denotes a core element of the state’s sovereignty and autonomy. The assumed potential of education to improve political, economic and cultural development has made education policy increasingly important within the spectrum of national policy fields. This chapter first studies the rise of the Education State in western nations from the early beginnings in the 16th century to the heyday of the education state at the dawn of the 20th century. Then, the chapter analyzes the public discourse of education and education policy throughout the 20th century in the international press: the Frankfurter (Allgemeine) Zeitung, The Times, The New York Times and Le Figaro. Surprisingly, education coverage of national and international aspects of education has declined in the course of the 20th century. Has the rise of the Education State and the confidence in the panacea of education policy reached its limits?

1 Social Integration and the Education State

In 1656, almost half a millennium ago, the proposition of the new German constitution¹ ruled that primary schools should be available everywhere and should be entered at the age of 5 years. High schools should encourage parents and children, especially the ones of lower class descent, to enrol and to stay there as long as possible. At the university level, the number of graduates should be increased greatly to serve the rising demand for academics in modern society. Stipends and scholarships, funded by state tax revenues, should be available to cover the expenditures of needy students. Furthermore, in times of European unity, students should be encouraged to study abroad. At that time, degrees were recognized across Europe.

The basic idea of education policy outlined in this constitution remains similar in contemporary Europe where educational goals are to achieve social integration at the national and European level by providing merit based credentials and financial aid to overcome social inequality; by stimulating economic growth, wealth and welfare through education; and by the promotion of understanding and exchange across borders. These integration goals of education policy are similar to those of activating social policy. Thus I use the term “Education State” here analogous to the widely used “welfare state” (Weymann 2010).

The chapter argues that the rise of the Education State began centuries ago, expedited by the assumed potential of education to improve human and economic development, political loyalty, and cultural integration of the population. The Education State reached its climax during the heyday of the nation-state in about 1900. Since then, social integration by means of education policy has remained a key political topic. But at the same time the public’s interest in education policy in general and in international aspects of education in particular has decreased. This can be seen from the analysis of leading newspapers in England (Times), France (Le Figaro), Germany (Frankfurter Zeitung) and the US (New York Times).

This chapter first outlines the economic, political and cultural purposes of education policy in modern states (Sect. 2.2), then takes a look at the historical rise of the Education State throughout the last five centuries (3). It continues with the study of 20th century national press discourses on aims and limits of social integration by means of education policy (4); and presents data on the retrogression of national and international education policy coverage in the 20th century (5). It concludes that integration in educational institutions is not a task of short-term social engineering but involves profound social change of very longue durée and requires a large window of longitudinal comparative observation (6).

2 Economic, Political and Cultural Integration Through Education

Over the course of half a millennium, the assumed potential of education to improve social integration through human development made education policy increasingly important within the spectrum of national policy fields. Economic, political and cultural purposes expedited the expansion of the Education State.

From the perspective of economic integration, education policy is driven by the options and sanctions of markets and capitalism. The modern state is fully dependent on the levying of taxes and fees from civil society (Schumpeter 1918; Skocpol 1979; Tilly 1992). This is the reason why investments in capital and human capital turned into central elements of state policy. National human capital policy and individual economising on human capital became a rationale perceived as natural (Goldin and Katz 2008; Heckman and Krueger 2003; Schultz 1981).

From the perspective of political integration, education is a well-esteemed instrument to achieve loyalty within mass societies. More than the market, meritocracy through credentials is widely accepted as a legitimate basis for the distribution of goods and commodities throughout the population. The fight for educational credentials mirrors the fight for social position and reflects the balance of power in society. As a consequence, the struggle with credential inflation is a serious problem for the Education State. State policies to consolidate the value of educational credits range from credential capitalism to credential Keynesianism to credential socialism (Collins 1979, 2000).

From the perspective of cultural integration, education policy is well-suited to shape large populations homogeneously (Hechter 2000, pp. 24–25, 64–66; Mann 1986, 1993). As a result of urbanisation and mass migration, the illiterate rural populations, often still organised in religious communities, clans, tribes or extended families, are transformed into an alienated urban proletariat. Conflicts between the old residents and the newcomers, between the rich and the poor and between classes and ethnicities threaten the integration of state and society (Guibernau and Hutchinson 2001; Smith 1998, p. 215). Education policy is one of the best means for constructing a unified national public; and in particular, elementary schools and preparatory schools are praised above all as useful institutions to achieve cultural homogeneity (Gellner and Breuilly 1983, 2006).

3 The Rise of the Education State in History

In the 15th century, German municipalities of 1,000 inhabitants or more had already established vernacular schools for children of the lower classes as well as Latin schools for children of higher social standing. But the first effective steps towards the education policy of states were not taken before the formation of secular and centralised states in the 16–17th centuries. In this period of European history, education was used by the emerging central state which was confronted with religious wars, conflicts and clashes, to integrate the multi-centred and multi-cultural populations by means of literacy, homogenising religious lectures, basic arithmetic and a common language and narrative. Step by step, education turned into a public, collective and normative good of statehood, transcending the boundaries of Christendom, self-governing cities and clerical and feudal authorities.

