18th February 2000

Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs
P O Box 31010
London
SW1H 9ZL

Dear Lord Burns

On behalf of the Countryside Foundation for Education, I would like to draw to the Inquiry's attention a particular aspect of the social and cultural life of the countryside to which hunting with dogs contributes - education.

I hope that you find the attached submission and video of interest.

Yours sincerely

Dawn Goodfellow (Mrs)

Enc

The Countryside Foundation For Education (CFE) is a registered charity, established in 1986 with the aim of creating an understanding of rural Britain as a living, working environment. It pursues this aim through working with the maintained and independent school systems, producing teaching materials and providing initial and in-service teacher training on the countryside as a resource for learning.

Both the materials and training cover the widest range of countryside and land use issues. As laid down within the charitable objectives, no view is taken on the morals or ethics of any particular activity and teachers and students are encouraged to research the range of opinions held about controversial issues. Within our pack for primary schools, one of the ten activities presented is a role-play about the local council debating whether fox hunting should be banned on council land. Six cards representing villagers for the motion and six against are included. Either individuals or groups of children take on each role in the debate. This activity is designed to be used in the context of the children having learned about village life, farming practices and wildlife prior to the debate. They should, therefore be debating from the point of view of having at least some knowledge.

Feedback from teachers who have used the pack and undertaken this activity has been extremely positive. Comments made refer to the very high quality of work children have produced as a result of their interest and motivation arising from the subject. Many teachers have reported that votes taken before and after the debates have shown both increases in the number of students voting for, rather than against, hunting and particularly those who acknowledged that it was a far more complex issue than they had previously considered, and one on which they no longer held an opinion either way.

Constant changes to, and reform of, the schooling system and the National Curriculum in recent years have resulted in many schools and teachers having adopted something of a 'siege' mentality.

This has meant that rather than embracing exciting, innovative subjects and approaches they have retrenched into those areas of the curriculum they perceive as most urgent eg. literacy or numeracy. Whilst the National Curriculum in both its past and present forms does allow the opportunity study such issues, at present only the strongest teachers are taking that opportunity and much creative work is being stifled.

Our experience of working with students, teachers and parents shows that the level of knowledge about the British countryside as a whole is very low. Teachers, as a broadly representative cross-section of our society as a whole, come in the main from an urban background. Even if they are from a rural background, the likelihood is that someone from an urban background will have trained them. Therefore, there is little understanding of the many different issues relating to the management of our countryside and even less of using it as a teaching resource.

This low level of understanding of the context generally means that teachers are frequently unwilling or reluctant to teach about controversial issues. In addition to their lack of confidence in their own knowledge, there is also a lack of appropriate and balanced material to support them. At a time when there is intense competition, from a whole range of subjects and interest groups, for curriculum time, teachers will understandably use those resources most accessible and relevant to their needs. We have also found that often teachers are concerned about handling controversial issues because of fear of what school governors wil~1 say or comment from colleagues.

Our research has shown that most of the material available to teachers on controversial issues like hunting is produced by lobby groups. Therefore, even though it purports to be presenting fact rather than opinion, it is almost always biased. Whilst that bias may be inferred/expected from the source of some materials eg. The League Against Cruel Sports or The Countryside Alliance, in some cases teachers can be misled about whether what they are being presented with is fact or opinion where they perceive the source as 'respectable' or non-partisan eg. the RSPCA. The far greater financial resource of organisations such as the RSPCA has also meant that anti, rather than pro, hunting materials have been much better publicised and more readily available to schools.

The high profile that hunting has assumed in the media in recent years has understandably made teachers somewhat reluctant to tackle the topic, for fear of reaction from parents.

In 1997, at the request of the Institute of Education at Warwick University a project was set up which looked at the teaching of controversial issues in primary schools. The project took the CFE's Lychford File and in particular the foxhunting activity as the focus for the project. It involved nine first year trainee teachers, the teacher mentors from the schools they were going to on teaching practice and their course tutors. The CFE set up an initial training day, at which representatives of both the RSPCA and the British Field Sports Society addressed the students and their mentors.

Further workshop sessions looked at the teaching of controversial issues more generally. Each of the students was able to at least incorporate the theme of hunting into their teaching practice; in most cases they were able to make it a full topic. They were encouraged to use the CFE material and any personal experience they were able to arrange - visits or speakers- and use hunting as a context for teaching across the whole curriculum. There were some excellent examples of drama, music and technology and English as well as the debates that took place on the issue itself. For many it was the first debate they had ever had at that age. At the end of the topic another half-day workshop was organised by the CFE where the students and mentors were debriefed.

Dr Susan Barker, one of the course tutors followed the progress of the students and schools both in 1997 and the subsequent year when the university chose to repeat the exercise. Attached is a copy of the report that Dr Barker wrote.

