Introduction

Mention of the democratic process points towards one explanation of this contemporary neglect of political education. From ancient times there has existed the conviction that one of the functions of the school is the education of rulers. Some of the outstanding classics of educational literature have been devoted to an examination of the ruler's function in different societies. Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Volitics, Quintilian's Orators, Castiglione's Book of the Courtier and Elyot's Governor, all dealt explicitly with the nature of government in particular societies (ideal or real) and assessed its educational implications (see Harrison for an examination of this literature). However, in a tyranny or oligarchy the nature of this educational task is not difficult to define. Governors are few in number and what the state requires of them is capable of fairly precise definition. But in a democracy this is not so. In some sense everyone is supposed to govern. Moreover, democratic societies are not rigidly closed structures: they are societies open to change and development. Thus the task of evaluating governmental institutions, of making informed and intelligent political decisions and, consequently, of educating democratic citizens is much more difficult. It rules out any form of political education conceived in terms of fitting the individual for his place in society. One's place is a shifting location: it is implicit in the concept of equality of opportunity that there will be considerable social mobility. The concept of an open society also rules out any possibility of learning political participation by rule of thumb. Grasp of political principles is required if there is to be accommodation to change.