1975 - Unknown Author: PhD Thesis:
Kilquhanity School
. . . To some extent the school is isolated. Public transport is infrequent with two buses a day. The staff find it too expensive on existing salaries to finance their own transport and only three of them including the headmaster, have cars. The two school vans are not well suited for private use: the one, a small temperamental Morris of early vintage tends to break down on journeys much further than the village The other, a large Bedford, a sound enough vehicle, is used predominantly for school visits. Being fairly expensive on petrol it is not often used by staff for private visits. It would seem for some of the teachers the school is a little cut-off from the outside world for at least part of the year.
Kirkpatrick Durham is visited more than anywhere else in the neighbourhood by both pupils and teachers. For the staff who are prepared to climb the brae leading to the village or who can lay their hands on transport, there is a pub, a veritable haven for those who want to ‘get away from it all’. For pupils the village shop is indispensable with its stock of sweets, biscuits and lemonade. During the school term a constant stream of children pass up and down the hill eager to pend pocket money on the ‘goodies’ the shop has to offer.
The nature of Kilquhanity freedom: . . . each person’s attitude towards freedom will differ considerably. This is why there has to be a consensus for the community to function with any degree of cohesion. It is this learning to give and take which is fundamental to the social wisdom the school endeavours to impart to all its pupils.
Aitkenhead believes that by creating an environment in which individuals live in peace and harmony he is providing an education for life in a world in which everyone has to learn how to make adjustments. One pupil was asked specifically what freedom meant to him: ‘For me freedom means here that if I don’t want to be with other people I don’t have to be; I can be left alone.’
Aitkenhead was asked what sort of school he considered it to be: ‘Well I would like to think of this place as being an ordinary school for ordinary kids.’
Over the last three decades about half the pupil intake, on average, have had some form of learning or behaviour problem. The headmaster prefers to regard all of them as ordinary children. He finds the word ‘maladjusted’ distasteful and tends to use the phrase ‘mixed up kids’ in preference.
His view is that if children are treated badly then it is natural they will behave badly. Beating the child only exacerbates the difficulties. It may not be possible to find the cause of the problem, anti-social behaviour or the ineffective learning but one has to believe as a matter of strategy that there is a cure. The most effective therapy is that of genuine human care and affection: put children into an environment where this already exists, and add to it the type of freedom defined above, then most children improve and some recover completely.
Aitkenhead: ‘About half the parents sending children here are sending them because they fully believe in the system and it is not because there are any specific learning or behavioural problems with respect to their children.
Another quarter, approximately, are prepared to skrimp and save and sacrifice in order to send their kids here knowing that what the state system was providing is insufficient in terms of the needs of their child.
The other twenty five percent which are supported by the state, because the state itself is not able to supply the environment in which these children can improve and develop.
What is extremely important to note is that the school benefits from the kids with difficulties because it is here that the element of charity comes in. In the real world there are people who have got emotional behavioural problems and this is a fact we have to accept. What is of course disturbing is that, for example, List D schools are populated by kids, who not only have the problems of adverse home environments, but have had to attend schools which rather than providing any form of therapeutic environment have more often than not only added to kid’s existing disadvantages. In the so-called normal school, the child is divided in so many ways. He is divided by social class, he is divided by ability, he is divided by age. Here this thing just does not happen.’
One other aspect worth mentioning concerns teachers’ academic and professional qualifications. Aitkenhead places far more importance on teachers’ personalities than on their paper qualifications. It is essential for the school’s success that teachers have the personal qualities which will enable them to establish a warm relationship with all the other members of the community and in particular with the children.
Of the nine full-time teachers six are fully trained; one, the headmaster, is a graduate. One of the remaining three attended a Teacher Training College but left, not because of examination failure, but because he did not approve of either the methods or the philosophy in vogue at that particular college; another teaches sewing and dressmaking; and the third may complete her qualifications when she returns to France.
