It requires a degree of courage to write a book such as this. Not only is a substantial field of study that has been producing works of substance for over a century to be summarised and interpreted, but there is also the attempt to articulate a view of the future. Regular attempts to do this are essential. Fields of research require the questions: “Where have we come from?”, “What have we achieved?” and “Where should we go?” In the process new researchers are inducted into the field, the significance of particular research communities and historiographies are reconsidered, and the conversations that provide the platforms for new research are allowed to continue.
Despite the necessity for such works, it is difficult for a single writer with a word limit to translate him or herself from familiar intellectual and geographical centres. The chances that research activity of substance will be misrepresented or “left out” are high. Criticism inevitably follows. These things matter, especially in the embattled field of the history of education. This book will have a life beyond a year or two of its publication. It may well be regarded as a major statement about the field, especially in the UK for years to come.
So, the first thing is to recognise its achievement. There is a highly competent outlining of the basic story of historiographical development in the UK, and a useful commentary on the same in the USA and New Zealand. The chapter I enjoyed the most was that on Brian Simon. There was a genuine appreciation of this scholar's impact on the field, though there was not quite what I was hoping for, a critical reassessment of Simon's work. There is no doubting Simon's importance, but a new and critical reading of his four volume Marxist history of English education is needed.
McCulloch also affirms the impact of Fred Clarke of London University's Institute of Education. From different platforms, both Clarke and Simon insisted that the history of education was only worth doing if it illuminated the relationships between education, schooling and social change – and supported social fairness and sometimes equality. McCulloch consequently organises his book around the topics: “The struggle for social progress”, “The struggle for social change”. “The struggle for social equality”, and then, “The struggle for educational reform”. This structure supports the general argument that there is pressure on the history of education to provide useful histories of education. I think McCulloch is correct in his argument that sensible “presentism” is inescapable. Historians of education are required to assist in the understanding of why systems of schooling, schools, teachers, curricula and educational practices in different societies are constituted as they are. Historians of education at least know that this is essential knowledge if contemporary educational reform is to be informed and effective.
On another level, McCulloch's chapter headings are constricting. They tend towards making social class struggle central to the story. There are good reasons why that should be so in the UK – but there are consequences for the recognition of other areas. McCulloch works hard at valuing non-class focused histories of education, including those of the “senses”, of material technologies in education, and gender. I would be surprised, however, if the historians who have revolutionised our understandings of girls’ and women's education, of women teachers, in the last 40 years will be happy with the summary provided here. For this reviewer, work in this area has been the outstanding bright spot in the field in relatively recent times. It has played a major part in removing some of the tired old stand-offs between the discipline of history and the sub-disciplinary field.
McCulloch provides a useful analysis of the relationship between historical research in education and the problem of a declining base in university departments of education. There is a problem, as the history of education, and other “foundations of education” have been driven out of the teacher education curriculum. The journals and the national societies, as well as ISCHE, are a crucial base for encouraging new research in the field. They foster a community of scholars who as individuals are increasingly isolated in their own universities.
McCulloch has decided to personalise much of this book. It has the good effect of adding the experience of a real person to the more general narrative and analysis. I am not sure that it always works well. McCulloch's experience in New Zealand tends to make him the central figure in the study of the history of education in that country. McCulloch's bibliography cites 44 of his own published works, in two pages. No other historian comes close. The historians based at Institute of Education in London tend to get more than their fair share of references. One would hardly know that centres at other British universities, such as Birmingham, were responsible for much innovative and important work. So, this book also constitutes something of a professional autobiography. There are absences as a result. Canadian scholarship is barely mentioned. Universities in Toronto and Vancouver, and in Australia, Melbourne, have also hosted remarkable scholars and research projects. And then there is the problem of Central and South America, and Spain and Portugal. If the field is in decline in the English-speaking world, and much of northern Europe, then the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking world is a different story.
McCulloch's argument is measured and reliable. There was only one specific issue of fact that I questioned. I think that Michael Katz would be surprised to discover that he was a Marxist. The sources of revisionism and educational radicalism in the USA were not the same as those in Europe.
The Struggle for the History of Education covers far too many issues of significance than can be addressed in this review. Historians owe a debt of gratitude to McCulloch for taking on the task. The book advances the discussion of what the field has achieved, and may achieve in the future. It makes a strong argument for the contribution that research in the history of education can have for contemporary policy making. It will be interesting to see what reviewers in other journals make of it. For example, McCulloch's take on curriculum history will likely be contested. Perhaps the author will not be displeased as this book gives rise to vigorous debate. Everyone with an interest in the field should read it.
