Since the Liberation, there has been no shortage of reforms within National Education: the Langevin-Wallon plan of 1947, the Debré law of 1959 on private establishments, the Faure law on universities in 1968, the Savary law of 1984, etc. Why, today, this impression of immobility ? Between school and reform, it’s a bit “ I love you, me neither “.
Among the figures of speech which structure the debates on National Education, three have enjoyed undeniable success. The first of these, the “ school crisis ”, has established itself as a fact, both in public opinion and among social science researchers. Second figure of speech: archaism and immobility. Since the 1980s, these themes have offered an image that is as accusatory as it is popular. THE “ mammoth ”, according to the formula attributed to Minister Claude Allègre, goes well with the “ happiness that we are murdered » in classes, according to journalist François de Closets. Third theme, which arises from the previous two: the need to “ reform the school “. This slogan achieves consensus across the entire political and intellectual spectrum. Not an electoral campaign, not a major public declaration, not a foresight without a reminder of the need to transform the education system.
However, since 1945, there has been no shortage of changes and reforms within National Education. It is no coincidence that Antoine Prost returns in his work, Change in the school, on the scansion of school transformations. As renowned a historian of politics as of the educational system, he links two fields which are intimately linked. An expert with public authorities, he participated in commissions of the Ministry of National Education, as well as in the cabinet of Michel Rocard between 1988 and 1991. An activist, he was a member of the SGEN–CFDTwhere he participated in particular in the educational reflection of the union.
His work is original: it is presented in chronological order (with a substantial introduction and conclusion), but with chapters shedding light on certain moments of reform. These range from the ministries of Jean Zay (1936-1939) to that of François Fillon (2004-2005).
The emergence of school reform
What is a reform in the education system ? This is a change wanted by the authorities to modify it. Antoine Prost emphasizes that the Republicans led a profound transformation of primary school (Ferry and Goblet reforms in 1881-1886) and secondary school (reform of 1902). These two orders, intended for different social and cultural audiences, have their architecture assured for several decades. From the 1930s, several factors destabilized these developments.
Firstly, social demand lengthens the duration of schooling (even if it is initially camouflaged by the demographic backlash of the interwar period). The second trend is the formalization of a sensitivity known as “ new education » (Companions of the new university, alternative pedagogy by Célestin Freinet, French New Education Group). Finally, a group of senior civil servants and politicians favorable to educational reform was formed.
Jean Zay’s ministry reflects the conjunction, under the Popular Front, of these different developments. For the first time, political power and the administration are supporting educational movements and initiatives and proposing projects inspired by them. The moment also formalizes certain recurring difficulties. Jean Zay thus discovers that educational divisions do not cross political borders. In many ways, the camp hostile to Jean Zay was found during René Billères’ attempt at reform, twenty years later, in 1956-1957, bringing together a part of the teaching unions, associations and political leaders, from both the left and the right. .
The Vichy regime brought its share of transformations. Some are permanent: upper primary schools (EPS), which extended the first degree, are deleted. Others are provisional: public funding of Catholic establishments, closure of teacher training colleges. At the Liberation and at the beginning of the Fourth Republic, a global education reform project was developed, from nursery school to higher education. This is the commission led by Paul Langevin and Henri Wallon, which submitted its report in June 1947. Antoine Prost underlines that the Langevin-Wallon plan only gradually established itself as a reference for political projects for reform of the school. At the time of its development, political forces (including on the left) were rather indifferent.
The moment “ Fifth Republic »
In 1958, once again, the trajectories of educational history and political history met. The advent of the Gaullian Republic profoundly modified the architecture of school reform. Indeed, it accentuates the role of the government, the weight of the Presidency of the Republic and the transformation of the Ministry of National Education (which in 1963 acquired a secretary general, a real vice-minister, according to Antoine Prost, until ‘in 1968). At the same time, school massification (favored by the increase in compulsory education from 14 to 16 years of age in 1959) overflows the educational structures. Three issues become crucial: the way to structure the “ middle school » (i.e. the current college), the orientation of students, the teaching methods.
Some reforms are being made without noise », like that of primary school, which becomes the first stage of an education which extends well beyond (p. 121-140). Others arouse passions, such as the establishment of financing contracts with private establishments (Debré law of 1959). Faced with demographic flows which are expanding school numbers, some of the leaders of the 1960s feared a “ submersion » of school structures, the “ drowning » students who are too fragile, while the general level « flows “. To use the beautiful expression of Antoine Prost, the “ aquatic metaphor » (p. 100) had a certain success throughout the decade. This nevertheless sees the rise of a demand for reform of pedagogy and guidance, in order to ensure school democratization.
The criticism of traditional learning frameworks, the need to provide qualified workers for economic expansion, the first works of the critical sociology of education converge in the desire for reform. The conferences in Caen (November 1966) and Amiens (March 1968) constitute the apogee of this reform movement, where trade unionists, politicians, senior civil servants, academics, researchers, business leaders and journalists come together in a common desire to transform the education system.
Paradoxically, May 68 constitutes a watershed. The increased politicization of schools hardens pre-existing divisions ; the reform consensus of the 1960s tends to disappear. It is no coincidence that the most virulent criticisms against the Faure law on universities in 1968 came from the far left, the far right as well as the Defense Committees of the Republic, the hard wing of the Gaullist movement.
School reform, revealing a malaise ?
The ministry of Alain Savary (1981-1984) reveals this political-educational turning point. For three years, reforms were carried out: creation of ZEPstrengthening the continuing training of people via MAFPENetc. However, the desire to bring together public schools and contract education failed, with the withdrawal, on July 12, 1984, of the law that Alain Savary had patiently prepared on this subject. Part of public opinion, including on the left, now denounces the changes at school, perceived as excessive and dangerous for the institution. It is encouraged by extremely critical essays and libels, which advocate a return to “ traditional school ” Or “ republican “.
Does this mean that reforms would have become impossible after 1984? ? Antoine Prost emphasizes that major transformations have taken place since that date. He takes the example of the creation of professional baccalaureates in 1985, that of university teacher training institutes (IUFM) by the so-called Jospin orientation law of 1989, as well as the “ common base » instituted by the Fillon orientation law of 2005. However, in all cases, we are struck by the violence of the debates and oppositions.
Antoine Prost concludes this fascinating work by highlighting the difficulty of linking the passions driven by a reform and its future in the medium term. Thus, the Debré law of 1959 sparked an unprecedented mobilization of the secular camp, which did not prevent contract teaching from taking root in the educational landscape. Conversely, the IUFMwhich constituted neither the most highlighted nor the most controversial aspect of the Jospin law, quickly crystallized a current of deep hostility against them, as shown in André Kaspi’s report in 1993.
As Antoine Prost points out, school reform requires a conjunction of social demand, educational actors and the political field. However, such a situation tends to become rarer. Let us make three hypotheses to explain this evolution. In a French society which maintains an obsessive relationship with the educational institution, this consensus is difficult to obtain. It is all the more so since, since 1995, the cessation of educational expansion (stagnation of access to the baccalaureate) tends to harden the oppositions between the actors of the education system. Finally, not only are expectations regarding school increasing and becoming more intense, but they are contradictory: social diversity and free choice, segregation and openness, autonomy and fear of a multi-speed system. To use an aquatic metaphor, by loading school reform with countless demands and hopes, are we not condemning it to taking on water? ?