The Government of the School: Aitkenhead’s Role and Style of Management: Decision Making: Although the school was formed into a Trust in 1970 it has made little or no difference to the overall management and organisation of Kilquhanity. A large part of decision-making lies within the hands of the headmaster who, although he recognises and co-operates with the ‘democratic’ institutions of the school, may on occasions behave not unlike a benevolent despot.
Decision making is shared between headmaster, staff and pupils. Some of the most important decisions affecting the community are reserved for Aitkenhead; he makes them without recourse to staff or Council meetings. These would include such items as the fees to be charged, which pupils should be accepted or rejected, the appointment and retention of staff, capital expenditure on building and equipment. The staff on the whole seem to accept that such matters should be left to his discretion. He does attempt to leave other matters which are not of fundamental importance the Council Meeting or to the staff meeting although even here it has been suggested he will listen but in the final analysis makes up his own mind.
Aitkenhead, without question does command the respect of the great majority if not all of his staff and pupils. The writer feels that the whole ethos of Kilquhanity is very much related to the personality of its headmaster; the school is his creation and it might be felt that he could hardly be expected to surrender control over it altogether. (Perhaps the role of the progressive headmaster has inherent contradictions). It may be more accurate to assert that the system relies on very full consultation and communication based on warm human relations than to call it ‘democratic’.
Aitkenhead as a Leader: Community spirit and participation do not eliminate the need for leadership but they do change its nature. The aspirations to freedom and equality of status at Kilquhanity generate expectations about Aitkenhead’s behaviour: he tends to conform to these expectations, generally not behaving in an arbitrary manner. Structural authority here can be regarded as a reserve power called into operation ‘when necessary’. The effectiveness of Aitkenhead as a leader emanates partly from his personality, partly from the specific needs of the community and partly from his sapiential (relating to wisdom) authority, all of which contribute towards his personal authority.
Aitkenhead has mastered the techniques of leadership in this predominantly informal environment. He excels in his sensitivity to the needs of others, particularly children, and in his ability to communicate as also in his receptiveness to the ideas of others as long as they do not conflict too fundamentally with his own. Although the nature of his leadership change depending on the circumstances, for a large part of the time he is cast in the role of a benevolent and caring father, watchful of his charges.
One further point should be added here: at Kilquhanity, like so many other progressive schools, depends for its success on the leadership, personality and charisma of one leader. There must be some doubt as to whether it can survive with anything like its present character once Aitkenhead ceases to be the headmaster.
Staff Meetings: It is important to realise that ‘staff’ is an all inclusive term in this context. All adults are eligible to attend staff meetings and are expected to do so. In addition to the teachers there will also be the cook, full-time domestic staff as well as the farmer. The general format of the meeting is as follows – the Chairman is almost invariably the headmaster who initiates discussion and introduces the items on the agenda. Each person is free to contribute in what is a fairly informal atmosphere. The chairman will become involved in discussions himself. He endeavours to influence opinion and not infrequently presses his own case so forcefully that he inadvertently overrules others who would not wish to offend him. This view is not held by all teachers.
A significant amount of time is taken up with the problems of specific children including emotional difficulties and learning problems. Outside specialists may be called in to advise on more serious cases of a psychological nature. Other topics do come up an there have been times when marked differences of opinion have emerged. As in most group situations, complex factors are at work determining the way individuals respond or conform to group pressures.
It is in such circumstances that Aitkenhead’s authority is evident. It was suggested by two members of staff that they found it difficult to have their ideas accepted. Because of the immense loyalty to the headmaster few individuals were prepared to argue with him at length. Some of the staff felt that there were strong pressures to conform, whilst others felt that they were free to differ but agreed with Aitkenhead on most of the basic policies.
The Council Meeting: . . . . No subjective evaluation of the Council Meeting could possibly substitute for actual attendance at a meeting. It is true that qualitatively they may vary to some extent from week to week yet what is being demonstrated is the tolerance of the members of the community, a tolerance not simply between adult and child but between children themselves.
The School Council epitomizes not only the participation of all at the lower levels of decision-making but also represents the institutionalisation of the belief that the best type of community will be the one in which individuals are able to disagree yet remain good friends.
