By Wilhelm (Bill) Arends
The Origins and Nature of Public Education in the Province of Ontario: Universal but not Egalitarian
The story of public education in the province of Ontario, extends back to the pre-confederation period, but it was at the beginning of Confederation that the nature of the system was being defined. It is difficult to fully understand the system of education during the latter part of the nineteenth century, as the structure of the school system was still in its infancy.
The education system from the middle to the end of the nineteenth century was in a stage of transition. Ontario’s universal education system would grow from a very informal one in the mid-nineteenth century to a very structured one. Domestic schooling was the most common type of schooling up to the middle of the century. This system was to drastically change as Ontario entered the confederation era.
The system that developed was structured to meet the needs of society according to a protestant upper class model. Therefore the structure of the system that developed was one based on upper-class Protestant ideals. Egerton Ryerson and the universal school system would forever change education in Ontario and give it a protestant upper class structure that was far from socially representative of class.
Alison Prentice in her book the School Promoters: Education and social Class in Mid-Nineteenth Century Upper Canada points out that Education history in Ontario was written by “schoolmen” and followed the American model that used a “congratulatory approach.” The two authors that Prentice sees as exemplifying this style of history are J. George Hodgins and J. Harold Putman. Putman’s first major work centered around the character of Egerton Ryerson it was entitled Egerton Ryerson and Education in Upper Canada. In this work he clearly states the objective of his writing as “to give a succinct idea of the nature and history of our Ontario School legislation [and] this legislation is so bound up with the name of Egerton Ryerson that to give its history is to relate the work of his life.” This great man centered approach though negates the fact that society helped to create the system as much as Ryerson the man. Society imposed forces on education that would inevitably change its character as much as the efforts of Ryerson. Marvin Lazerson in his article “Canadian Educational Historiography: Some Observations,” writes that “Ryerson’s role as historians are coming to understand, was to both help build a new system and to accommodate to social trends over which he had little control.” In a letter to Bishop Bethune Ryerson states that “My own humble efforts to invest our school system with a Christian Character and spirit have been seconded from the beginning by the cordial and unanimous cooperation of the council of public Instruction and without that cooperation my own individual efforts would have availed little.”
The growth of schooling in Ontario was not simply a byproduct of Ryerson’s efforts but due to the growing school house phenomenon. Domestic schooling predominated the first half of the nineteenth century. Many of these domestic schools or home schools were a means to supplement a family’s income, but often they had roots in religious societies and churches. As Johanna Selles points out in her article “A girl at Cheltenham: The Diary as an Historical Source” domestic religious education was commonly practiced by the Quakers which organized in “private households.” Susan E. Houston and Alison Prentice expand on this in their book Schooling and Scholars in Nineteenth Century Ontario, stating that the Quakers and the presbyterians also practiced domestic education but had developed a more formal school house centered education. In 1816 the Quakers had built their own school house and the presbyterians were not far behind in this education innovation, building their own school house in 1817. The trend toward a more formal approach to education was well under way.
The Common School Act of 1816 had allowed for government grants to towns villages or townships that wanted to set up their own schools, but had not endorsed a public educational system envisioned by Ryerson. Ryerson’s call for universal education was not to improve a student’s chances for advancement but to mold his or her behavior to a preconceived norm. All students were to be taught a set curriculum regardless of their class or ethnicity hat fit Ryerson’s upper class preconceptions of education and its purposes. This purpose being to a large degree a form of social control. He saw Christianity and morality as the key to good human conduct, and education as a means to that end. In an Editorial in the Christian Guardian Ryerson stated that “moral theory becomes a viable norm for human conduct only when it is integrated in and grounded on the all-encompassing truths of Christianity.” This belief was by no means unique to Ryerson as he was simply expressing opinions that were endemic to the educational system that existed before confederation. The Regulations on the constitution and government of schools in respect to religious and moral instruction, prescribed by the council of public instruction for Upper Canada, up held at the time a very Christian position. The regulations stated that “As Christianity is the basis of our whole system of elementary education, that principle should pervade it throughout.”
Ryerson’s chief accomplishment as Superintendent of schools from 1846 to 1876 was to centralize education in Ontario. He was to leave the system of trustees in place but removed their authority to a degree. Putman points out that Ryerson’s chief task was, that he “lessened local, and strengthened central, control, and did it so gradually, so wisely, and so tactfully, that local prejudices were soothed and in many cases the people scarcely recognized what was being done until the thing was accomplished.” Robin S. Harris in his work entitled “Quiet Evolution: A study of the Educational System of Ontario, believes that the system of education created by Ryerson was basically complete by 1867 but was simply a “ground floor.” Harris States that for Ryerson “it required twenty years of steady effort to build the ground floor, but by 1867 the job was essentially done.” Harris points out that while societal forces were influential in shaping the school system “ it was Ryerson who organized, related, and defined the basic elements and who provided the philosophic ideas which gave the developing system cohesion, inner consistency, and fulness.”