Dr Barker's findings very much mirror those of the CFE with existing and student teachers and schools across the country.

The project had three phases:

June/July 1997 Nine first year teacher training students working on the theme of hunting in school with KS2 children.

Children's views on hunting do not seem to be influenced by the type of school, sex of the child or ability. The main influencing factor was the extent and range of information they received through the project. Children who studied the topic in detail with inputs representing a variety of views (sometimes including visits to kennels or outside speakers) were able to make logical informed decisions. Many children in classes in this category agreed with hunting as an integral part of country life and those who agreed to the contrary were still able to present well-thought arguments. In classes where a more superficial approach to the project was taken the majority of children responded on a purely emotional level and dismissed hunting as purely a cruel and barbaric sport.

Schools A, B and C had spent a considerable amount of time on the project, had involved outside speakers and/or visits. School D had more difficulty integrating the topic into the curriculum and had spent less time with no outside speakers or visits. There was a large difference in the numbers of children agreeing/disagreeing with hunting and the quality of arguments presented. Knowledge of hunting as a result of the project, particularly in schools A, B and C, was considerable with only a few misconceptions such as otters being hunted . Few children mentioned hunting of non-native animals such as crocodiles in this country. Children found learning about such issues extremely motivating because it was a real life issue and that their views were acknowledged and valued; they were not just simply learning facts.

All teachers indicated reservations at the outset of project. On completion of the project they indicated that as a result of the overwhelming enthusiastic response by the children they would teach the theme again. None of the teachers' views on hunting had changed as a result of the project. Teachers lacked the confidence to address such issues in the classroom on their own initiative because of their controversial nature and/or lack of suitable 'off the peg' resources particularly for primary schools.

As the students were in their first year of training they all indicated they were most concerned at the thought of teaching such a controversial subject so early on. However at the conclusion of the project they indicated that the topic had been the highlight of their teaching practice. This was because they had ownership of the topic and one in which their creativity could be demonstrated. The enthusiastic response of children to their teaching was very rewarding and highly motivating. Four of the nine students had changed their views on hunting and those that had not, indicated that they were now much more aware of the complexity of the issue.

All the teachers and students commented on the value of taking hunting as a theme through which they delivered a whole range of subjects. It demonstrated how useful a tool it can be to integrate components of the curriculum and be a true cross-curricular theme. Most importantly it encouraged an understanding of values and promoted skills in decision making. It also involved real discussion and debate. Children gained experience in evaluating written materials, media reports and personal views of visitors or individuals on visits.

The attitudes of the students, teachers and children were very similar to the previous years project i.e. at the outset rather hesitant but on completion overwhelmingly enthusiastic. There were some difficulties in integrating the materials into the school practice particularly for secondary students but also in the primary school where there is an increasing emphasis on SATS. In both primary and secondary initial teacher education the shift to school-based training has continued with increasing emphasis on student teachers achieving standards set by OFSTED. This combined with the constraints of the National Curriculum leaves opportunities for creative projects such as this even more limited. Even so all those who were involved acknowledged the tremendous value of the project despite frustrations of the system'.

This was carried out with primary, secondary school pupils and undergraduates and the work has not been fully analysed but a superficial analysis indicates that individuals are greatly influenced by the immediacy of the material given. Students and pupils were shown clips of videos about hunting from BFSS, RSPCA and League Against Cruel Sports then asked to respond to written tasks which highlighted their views on hunting. Whatever video clip they had seen had a great impact and did change perceptions or points of view. A few individuals were unaffected by the materials and stuck to their original points of view but many were easily swayed. This research will highlight the immense power of the visual media and the importance of achieving an educational balance when teaching issues with polarised views.

It is clear from all three components that there is an urgent need for educational materials or projects that address the teaching of countryside issues in the classroom in a balanced way particularly for primary schools. Our citizens of tomorrow are making decisions without access to the full range of facts and/or education on how to make decisions. Educational materials on hunting in particular are very powerful and can be very persuasive and the most effective form of education should include a balance with a range of strategies including outside visits and speakers. The materials need to be both instructive in terms of knowledge about countryside issues, but also in how to discriminate between fact and opinion and how to make personal decisions. I think there is a unique opportunity with countryside education to link knowledge with value education. Addressing young newly qualified teachers or teacher education students will have the most impact. There is a certain amount of reluctance or lack of initiative by older teachers to develop such a theme in school. There was also some concern voiced by a minority that hunting as an issue is not appropriate for primary schools. Thus there is also thus a need for research into how progression of such materials could operate over the full age range from early years to secondary and adult education. Any materials that are developed for teacher education students would need to take into account OFSTED criteria and partnership training models.

Back to top

Date uploaded to site 16 May 2000