It was not long before the Chairman (aged 16 ½ years) demonstrated his ability to handle the various items on the agenda. It would have been easy to assume that because he was a referred pupil he might not have been able to perform the task adequately. There were a number of contentious items to be discussed and there were bound to be differences of opinion. Yet, W’s insight, self-control and sound judgement were readily noticeable. It would have been impossible to surmise from his performance that he had behavioural problems when he first came to the school. what was also remarkable was that those other pupils originally with similar problems no longer exhibited any sign of them.
Many of these pupils were able to contribute to the Council Meeting in an effective, constructive and mature manner. It was apparent from the whole tenor of the proceedings that individuals really did care about their fellow members. The younger children were encouraged to express their ideas and on the whole they availed themselves of the opportunity. On three or four occasions older pupils spoke up on behalf of others who were either too nervous or self-conscious to speak. The teachers were also adept at adjusting their conversation to the needs of the child, making sure that their vocabulary was simple enough for all to understand.
There were many indications that pupils and staff were identifying with the community as a whole and when it was a question of choosing between the school and loyalty to the individuals who infringed the rules, the community interest came first. At Kilquhanity different social norms seem to be in operation. It is sufficient to let it be known that the person responsible for a breakage had been seen for him to admit it. There are other pressures beside identification with the community which encourages individuals to be honest.
If they confess to damage or theft they invariably get a fair hearing and usually mitigating circumstances are taken into consideration: these may include allowances for the psychological condition of the person concerned. An excellent example of this occurred at the meeting. If someone neither confesses nor is caught the cost of repairs or replacement goes on to the general levy which simply means the community as a whole has to pay. This could become an expensive affair and it is therefore not surprising that members of the community keep their eyes open so that it is generally known who is responsible for the damage and the matter can be dealt with.
Aitkenhead has claimed that children show great charity towards each other. What was particularly striking was the ability of the children to make allowances.
Because the non-teaching staff are so few it would be impossible to run the school at all without both pupils and teachers helping on the domestic side. The farmer is concerned with his own specialised work but has to have help with the farm. Morag Aitkenhead carries a very heavy load not only attending to the book-keeping and paperwork but also playing a large part in assisting with planning, budgeting and domestic chores. The cook is also fully occupied.
This usually leaves one full-time member of staff on domestic with possibly one or two other ladies coming in on a part-time basis. In order to carry the workload other hands are required. One could argue quite easily for another two full-time domestic workers but there are at least two reasons for not having this: there is the problem of paying them and possibly accommodating them and, further the ‘useful work’ can be regarded as an essential part of each pupil’s training and education. One is reminded of Aristotle’s stress on the importance of training young people in good habits.
A list of all the jobs that have to be done in the school is drawn up. At the beginning of each year the School Council elects a Useful work Committee with a Chairman. This committee meets at the beginning of each term.
Spring 1975 Spring Term Useful work Teams: Stable – Nicola, Wanda: Bike workshop – Andrew, Dunja, Roderick; Kindling – Greg, Angus, Charlie; Library – Jesse, Christine, Patrick; Fires – Thomas, Benedicte; Upstairs Wash-up – Claire; Junior School Room – Keith, Imogen, Brendan, Luke; Farm – Rory, Alistair L., Jane, Robert, (slops – Johnny, Grant H., Jim); Log Sawing – Bruce, Stuart, Sam, Adam; Art Room – Bridgie; Coffee Places – Stephen B.; Workshop – Anne; Lab. – Gordon; Stairs – Tom; Kitchen – Margo, Cary, Liz; Bins – Alistair D., Grant J.; Middle Landing Sweeping – Matt G., Hugh; Bathroom – AJ; Red house Sweeping - Matt G., Hugh; Lodge – Kirsty; Windows – Campbell; Hall – Douglas; Back Door Sweeping – Chris M; Downstairs Wash-up – Matt N.; Mugs – Stephen P, Jake; Compost – Edmund; Downstairs Sweeping – Heather.