Ryerson’s biographical information sheds light on how societal influence helped to contribute to his construction of the School system. He was a Methodist Minister and the son of a United Empire Loyalist. He was the first editor of the first Methodist newspaper in Canada The Christian Guardian and the principal of the first college with university powers in Canada, the Methodist Upper Canada Academy. These experiences were to shape Ryerson’s views on education as he helped to shape the educational system of Ontario. His background as a Loyalist was to produce a particular direction to his ideas on education. Ryerson’s family having come from America, retained aspects of American ideals. As J. Donald Wilson points out in his article The Ryerson Years in Canada West, “like his American counterparts, Ryerson looked on the school as a vehicle for inculcating loyalty and patriotism, fostering social cohesion and self-reliance, and insuring domestic tranquility.” Patriotism according to Ryerson was inherent in the education system and lack of attention to this aspect of education could present problems for domestic tranquility. In a 1847 report to the Assembly of Canada Ryerson showed how strong his belief in this object of education was. He blamed American influences on Education for some of the radicalism that led to the 1837 rebellions. He stated that “in precisely those parts of Upper Canada where . . . United States schoolbooks had been used most extensively, there the spirit of the insurrection in 1837 and 1838 was most prevalent.” Ryerson tied the ideals of religion and order together. He believed that social order that had been rocked by rebellion required the lessons of religious sanctity to bring it back together. As Prentice states “The ‘world of men’ as Egerton Ryerson called it, seemed evil, Chaotic. The movement to send all children to school was, above all, a movement to bring Sanctity and order to human affairs.” Ryerson’s goal was to improve the mind of Children for religious reasons as well. Prentice points out that “The mind [Ryerson] argued in the 1870s was that which man had ‘in common with the angels and with God.’ ” According to Prentice Ryerson saw that “While political economy, science and education were important, they were meaningless if strictly secular.”
Drawing From Census data Michael B. Katz in his article, Who went to School, uses the employment of servants to determine economic and class distinction in early Ontario. His research shows that “there is a direct association between the employment of Servants and economic rank [and] the proportion of children attending school generally increased with the number of servants in a family.” The middle class morality that was therefore preached in schools stressed a life style of sobriety free of sin, and this moral education was endemic to Ryerson’s system of education. He believed there was “no guarantee that a man’s conscience would lead him away from the paths of Sin, for moral law was not innate, [and] could only be introduced to the mind by Christian revelation, and thus by Christian education.” Ryerson endeavored to include this Christian moral education into the New Provinces system of education. In a report on the Systems of popular education on the continent of Europe, in 1868, Ryerson concludes that examples of Christian education in Europe should be the model for education in Ontario. He states that “on the creation of legislature, and the inauguration of a new system of government, it seems appropriate to review the principles and progress of our system of education . . . [and] to be second to no country in our plans to secure . . . [the] blessings of a sound. Christian education.”
The System of Education that therefore developed was based on what upper class society believed to be needed to produce good moral Christian citizens, based on upper-class Protestant ideals. Katz in his article though does not see Ryerson’s attempts as highly successful and states that they did not alter the morals of the students to produce better class students. Katz states the “expansion of educational facilities reflected rather than altered the relations between social and ethnic groups.” Egerton Ryerson and the universal school system would make education in Ontario a protestant upper class tool that was far from egalitarian or representative of the students culture and ethnicity which sought to teach.
Bibliography
Prentice, Alison. The School Promoters: education and social Class in Mid-Century Upper
Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1999
Putman ,J. Harold. Egerton Ryerson and Education in Upper Canada. Toronto: William
Briggs, 1912
Selles - Roney, Johanna. “A girl at Cheltenham: The Diary as an Historical Source.” In
Historical Studies in Education. Vol. 3. No.1 (Spring 1991), 93 - 103.
Houston Susan E. and Alison Prentice. Schooling and Scholars in Nineteenth Century Ontario.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988
Ryerson. Egerton to Bishop Bethune, 13 July 1872. In Historical and Other Papers and
Documents Illustrative of the Educational System of Ontario, 1855 - 1872, Forming an
Appendix to the Annual Report of the Minister of Education. Ed. J. George Hodgins.
Toronto: L. K. Cameron, 1911. P. 71.
Lazerson, Marvin “Canadian Educational Historiography: Some Observations” in Egerton
Ryerson and His Times. Eds. Neil McDonald and Alf Chaiton. Toronto: Macmillan,
1978. pp. 3-8.
Egerton Ryerson, editorial in The Christian Guardian, 18 January, 1832, p. 116, c. 3.
Regulations on the Constitution and Government of Schools in Respect to Religious and Moral
Instruction, in Historical and Other Papers and Documents Illustrative of the Educational
System of Ontario, 1855 - 1872, Forming an Appendix to the Annual Report of the
Minister of Education. Ed. J. George Hodgins. (Toronto: L. K. Cameron, 1911) 58.
Harris, Robin S. Quiet Evolution: A Study of the Educational System of Ontario, Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 1967
Wilson , J.Donald “The Ryerson Years in Canada West”. In Education in Canada an
Interpretation. Eds. E. Brian Titley and Peter J. Miller.(Calgary: Detselig Enterprises,
1982. pp. 61-109.
Wilson, J. Donald“The Pre- Ryerson Years” In Egerton Ryerson and His Times. (Toronto:
Macmillan, 1978) pp. 9- 42.
Katz, Michael B. “Who Went to School” In Education and Social Change. Ed.Michael B. Katz
and Paul H. Mattingly. New York: New York University Press. 1975. pp.271- 293
Ryerson Egerton “Report on the Systems of Popular Education on the Continent of Europe ,
1868" In Historical and Other Papers and Documents Illustrative of the Educational
System of Ontario, 1855 - 1872, Forming an Appendix to the Annual Report of the
Minister of Education. Ed. J. George Hodgins. Toronto: L. K. Cameron, 1911. pp. 248-
278.