A second step in the development of the Education State was made with the formation of the nation-state. Starting in England and France in the second half of the 18th century, the nation-state became the most important ‘container’ of society. The nation-state was taken as a stronghold of civilisation, progress, and protection and as a key instrument of rational economic organisation and political decision-making. The state became a prime tool of the rising bourgeois professional and economic elites and the most important social construction of community. The nation-state subordinated religion, gender, class, ethnicity and the family as primordial and perennial institutions of community to its rules of law and governance. Education was used as a mercantilist instrument to improve the industrialism, professionalism and human capital of the monarch’s or sovereign’s subjects. These goals could only be achieved through the mandatory and comprehensive education of the lower classes. In Germany, mandatory primary schooling was introduced in 1721, but it took more than 100 years to accomplish the policy of mandatory schooling for all citizens. For a long time, school avoidance was widespread among the poor, peasant families, migrants and the growing industrial proletariat.

In the 19th century, nation-building reached its climax all over Europe, which benefited large national economies and central administrations. More and more, society was based on universal rights of citizenship, a national economy, inclusive communication and a national curriculum of education. The inclusion of the lower classes of the agrarian population and the industrial proletariat in primary and lower secondary education became a primary instrument of the Education State to achieve social integration through economic prosperity, political loyalty and cultural homogeneity (Smith 1998). At the end of 19th century, education turned into a social right of the constitutional state, the foundation of democratic self-determination and a means of providing wealth and security. The most developed Western European states accomplished a level of more than 90 % of schooling whereas Italy and Russia lagged far behind (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Percent of male children aged 6–14 enrolled in schools in Europe 1820–1900

The 20th century is what we may call the human capital century of the democratic polymorphous state. At this point in history the United States has become the leading nation. The US opened senior secondary school education earlier and more consistently to all citizens than European nations did and it turned the European university education into a much less selective and principally open system of higher education. Looking back at the development of education in the 20th century, the progressive expansion of education to include increasing shares of the population in secondary and higher education is striking (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2 University attendance (share of students in the number of 20–24-year-olds)

4 Aims and Limits of the Educational Integration Policy in the 20th Century Press

It took centuries before education policy turned into the unquestioned prerogative of the modern state. As a means of integrating the nation-state through culture and ideology, as a key tool for improving political power and legitimacy and for fuelling and stimulating economic growth via human capital investment, education policy denotes a core element of the state’s sovereignty and autonomy. The rise of the Education State, expedited by the assumed potential of education to improve human development and social integration made education policy increasingly important within the spectrum of national policy fields.

How is the Education State reflected in the public sphere of the 20th century? Which aims and limits of social integration through education policy are debated? We assume that education is a prominent issue continuously and increasingly displayed in the press. We will investigate the front pages of leading national newspapers which cover the most important, breaking news of the day from the perspective of the well-educated middle and upper classes. Within the entire education coverage articles should pay great attention to the political, economic and cultural aspects of education and social integration, whereas other aspects of education should be of minor interest. Furthermore, there should be an increase in international aspects of education coverage in the wake of the continuing internationalisation and globalisation of education in the second half of the 20th century (Martens and Weymann 2007; Weymann et al. 2007; McEneaney and Meyer 2000; Rizvi and Lingard 2010).

The analysis of the front-page coverage of education is restricted to historical periods of peace. We begin with the first decade of the 20th century, the years from 1900 to 1910. This is the decade of the victorious European empires England, France and Germany and that of the rise of the American empire. This period best represents the heyday of the fully developed Education State before Europe’s transformation and decay in the 30 years from 1914 to 1945. We will continue to study front page coverage of education in the post war period, beginning with 1950 and ending in 2004.² In this second period, the Education State opened secondary and higher education to ever larger shares of the population. At the same time, the former European empires turned into semi-sovereign and polymorphous states and even the U.S. hegemonic power in the end became challenged increasingly by the rise of new non-Western world powers.

The sample of articles consists of the front pages of the first Saturday³ edition of each quarter (January, April, July and October) from four leading national newspapers in four leading Western nations: the Frankfurter Zeitung⁴ (Germany), Le Figaro (France), the New York Times (U.S.) and the Times⁵ (England). The sample size is 260 front pages per newspaper totalling 880 front pages for all four newspapers.