Mostly the tasks were not carried out grudgingly. The majority of children were working alongside or in proximity to adults doing the same or similar jobs. They all had very much the same status. One may suggest that under these conditions social barriers would be reduced or eliminated with each person co-operating, any differences of age or position or ‘class’ between fee-paying pupils and others tended to become irrelevant. The system of useful work can be said not only to have an economic role but also a social one: - it drwas the school together into a cohesive unity.
Paid Jobs: The amount of money to be paid is not usually a matter for negotiation. A set scale of charges is laid down for most jobs and whether a pupil works or not is completely voluntary. Naturally if he has been paying fines recently he may welcome the chance to bring in a little cash and may actually be on the look-out for extra paid work to do.
Helping with breakfast (weekdays) 5 days @ 1 hour 40p
Helping with breakfast (weekend) 2 days @ 1 hour 30p
Downstairs wash-up (weekdays) 5 days @ ¾ hour 30p
Bell Ringing (weekdays) 5 days @ 40 minutes 30p
Kitchen Floor (weekends) 1 day @ 1 hour 15p
Potato peeling (all week) 7 days @ 1 hour 45p
The Headmaster was to explain why such a system actually existed. He believes that it has many advantages, one of the main ones being that it teaches children the value of money and therefore contributes to their general education; it no doubt also helps the school to be viable.
Pocket money: Every Friday afternoon a queue gathers outside the library: this is where the official payment of pocket money actually takes place. A teacher and two pupils conduct the operation. The teacher sits behind a table with the iron till in front of him. To his right is a senior pupil responsible for marking the ledger. There is usually another pupil responsible for taking deposits. The whole affair is conducted methodically and only one pupil ‘customer’ is allowed in at a time to ensure absolute privacy.
The large ledger not only contains debits and credits relating to pocket money but also has details of fines levied at the School Council Meeting. Another feature of the pocket money system at the school is that there is a fixed scale of pocket money paid each week and this depends on the pupil’s age. Parents are asked to co-operate in this matter so that there are no pupils who are very wealthy at the school whilst others are relatively poor.
Classroom Observation
1. Domestic Science: Optional Lesson: 1 hour: Margie Tolstoy: 4 pupils.
‘Well, how did you get on last week?’
It was difficult to draw a dividing line between the ‘lesson proper’ and the preceding conversation. One naturally flowed into the other because of the informal nature of the interaction. The pupils behaved impeccably, all contributing constructively to the lesson and demonstrating their sensitivity to the needs of others. On no one occasion did an individual interrupt while someone else was talking. It was clear that all pupils were enjoying themselves and that the class was working as a cohesive group.
2. Mathematics: Compulsory: 5 mornings: 1 hour: Helen Pierce: 6 pupils.
The table around which the 6 pupils sat was so large that they could be three feet apart. The teacher was able to have easy access to each child and periodically moved round the table in a clockwise fashion. The class did not appear to be functioning as a cohesive group. One of the reasons for this was that the teacher strongly believed that the child should be free to follow his or her own interest within certain specified limits; in no sense would this involve regimentation.
Consequently no one child was at the same stage or studying exactly the same topic. Other important factors were that the pupils had entered Kilquhanity this session, most of them suffering at least initially from behavioural or learning problems and that they had been selected for this class because the teaching style was considered suitable for them. Pupil monologue was interesting because it provided strong evidence as to the nature of classroom management and the teacher’s attitude towards unorthodox behaviour.
a. Pupil kneeling on his chair, having been humming away for a minute, shouted out, ‘I am a tit, a great big tit’. For no observable reason. No one made any comment.
b. Two pupils sitting next to each other, had, a somewhat peculiar verbal abrasion – ignoring each other while attempting to incite some reaction. Pupil 1: ‘Oh fucking hell, you are shaking the table.’ Pupil 2: For God’s sake, you’ve got my blotting paper.’ Heads were not turned and they simply carried on as if the other child never existed.
c. Here, Pupil 1 started to sing a rude version of a popular song, soon stopping when he appreciated that nobody was taking any notice.
d. Pupil 4 whilst the others in the class were all active – some humming, others talking to themselves – said, ‘I’ll tell you which one I have done; it’s the difficult one, it’s the castle.’ Again nobody took any notice.
e. Pupil 1 again, ‘You’re nothing but a big fat bum.’ Whether he was referring to himself or to somebody else, it was impossible to tell; yet no response was forthcoming.
