The 17 pieces included in the book explore relationships between education and the configurations of society as these have played themselves out over time. This indeed has been the prime avowed purpose of historical studies in education for at least the past generation, in Britain as in many other countries around the world. Until the 1960s, the main thrust of published accounts in the history of education was to celebrate the growth and spread of national education systems as a testament to social improvement and economic prosperity. Since that time, as criticisms of the nature and effects of schooling have become increasingly marked, so historians of education have tended to dwell on the problematic aspects of the relationship between education and the wider society. Revisionist, generally Marxist critiques that vilified schooling for its alleged role in reproducing social class control were highly fashionable in the 1960s and 1970s. Towards the end of the 20th century and into the 21st, a number of different aspects in the relationship between education and society have emerged in historical writings. These have often been more complex and in many ways more ambiguous and arguably more interesting than either the earlier liberal-progressive celebrations or the more recent vogue for Marxist critique.

In Britain, for example, the late Brian Simon led the way in the 1960s in refashioning historical studies of education. He complained that “it is the present tendency to review the past development of the English educational system, and of particular institutions within it, as if this took place by its own momentum rather than in relation to changing social pressures and needs.” The usual consequence was, according to him, ‘a somewhat indigestible mass of dates and facts, orders and Acts.’ By contrast, Simon argued, attention should be given to education as a social function, with primary importance in every society.

Nearly 30 years later, Simon could still insist that ‘a crucial issue, to which historical study can and should make a direct contribution, is that of the relation between educational and social change.’(The History of Education: its importance for understanding” in B. Simon, ed., The State and Educational Change: Essays in the History of Education and Pedagogy (Lawrence and Wishart, 1994)

Simon’s views were endorsed and elaborated upon by Asia Briggs, the leading social historian of the early 1970s; Harold Silver, another major figure in the field writing in the 1980s, who had co-authored with John Lawson ‘A Social History of Education in England’ (Methuen, 1973); and in 2000 Richard Aldrich, Emeritus Professor of History of Education & current Head of the History and Philosophy Group at the IOE.

Silver observed that the history of education had become increasingly complicated by the recognition of relationships with other social phenomena.

‘An older history of institutions and of ideas has become subject to an awareness of the ambiguous or controversial nature of historical interpretations in other and related fields, including economic history, the history of political institutions and ideologies, the history of class formation, social welfare and reform.’

McCulloch reports that the outcomes of these developments spelt out by Harold Silver were themselves open to debate. On the one hand Lowe could suggest that ‘in recent years, History of Education has become clearly identified as a full and proper element in the study of history more generally, with a central role to play in the development of social, economic and political history…’ Crook and Aldrich similarly hold that ‘British history of education entered the 21st century in a relatively strong position.’ History of Education for the 21st Century’ (IOE, 2000). On the other hand, some observers of the field are more critical of its development .Jurgen Herbst thinks the “revolution” launched in the 1960s has now run its course, to such an extent indeed that it has become stale and repetitive, with ‘ little genuine fresh input.’

<I>The reader is pertinent to us for several reasons. Above all it is a healthy reminder that in a global context we should not get bogged down in futile controversies.</I>

According to Herbst ‘most writings tend to fill gaps in the records or bring to our attention groups or issues that have been overlooked in the past. We endlessly repeat old mantras- class, race and gender being the ones most often heard- but we are no longer sure just where and how we are going to apply them.’ (“The history of education: state of the art at the turn of the century in Europe and North America” in Pedagogica Historica, 35/3 (1999), p. 739).

Another critic, Kevin Brehony, contends that insufficient attention has been given to social theory, in particular postmodernism. Marc Depaepe, a senior figure in the European field, has directed particular criticism at historiographical trends in Britain. Also David Vincent, a leading historian of literacy, claims that in Britain, and perhaps to a lesser extent in North America, the history of education has ‘almost collapsed as a sub discipline.’

Hence this reader, personal and selective though it is, should afford some opportunity to assess the state of the art and its current level of health.

History of education revisited</B>