4.1 England (The Times): Colonial Empire, Industrial Decay and Class Conflicts

1900–1909: On January 6th, 1900, The Times celebrates national pride via the English Education Exhibition in London. The exhibition “…brings about that the role to be filled by England in the great international exhibitions of 1900 shall be worthy of the marvellous progress and development in all branches alike industry, arts, and commerce that this country has achieved throughout the long and beneficent reign of her Most Gracious Majesty”. The first impression “…will be that whether education in England is organized or not and whether it is better or worse than in foreign countries”. At the dawn of the 20th century, England’s economy faces growing competition in a global world and is losing its former top rank. Enthusiastic hope is put in a policy of improving the technical education in primary and secondary schools as well as in higher education. The path to success is through better industrial training (January 4, 1902). Another means of raising England’s international competitiveness is seen in introducing compulsory modern language classes in school (January 5, 1901; January 2, 1904; October 2, 1909). Also, village libraries are established to support village industry. Every village can receive a parcel of books and keep them for a certain length of time before returning them (April 7, 1900).

In the first decade of the 20th century, there is a smell of nationalism and militarism in the education coverage of The Times (April 6, 1901; October 10, 1901). The aim of national training and national defence in school is to initiate the first stages in the development of a healthy, vigorous population of young people sufficiently patriotic to care for their country and so adequately accustomed to drill and discipline as not to shrink from personal service in its defence (April 5, 1902). “Military education in England from a National and an Imperial Point of View” is a critical point of the nation’s education policy (July 5, 1902).

The United States of America and Germany are seen as major rivals challenging England in the field of education. On July 3, 1909, the Times raises the question: “why does our Government not support the Hong-Kong university scheme in the same way as the German Government is supporting a similar scheme at Kiao-chau?” The other rival, the USA, is looked at with a bit more sympathy. The Mosely Educational Commission leaves Southampton this morning, The Times reports. A majority of its members are especially interested in technical and commercial education. “It is here, we suspect, that the United States, as well as Germany, have an advantage over us” (October 3, 1903). The final will of Mr Cecil Rhodes, reprinted in The Times in full length (April 5, 1902), combines the sense of the looming threats of war stemming from the national rivalries of the leading powers of that time with his intention to preserve peace in the world under English hegemony by offering stipends to English-speaking students in all colonies. Also, American and German scholarships are explicitly included in the will. The financial resources of this testament are taken from Cecil Rhodes’ colony, Rhodesia. South Africa, a colony just recently conquered from the Dutch, also receives a lot of interest. “The question of education in the new colonies in South Africa is of such paramount importance in the ultimate consolidation of our South African Empire” (January 2, 1904). The Times argues that in dealing with “uncivilized races”, the most important thing is to teach them what they ought to do (October 1, 1904; October 7, 1905).

Ireland, located between colonial and domestic education policy, is also of great interest to The Times. There is an embittered open conflict over Irish home rule in general and Irish education in particular (April 4, 1903). As in the case of other colonies, the national language policy of teaching Gaelic in national schools is seen as an impending threat (April 2, 1910). This state of affairs launches a fervent response from the Roman Catholic Bishop of Limerick; “The Bishop insists that the only way in which Mr. Birrell and his Cromwellian colleagues can be brought to terms is by an open declaration of war against the Government” (October 5, 1907). Generally, the integration of religious groups by means of education policy is seen as a major task to be fulfilled. At home, the term “education crisis” applies to the conflict over Christian or secular education (January 5, 1907). In the eyes of liberals, the bill sought to place the moulding of the minds and characters of the country’s children under clerical control. Seen from the conservative side, the nation as a whole is set on providing Christian education for all of its children (April 2, 1904).

Other problems relate to issues of class, gender, professions and regions. The four Scottish universities appeal for funds to enable them to compete on equal terms with the universities in England, Germany and America (April 6, 1901; April 2, 1904). In terms of gender equality, it is argued that the effect of the Acts of 1902 and 1903 is the establishment of education policy bodies which consist only of men (July 7, 1906). In terms of the representation of professional interests, the improvement of teacher training is seen as urgent (January 4, 1902). In 1900, there was only one certified teacher for every 73 children in school. “The rest of the work was done by non-certified teachers—a kind of teacher known as ‘article 68’, which meant a young woman of good character and 18 years of age” (July 4, 1903).

1950–2007: After World War II, most articles either deal with cuts or budget shortages, the miserable state of buildings and facility deterioration, or they deal with strikes, the poor salaries and low living standards of teachers’. The balance of power is reflected in battles over primary versus comprehensive schools and universities. Furthermore, it is argued that individual human development and the prosperity of the nation are endangered by the poor quality and low competence of graduates and by the undersupply of the technical skills that industry demands.

For the first two decades after World War II, a central topic in The Times’ coverage of domestic education policy is the “intolerable conditions of sweated labour of members of a depressed class who never will get the financial rewards their services deserve until public opinion had indignantly demanded it for them” (October 7, 1950). Also, the condition of school premises, the number and condition of class rooms and the availability of technical facilities for education in the sciences are heavily criticised (January 5, 1951). The plea for higher pay is perpetually made (April 4, 1959) and teachers are on strike on a yearly basis (April 4, 1961; January 3, 1970; April 1, 1973; October 2, 1976; April 7, 1984; April 6, 1985).