The important feature here was that the teacher did not react to the provocative speech. A lot of time was spent answering individual questions. Questions concerning permission to do something, rather than seeking information, tended to predominate. One explanation could be that the questioning was symbolic of the need of the child to be in emotional contact with the teacher. With quite a number of questions it was most likely that the child was aware of the answer: ‘
May I look at another book?’; ‘Can I try another problem?’; ‘Will you let me use this card?’ It was if they required some form of confirmation that they were not losing the teacher’s friendship and affection, indicating that the ‘needs’ of the child went far beyond the academic. One of the advantages of the informal classroom is that children have a chance to develop at their own pace. The teacher herself had this to say: - ‘most of the kids get ‘up-tight’ very easily. They come here with different expectations: - most of them expect to be forced to learn. Forced feeding is not really part of our repertoire.’
3. Art: Optional: Art Room: 1 hour: Lyndal Price: Pupils 3 to 6.
No pupil was tied to a specific location and it seemed to be one of the characteristics of the class that they moved around quite a lot. There were supposed to be 6 pupils in the class between the ages of 12 -16. This class was extremely informal and lacked any kind of overall structure. The teacher was very accessible but tended not to interfere in what pupils were doing.
If interest was flagging she would either give encouragement or suggest other things to do. There were only three individuals who could be said to be seriously occupied including one pupil who came in from the woodwork room for a change. There was quite a lot of movement between the woodwork room and the art room and this was not frowned upon. Art meant more than painting or drawing: it included modelling and other creative pursuits.
4. Woodwork: Woodwork Room: Free Choice: 1 ½ hours: Richard Jones: Pupils between 4 – 9 present.
‘To help children be themselves and do their own thing.’ To provide the technical skill and ‘know how’ to enable pupils to achieve what they have set out to do. There was an impressive array of equipment which included not only the woodwork benches but a turning lathe, grinding machines, polishers, drills and many hand tools. Below the classroom there were extensive storage facilities for wood, some of which was cut and in the the process of being dried by the school. The pupil’s position in the room was naturally determined by the nature of the task – the job had to be taken to the machine.
Pupils tended to come and go as they wished. There was very much of a voluntary ‘club’ atmosphere. Pupils whistled, sang and banged away with hammers; they were not interrupted unless they were deliberately annoying somebody – in fact, whilst the observer was there the teacher had no occasion to intervene for disciplinary reasons. The observe had visited this room on three previous occasions and on each of those it would be true to say that the pupils were so interested in and pleased with what they were doing that thye had neither the time nor the inclination to misbehave.
Two pupils were occupied making rings out of stainless steel. One had cut and shaped hers and was polishing it under the watchful eye of the teacher; the other was waiting her turn. Once completed the rings of a remarkedly high quality, and the girls were delighted. The achievement of making such attractive items, well designed and beautifully finished, must be particularly important for these two children who, coming from broken homes, had had their confidence severely undermined.
A third pupil was working on a sailing dinghy in the middle of the room. The standard of work was excellent and it was clear beyond any doubt that a combination of strong motivation and first-class instruction had been at work. Again, the sense of achievement was immense. This could be seen after a brief period of sandpapering: the pupil ran his hand along the side of the bow with the confidence of a professional boat builder.
The fourth pupil (14 years) had suffered from dyslexia and also lacked confidence when he first came to the school. It was found that he was musical, so he was encouraged in this and was making great progress. Here he was making a violin under the supervision of the woodwork teacher.
Pupil 5 (14 years) had had behavioural problems but these had long since been solved. At one time it was thought he was retarded but according to the teacher, on his present performance he would be able to pass his ‘O’ Level in woodwork. Having previously made some stools and turned bed-lamps, he was now making a small bookcase and was very proud of what he was doing.
Pupil 6 (15 years) was turning a fruit bowl out of hard wood. The elm had been cut locally and seasoned at the school.
Pupil 7 (12 years) was making a coffee table for his mother’s Christmas present. He was not being supervised at the time, but demonstrated to the observer that he knew exactly what he was doing.
It appears to the writer that each pupil is regarded as unique and although there has to be some conformity this does not mean uniformity. The needs of each child are taken very seriously into consideration. No class at Kilquhanity is organised solely around a syllabus. Education starts with the individual child and finishes with the individual child. In this sense the philosophy of the school is to a very considerable degree reflected in the classroom. It is probably true that ‘freedom’ is not interpreted in exactly the same way in each class, but this is seen as a distinct advantage. Each class differently structured provides the child with a variety of contexts in which to develop as he or she passes through the school.
This author carried out several questionnaires to staff, pupils and former pupils. Sadly this document is incomplete and not all results are available.
Former Pupils were asked to write comments about their time at Kilquhanity:
1. I think it would be great to have another school like Killy on the map so’s other may have the freedom and companionship that people at Killy had. The best thing about Killy is the freedom and companionship which developed responsibility, co-operation and the confidence which enables one to mix with anyone regardless of social standing’
2. ‘It was very good because I enjoyed the outdoor pursuits.’
3. ‘It seemed to me that Kilquhanity was more concerned about the human side of things and was not really academically orientated. Some teachers were very good, and some weren’t, or specialised in a certain subject. I found that the school really ‘opened me out’ and allowed my character to form naturally, without imprinting anyone else’s ideas as the way I ought to be. The standard of teaching could have been better, as teachers tended to come and go, or were often young people who stayed for a year, perhaps, to gain experience of the type of school Kilquhanity was (and, I hope, still is). I am sure for children who had some kind of problem, Kilquhanity was the best place to be; it had a tremendous atmosphere of belonging – no one was ‘left out’. I know some kids wouldn’t be the happy people they are now if it wasn’t for Kilquhanity.’
4. ‘Kilquhanity would do a lot better than does at the moment if there was more money in the school.’
5. ‘My only regret concerning Kilquhanity, is that I did not make better use of the academic side of my education; I feel very ignorant in many basic subjects which I would have acquired in a more orthodox school; it was too easy to do only what I wanted where class work was concerned. Although it is a sheltered and perhaps slightly idealistic situation, I think Kilquhanity teaches, very well, human co-operation, in living and working together, which I feel is more useful than a collection of certificates.’
6. ‘The school’s political bias was unfortunate. The staff must be allowed to assume more control. John’s veto is used to often.’
7. ‘In such a small space it is difficult to give Killy all the credit it is due. I would agree with the suggestion that similar schools should be opened in every county. This would give parents a better choice in the freedom of education for their kids. Having spent some time in a teacher training college I realise what superb opportunities Kilquhanity offered in extending my knowledge in any subject I wish to pursue. This freedom can only be offered at a school like Kilquhanity.’
8. ‘I had a very free time at the school. I was never made to work. When I decided to take some examinations the teachers helped me to catch up on the academic subjects which had before seemed unimportant, making me well able to take, and pass the exams I needed. It is not the fact that I got my exams that makes me glad I went to Kilquhanity: it is the fact that I learned there, how to learn. This is something that, in my opinion, I could never have learnt anywhere else.’
9. ‘If it had not been for Killy I don’t know what would have become of me.’
10. ‘I would think twice if I have children about sending them. It would all depend on the type of child. If she or he were happy at an ordinary school I would leave them be otherwise I would send them. I also feel it is a pity it’s a boarding school as I now think one loses a lot from being away from home, life and friends I made as a small kid, and all so suddenly losing all the friends I made at Kilquhanity.’
11. ‘during my stay at Kilquhanity I helped at the farm and though helping there it mde me decide to take up farming. This type of school helped me and gave me confidence.’