Another topic of education coverage is the profound reform needed for the professional training of school teachers. Recruitment is at fault as well (January 2, 1954). Female teachers mainly want safeguards against the possible consequences of the reorganisation of secondary schools (January 1, 1966). A better grants system for pupils is thought to be important as well. Instead, parents’ expenditures in school fees increase (July 7, 1957). In 2007, The Times reports the highest fee level for private schools since 1963 (January 6).

In general, education needs a fundamental shift from a segregated system towards comprehensive secondary schools (October 4, 1952). The separation of liberal and technical education is out-of-date (July 4, 1953). Joint secondary schools are urged to end a baleful dichotomy of grammar schools and schools for technical skills (April 6, 1957; January 4, 1958). In the field of higher education, the opening of new universities and less selective rules of university admission, more interdisciplinary communication and the curbing of over-specialisation are debated and condoned in The Times (July 3, 1954). As the British system of education is not supplying the industry and civil service with sufficient sets of skills and competences, the paper expresses the drastic point of view that personnel in the National Service are nearly illiterate (July 6, 1957). The industry wastes the talent and good spiritual values of young personnel (January 6, 1951). 26 years later, The Times refers to a study stating that “educational standards dropped between 1968 and 1973 and general certificate of education examination boards awarded higher marks to pupils of lower calibre in 1973 than they did in 1968” (July 3, 1976). In the 80s, The Times writes: “The spelling, punctuation, syntax and, in particular, handwriting of O- and A-level candidates seem to be getting worse” (April 4, 1987). In the 90s, national tests for 11-year-olds spark the return to traditional teaching methods in state primary schools, including multiplication tables, spelling bees, public gold stars rewarding children’s progress and dividing classes by ability for some subjects (January 4, 1992; April 1, 1995).

The Times primarily reports on economic problems of education policy in terms of strikes, costs, shortages, cuts and deterioration of facilities (43 %). Another main topic is the political struggle over the transition from a class-based tracking system of schools and universities to comprehensive education (32 %). The interest in cultural aspects (11 %) and in foreign nations (11 %) is small (Other aspects 3 %).

4.2 France (Le Figaro): National Grandeur, Cultural and Ideological Clashes

1900–1909: The front page of Le Figaro on January 5, 1901, gives major attention to the reform of senior secondary schools (enseignement secondaire) in France within the explicit context of comparing, in some detail, the old and the new French systems with the American and the German secondary school systems of the time.

A key conflict within national education policy concerns the strained relations between the state and the Catholic Church. Through its constitution, the French state is obliged to be neutral, secular and laicist. In reality, the impact of the Catholic Church on institutions and education policy is strong and an object of embittered arguments. On the occasion of the dismissal of two professors by the minister of education, Le Figaro (January 4, 1902) argues that the enforcement of a state monopoly in the field of education limits the pluralism of institutions and the freedom of choice for teachers, parents and pupils with regard of where to work and study. In parliament, the freedom and liberty of education is radically attacked by delegates with the intention of completely suppressing competition in the field of education. Le Figaro states that it is not the alleged threat of clericalism that is the main problem of the French system of education, but rather the lack of patriotism among the 141 radical and socialist members of parliament who favour a tyrannical state monopoly on education (July 6, 1901). On the one hand, the leftist delegates strictly defend the right of professors to politically mobilise students towards privately held political preferences by turning classes into political tribunes. On the other hand, these groups act to eliminate any presence of religion in institutions of education. Senator Clemenceau represents this bigoted education policy best. He takes a liberal position, arguing that he is in favour of a system of “loyal battles” among the various groups that have an interest in the field of education policy. But hitherto, he supported a policy of submissiveness, ostracism and prosecution in education (October 1, 1904). As contrasting, good examples of real freedom and liberty in the field of education policy, Le Figaro celebrates the institutions of vocational and adult education maintained by the Catholic unions and Catholic citizens (April 3 and July 3, 1909).

Two articles argue in favour of military elements in education policy. In an article on October 6, 1906, Le Figaro supports the new draft regulations. The length of army service has been extended, and the possibility of enrolment at the École Polytechnique and at Saint Cyr is dependent on participation in the new two-year minimum army service. Another article, published on October 2, 1909, is written on the occasion of a “peaceful invasion” of 6,000 visiting English boy scouts in France. Le Figaro applauds the fact that 350,000 boy scouts are trained in England each year to become officers or corporals later in life. The writer argues that the boy scouts represent a perfect, modern way of training young men of school age for prospective military service as cadets. The author sees the pre-military organisation of the boy scouts as a shining example that the French school battalions cannot match on equal terms. “There is no doubt that this is the lesson they wanted to teach us” (October 2, 1909).

Three articles are dedicated to the representation of French civilisation in the educational institutions of foreign countries. On July 7, 1900, Le Figaro states that the eminent French compatriot professors affiliated with the Collège Européen in China are very popular with their Chinese pupils. On April 1, 1905, Le Figaro reports on 14 conferences the Duke of Monaco organised to address French education. Finally, the Ecole d’ Athénes is seen as a true monument to French philhellenism and a preeminent piece of France’s great history (April 4, 1903).