12. ‘Sewing facilities were very good. I took full advantage of a good interest in sewing and woodwork.’
13. ‘I think more people should open their eyes to the beauty and family environment which this school provides as opposed to the increase violence and uncertainty which one is immediately initiated into by modern state schools. I think you need people you can talk to without having to worry about being a ‘pet’ or a teacher’s idol. Kilquhanity is more a large loving family than a school. By that I don’t mean it misses out on education. At Kilquhanity the pupil learns more tha just academic education. Also, the pupil has the choice to learn what he/she wants.’
14. ‘I was backward with my speech when I first went to Kilquhanity and it helped me to catch up with other subjects. It was very friendly.’
15. ‘well I was 12 years old when I first went to Kilquhanity and had been at an orthodox school for several years beforehand, it was owing to my progress (or should I say total lack of it) that my parents decided to send me to Kilquhanity. At first I was not agreeable, but soon realised john’s school was something desirable and necessary. Council Meetings were often boring but definitely necessary.’
16. ‘What it meant to me was a chance to grow in my own time and in my own way. Simply a natural experience to learn in your own time what you cando, and what you are good at.’
Postscript:
To judge Kilquhanity one needs a fully formed philosophy of life against which to measure it and even then one could only say whether one agreed with or differed from the Kilquhanity philosophy, not whether the school did its task well or badly, because it doesn’t, as I see it, aim at some narrow definable target which it can be said to hit or miss. Kilquhanity is not so much about the target as about the act of aiming; it is a way of life, not a school in any ordinary sense.
Everyone at Kilquhanity is finding a way of living individually and as a community. The ‘end’ for each is individual and different, and cannot be spoken of as success or failure. In so far as one can separate classroom from the life around it, one might find the classes fail to do some things and succeed in others; but it may be that Kilquhanity was not aiming at these things, and one can only then ask: - should it be?’
Thus wrote Mair Llewelyn and in so doing indicated the methodological problems of attempting to evaluate Kilquhanity’s contribution. Certainly the way one looks at Kilquhanity will very much be a function of ones own personal philosophy of life. Those who for various reasons rank highly, status, position, power, material success may feel that academic achievement should be the principle priority of the educational system. For them Kilquhanity may well fall short of their requirements.
On the other hand there will be those who view life in wider terms. For them the word ‘happiness’ will be related to human relations ‘being right with one’s self and the world’ Kilquhanity will appeal because its philosophy will coincide with their philosophy.
It may be questioned what is therefore the significance of Kilquhanity to education and indeed to society if like traditional schools in many respects it is unrealistic or artificial, It seems to the writer that the state school is very much a bye-product pf the society on which it depends for its existence: to this extent it has to follow. Kilquhanity on the other hand brings a message to society and to that extent is endeavouring to lead. That message cannot adequately be portrayed in a sentence: it is an approach to life, a mode of existence. At the school at least, the generation of human happiness is a reality, not a theory.
One has to admit to the possibility that in modern times man’s preoccupation with material progress has obscured the importance of both human and spiritual qualities. It may be claimed that intellectual excellence includes these qualities, yet, if that is the case, one wonders why they are largely neglected in the modern school. Both school and society may well have something to learn from this experiment.
For those who say that Kilquhanity is an experiment that the state cannot afford they would do well to consider the following extract from the Glasgow Herald (19th March, 1977): -
‘The weekly cost of a List D place is £52, due to rise to £63 from April 1st. The cost of a place at Gordonstoun is £40 a week.’
When one adds to this that only one pupil out of 46 leaving Kilquhanity over the last five years has become a ‘problem’ with respect to anti-social behaviour, it may reasonably be asked whether the state can afford not to take a closer look at John Aitkenhead’s school.
I think the Kilquhanity has the right to be as Kilquhanity is – which is something alive and changing. Kilquhanity is the people who are there and what they bring to it, and changes as they change.
The philosophy and educational principles and practice on which Kilquhanity is founded deserve to be considered carefully by all those concerned with education.