1950–2006: Le Figaro in the post-war period is filled with reports and heated debates of the strong pressure towards the centralisation of education policy in all respects. Additionally there are reports of clashes between religious denominations and the secular state. These clashes particularly include conflicts over the abolishment of private schools maintained by the Catholic Church as well as—in the last decades—clashes with Islamic actors and organisations about Islamic offences against French laicism.

Many articles of Le Figaro deal with the educational budget shortage. The fiscal problems are seen as one of the basic evils of education policy and as a major cause of professors’ strikes (October 6 and 7, 1951); the reason for rotten buildings (April 3 and 4, 1954); and responsible for overcrowded classes in primary schools with up to 50 pupils per class and the undersupply of places—with only 600,000 places for 800,000 school pupils (October 5 and 6, 1957). In January 1950 (7 and 8), Le Figaro laments the fact that since 1935 France has not earned a single Nobel Prize. At the top of the ranking list of nations is Germany with 38 awards, followed by England with 28 and the USA with 23. In the end, the nation will fall behind in the high-speed race for research achievements at technical universities for scientists and engineers in the world’s leading countries. Benchmarking, screening and evaluating the country against its competitors might be of some help (July 4 and 5, 1970), but the main problem is that the French elite, a product of the grandes écoles, has turned into an oligarchy herding the nation and exercising guardianship over the electorate (July 1 and 2, 1978).

In the wake of the 1968 campus revolt, “the Revolutionary University” in France is dominated by Stalinism, Trotskyism, Castroism, Maoism and Anarchism and the state has lost control over education and education policy (October 5 and 6, 1969). Formerly, secondary schools were institutions that taught their pupils classical and modern languages, mathematics and philosophy. Now, the schools are in permanent turmoil, plagued by both pupil and teacher strikes (April 7 and 8, 1979). “An entire generation of pedagogues … turned imbecile” (January 6 and 7, 1973). From 1985 to the present, the turmoil is an outcome of the rapid growth of universities and schools, of overcrowded institutions of education and of unregulated mass immigration. In Saint Denise, 45 % of pupils are immigrants from 40 nations (April 4 and 5, 1998). The new graduate cohorts can no longer cope with the standards formerly required for graduation (July 2 and 3, 1988). Pupils armed with sticks and stones attack schools in Paris and in provincial cities (April 4 and 5, 1998). Even school authority buildings in Paris are blockaded (April 2 and 3, 2005). This is an “internal war” according to the minister of education (October 3 and 4, 1998).

In the 80s, 10,000 private schools are at stake because the government intends to nationalise and assimilate all institutions of the educational system, aiming for a perfect levelling of all pupils’ minds (January 7 and 8, 1984). The fruits of these labours will be incompetence, imbecility and humiliation on the part of the pupils, the deaths of young souls and the decay of civilisation, Le Figaro complains. This brave new world will be a boring vegetative universe—“ètre legume” (October 1 and 2, 1983).

Primarily, Le Figaro deals with cultural and ideological clashes throughout the entire second half of the 20th century (35 %). This is unique among the group of four newspapers. Aspects of political power (30 %) rank second in the hierarchy of education coverage of Le Figaro. Economic aspects (13 %) and international aspects (11 %) receive less interest (Other aspects 11 %).

4.3 Germany (Frankfurter Zeitung): Federalist Quarrels, a Standstill and Modern Times

1900–1909: In Germany, the states (Länder) are in charge of education policy. The government of the Reich (Reichsregierung), the parliament (Reichstag) and the second chamber (Reichsrat) do not play a prominent role in the front-page coverage of education policy. In 1902, after 10 years of parliamentary and public debates, the Prussian parliament had not yet passed the Prussian primary school act (Volksschulgesetz) (January 6, 1906; October 10, 1907). The Frankfurter Zeitung argues that pivotal points in this perpetual political and legal conflict concern constitutional law, the importance of education for the prospects of the national economy, the impact of education on the style of culture and civilisation and the effects of education on individual conduct. The main appeal is to improve school education in the face of rising demands from business, trade and industry, in what is called “modern times” (January 4, 1902). After 14 years (July 7, 1906), the front page finally celebrates victory in the parliamentary fight for a secular, modern Prussian School Law (Preußisches Schulgesetz). The primary school is praised as a basis of the democratic constitution, and the newspaper contrasts democratic countries with a well-educated electorate (Germany) with such illiterate autocracies as, for example, Turkey (October 3, 1908).

A series of articles argues for the improvement of education under the auspices of a modern, global economy. The argument is that the civil service needs better training in the wake of ever more complicated international customs and tariff regulations (April 2, 1904). The paper demands more schooling in mathematics, biology, technology and geography (the MINT or STEM) sciences—mathematics, engineering, natural sciences, and technology in contemporary debates (April 3, 1909). Enhanced practical studies in industry should be made compulsory in the teacher training curriculum of higher secondary vocational schools (October 5, 1902). Also, in times of globalisation and progress, stenography should be included in the curriculum of vocational secondary schools (October 3, 1903).

A burning problem at the turn of the century, just like today, is the risky transition from school to work. Schools and the national and local offices of labour are in charge of delivering statistics, recommendations, prospects and counselling while fully respecting the pupils and students to self-determination (“Selbstbestimmung”) (April 6, 1901). On this point, the German tracking system is vigorously attacked: the successful graduation from primary school as a prerequisite for enrolling at a Gymnasium should be abolished in favour of better education in primary schools. This is supposedly in the interest of good social policy which aims for less selection upon entry into the Gymnasium (October 5, 1901).

International education coverage refers to international and comparative statistics, standards and benchmarking. The Frankfurter Zeitung looks eagerly at international solutions to local problems (April 5, 1903). The international orientation of the Frankfurter Zeitung is captured in a phrase stating that the “modern European citizen” is assumed to be in “sympathetic accordance” with the general intention of the progressive new Prussian school law (January 4, 1902).

1950–2007: Key topics include the selectivity and inequality of the tracking system versus comprehensive schooling, the defeat of humanist traditions and religious education, migration and education, the quality of teaching, the competences achieved by graduates, over- and under-supply of graduates, budgets and financial shortages, the problems of integration of classes and social groups and finally the persistent rivalries of the states and the Federation over education.

On July 5, 1969, an article reports on the implementation of pre-school classes in Rhineland-Palatinate with the intention of launching a voluntary head-start programme for five-year-old children. Admissions and accreditation of comprehensive schools permanently stimulate bitter conflicts between the more conservative and the more social-democratic states over the equivalence of curricula and exam standards. “Disagreement between the ministers of education of the German states about mutually recognising comprehensive school diplomas as equivalent to the traditional grammar school/Gymnasium diplomas of the tracking system after Hamburg declared comprehensive schools the standard school form” (October 6, 1979). 12 years later, there is no agreement between the states and the nation on education policy in general and on this issue in particular (January 5, 1991).

Because pupils try to avoid German, mathematics and foreign language classes, these subjects are imposed as mandatory throughout middle and high school. On this issue, the ministers of education reach a consensus following long disputes (October 3, 1987). The headline reads: “Increasingly more mistakes. Spelling deficiencies are becoming commonplace among pupils and students” (October 1, 1983). Students clearly prefer the humanities and social sciences over the STEM (“MINT”) disciplines. This problem will have severe consequences for the competitiveness of the German industry in a global world the newspaper argues (January 6, 2007). In later years, the dispute over quality, skills and standards focuses on delayed or failed junior secondary school exams (July 1, 1972), especially among the growing group of children from immigrant families (July 7, 2007). The level of open violence in schools rises. “After the urgent letter from the teaching staff due to increasing violence” at a secondary school with an immigrant population of roughly 80 %, a new debate erupted about integration in Germany and the lower secondary school (April 1, 2006). Successes and failures of integration policy and politics become pertinent issues in the press.

Political power is the predominant topic of education articles in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (50 %). Federalist quarrels in general and in particular over tracking versus comprehensive schooling are the main subject matters in education press coverage. Economic aspects, especially interests in the costs of and returns on education at the individual and national levels, rank second in the hierarchy of the newspapers’ reports on education (20 %). Culture ranks third, predominantly related to clashes of the campus revolts and immigration (15 %) along with international aspects of education (15 %).

4.4 USA (New York Times): Racial (De-) Segregation, Finance and Screening

Racial segregation and de-segregation in schools and higher education, the problems of federative financing of education and the screening of quantity and quality of the outcomes of education are the main topics of the New York Times throughout the century.

1900–1909: Beth Low, nominated for mayor, released a letter to the supporting political associations and the public that centred on primary education in New York City schools. All the children of New York are given a fair chance to grow into God-loving and God-fearing men and women. “Most of all, it means that the City Government shall wage relentless war on every one who shall make one of these little ones to stumble” (October 5, 1901). Frequently, reports about public education policy focus on matters of racial segregation and desegregation. On October 6, 1900, a front-page headline of The New York Times reads “Protest by Negro Clergy”, and the article says that church and education have failed in their efforts to solve the “negro problem”, and that “the race” is confronted by a menacing growth of prejudice and violence. “President J.H. Jones of Wilberforce University asserted that the negro is being made the victim of a National conspiracy and that his only hope is an immediate moral and intellectual education” (October 6, 1900). 10 years later, a small success in terms of desegregation is announced: “Negro a Columbia orator” (April 2, 1910).

Reports about bequests and funds donated by wealthy citizens also receive a lot of interest. “Large public bequest. Bowdoin College and Worcester Polytechnic receive funds” (April 7, 1900). A Rockefeller gift of $10,000,000 is dedicated to create an endowment fund for higher education. Only the small colleges will receive aid. The administration of the fund is put in the hands of the General Education Board (July 1, 1995). “6,000,000 Carnegie gift. The present endowment of the Carnegie Institute is doubled. Funds go to Technical Schools, Librarian Schools, Art Department, Museum and Music Hall. The gallery is for the masses of the people primarily, not for the educated few” (April 6, 1907). Carnegie adds another $5,000,000 to the Teachers’ Fund. Carnegie creates a foundation of $15,000,000 to include State University Professors in his programme. The interesting aspect of the last news is that the pensions of professors were so small that aid from private sources was necessary and accepted. One hundred colleges are now on Carnegie’s list, denominational and parochial institutions are excluded (April 4, 1908).

The coverage of foreign education policy reflects the international race for excellent professors and the exchange of teachers. “Osler May not Go Back”, there is a belief in Baltimore that he will resume his old post at Johns Hopkins Hospital and resign from the Regius Professorship of Medicine at Oxford (January 6, 1906). With respect to the exchange of teachers, a New York Times headline claims, “American Teachers Wanted” (July 4, 1903). Japan is about to hire 650 instructors of English and prefers American teachers. Furthermore, The New York Times reports the “French Religious Exodus” (October 5, 1901). The Jesuit schools in Paris and the provinces are to reopen under new ecclesiastical teachers. At Ottawa, French professors are dismissed from Ottawa University. “Pope heeds Irish Protest” (January 1, 1907).

A number of articles report fatal accidents of pupils and students or comment on incidents of crime and violence at schools and universities. Special attention is given to ritually repeated events of “hazing”, i.e. the bullying of new students enrolled at a college or university. “Don’t haze, says Schurman”, the President of Cornell University (October 1, 1904). At the University of Illinois, a police Mayor fired his gun at students during a fight between sophomores and the local police. “I will shoot to kill the next time… the militia ought to be called out”. Furthermore: “President James of the university asked the authorities to arrest all students misconducting themselves” (October 3, 1908).

1950–2004: For the decades after the War, the bulk of articles on education deal with racial segregation and de-segregation. In the early 50s, delegated educators from all American states back the courts’ segregation bans (July 3, 1954). In addition to school segregation bans, the university bias is banned as well. “Judge orders University of Alabama to admit qualified Negroes” (July 2, 1955). 6 years later, on January 7, 1961, Georgia University too was ordered to admit “Negroes”. The period of court bans against segregation is followed by social movements and more radical actions. In New York, an anti-racism sit-in blocks the main headquarters of the Education Board in Brooklyn (July 6, 1963). On the Lower East Side, demonstrators clash with police outside a school (October 5, 1968). The President plans a teacher corps for needy areas (July 3, 1965; July 5, 1969). In the Senate, the pros and cons of busing are dealt with in heated debates (October 7, 1972). The City University of New York establishes a new Harlem branch. More black people than ever take their children out of public schools and place them in private black charter schools (April 5, 1980; July 7, 2001). On the higher education level, the enrolment rate at black colleges grows far more quickly than the national average (January 2, 1993). Also, there is increasing poverty in the 90s, and The New York Times worries that it is crippling students’ health and learning. “Nearly 40 % of black women, and nearly one-fourth of all women in the United States get no prenatal care in the first trimester” of their pregnancy (October 5, 1991).

A second permanent focus of education coverage in The New York Times is the availability of and conflict over financing and funds at the federal, state and city levels. In 1956, a U.S. report asks the nation to double education funds (April 7, 1956). One year later, against strong resistance from the states, the President still hopes for the ratification of a school bill (July 7, 1956). “The task force stipulated that the states should be required to maintain or increase their present support of education, not use the federal aid to reduce their own share of school expenditures.” (January 7, 1961). In accordance with the expectations of the federal task force, the mayor of New York says that New York State will cut New York City school aid by $48.6 million (April 7, 1962).

A third category of articles argues over the alleged affiliation or sympathy of teachers and professors with the Communist party or with communist groups inside and outside the USA. This “McCarthy” issue ranks third in the front-page coverage of education policy. It is most frequent in the 50s and 60s. On April 1, 1950, The New York Times reports that McCarthy suspects the Secretary of State and a number of university professors of being communists. The University of California is ordered to rehire 18 faculty members previously accused of being communists (April 7, 1951). One year later, three professors are suspended because they refused to answer questions about alleged Communist Party membership (October 4, 1952). A decade later, McCarthyism sporadically has a brief revival in the education policy coverage of The New York Times (October 1, 1966).

The leading topic of the last two decades is the screening, evaluation and rating of education. In 2001 (April 7), the front page reports the alarming news that between 1992 and 2000, the gap between the best and the worst pupils widened in the nationwide fourth-grade reading test of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. “Two thirds of students fell below the level the federal government considers proficient, and 37 % fell below even basic knowledge of reading” (April 4, 2001). They could read little beyond simple words and sentences and could not draw conclusions from what they read (April 7, 2001).

The political problem of how the federalist state can fight the segregation of pupils and students by race is the subject that raises the most interest (46 %). Also, federal financing of schools, colleges, universities and special aid programmes is an aggressively contested battlefield. The leading topic of the last two decades is the screening, evaluation and rating of the quantity and quality of education, of the standards of skills and competences (22 %). Cultural and ideological clashes, mainly McCarthyism, are confined to the 50s and 60s (13 %). International education issues are covered relatively rarely in The New York Times (6 %) (Other aspects 13 %).

5 The Cure-All Panacea of Education Policy in Times of Globalisation

Throughout the 20th century, education policy is considered a classic prerogative of the modern nation-state in the western world (and virtually worldwide). As a means to integrate society, as a key tool to improve economic growth and as a social right it constitutes a core element of the nation—state’s sovereignty and autonomy. Mass education is employed to foster national unity, capitalising on the resources of a national language, literacy and arithmetic skills. Mass education is based on public- or state-financed and -supervised institutions and on standardised curricula. Education enforces discipline in the personal conduct of all citizens according to the municipal middle class archetype. Education supports the construction of cultural homogeneity and identification with a national community. Education improves the smooth exchange of goods, persons and services on expanding markets. Education is seen as the key resource of nations to successfully compete for wealth and power and as fundamental for national achievements in science and technology. Education is used to integrate migrants and minorities into society. Education serves as an instrument to fight anomie by re-socialisation, correction and rehabilitation. Moreover, improvements in education are also supposed to promote democratic participation. And last, but not least, education legitimizes the unequal distribution of status among citizens by means of providing standardised and publicly acknowledged merit-based credentials that counterbalance opportunities otherwise allocated for example via inheritance, employment or marriage. It goes without saying that social integration by means of education and education policy serves as a panacea against the multifaceted social ills of modern society. The belief in education and in the Education State’s policy to provide a good society resembles a civil religion (Bellah 1975; Beiner 2010).

At the beginning of the century, the four newspapers see education policy as an appropriate means to improve the welfare of the people at home and to increase the international competitiveness of the nation in terms of power and industry. Furthermore, education policy is debated as a means of appeasing conflicts and clashes in domestic politics. Figure 2.1 shows the leading newspaper’s front-page coverage of education for the first period of the century. Education is covered frequently and continuously at an average rate of more than 40 articles per year and newspaper. In the second half of the century, unexpectedly, the coverage of education on the front pages has not increased but decreased (Fig. 2.2). The average rate of education front-page coverage published per year and newspaper dropped from over 40 to less than 20 articles. This may indicate that the newspapers’ and the readers’ interest in education declined throughout the century.

Fig. 2.1

Annual front page coverage of education—1900–1909 (calculated from 160 front pages between 1900 and 1909) (articles per year)

Fig. 2.2

Annual front page coverage of education—1950–2004 (calculated from 880 front pages between 1950 and 2004) (articles per year)

A second unexpected result is that the coverage of global and international aspects of education policy also has not increased but decreased, is erratic and shows ebb and flow (Figs. 2.3, 2.4). We can observe a strong retrogression of the papers’ and the readers’ interest in international education. The challenge of internationalisation and globalisation is not consistently met.

Fig. 2.3

Front page coverage of international education—1900–1909 (in percent of all education coverage)

Fig. 2.4

Front page coverage of international Education—1950–2004 (in percent of all education coverage)

6 Final Considerations

This chapter has shown that the economic, political and cultural integration of the population by means of the Education State’s policy has taken centuries and has never been fully accomplished. Very slowly and gradually only, the pride in education and the insight into the usefulness of education transcended from the upper and middle classes to the lower ones. The well-educated classes permanently added newly erected wings, floors and annexes to their institutions of education to maintain advantages for their offspring under the growth of mass higher education. Today, in times of continued economic and financial globalisation and mass migration, it will take more generations to replicate the European Education State and its policy of social integration worldwide.

Seen from this historical context, it is surprising to observe the decrease of national and international education coverage in the leading papers of the well-educated classes of the hitherto leading Western nations. This finding raises new questions. Is the strong interest in education bound to ascending (bourgeois) classes of ascending nations and empires? And does the interest in national and international education stagnate with the stagnation of state and empires? Do the topics, aims and limits of integration through education policy reflect the dynamics of rise, stagnation and fall? Does the trust in the Education State and its policy of development and integration in our days transcend from the West (Goldin and Katz 2008; Heckman and Krueger 2003) to the rising Non-Western world, for example China (Davis and Wang 2009; Hannum and Park 2007; Postiglione 2006), India (Ferguson 2003), Bangladesh (Baulch 2010), and other developing countries (Ravallion and Wodon 2000; Taras 2005)?

However, in terms of social research, the analysis and understanding of the conditions of Integration and Inequality in Educational Institutions needs a large window of longitudinal comparative observation. In terms of politics, integration in educational institutions is not a task of short-term social engineering but involves profound social change of very longue durée. And the outcome is open-ended.