1. Cairo Institute of Liberal Arts and Sciences
Course Name: History of Education in Egypt
Academic Year: 2014/2015
Student Name: Nariman Moustafa
Reaction Paper
Torn between the influence of the bi-polar forces of nationalism and imperialism in shaping
the Egyptian education system during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, this
paper explores a third possibility: It argues that for higher education to achieve social justice,
it needs to break free from the aforementioned poles. The argument is built through
exploring a radical, less polarizing, liberal and autonomous University model highlighted by
Anthony Gorman in his paper Anarchists in Education: The Free Popular University in Egypt
(1901). The paper not only explores the model introduced by Gorman, but it also presents a
critique of his article’s shortcomings and the implications for our understanding of
independent education models.
Gorman sheds light on The Free Popular University, a unique model of a higher education
institution established by a core group of the anarchist community in Egypt. Through his
analysis of the social, political and cultural context and the forces at play, Gorman presents
us with a higher education case that aimed at free, opened, inclusive education for the
popular especially the working class and a "pluralist social discourse" (p.316).
Late nineteenth century Egypt was characterized by the British Occupation following a
modernization process affecting all walks of life including the military, educational and
economic systems. The latter period of time witnessed the organization of labour
movements into associations and unions from the Greeks, Italians, Jewish and others. It was
a dynamic era where education was seen a vehicle for social, political and cultural
transformation. Hence, a wide assemblage of schools representing different communities,
ideologies and approaches were present. However, higher education for the working class
focused mainly on technical and vocational skills.
Amid the described context, The Free Popular University in Egypt opened its doors to a
multi-ethnic, diverse Egyptian community in 1901. I have always believed that the end
means of education should be social justice. The model depicted by Gorman shows an
educational environment that, although started by Europeans mainly Italians, can
encompass and represent different Egyptian ethnicities, religions and socio-economic
backgrounds in one place.
The University, unfortunately, did not survive the nationalist, colonial and communitarian
forces at play as well as the turn over by the media which initially supported its founders.
Two years after its establishment, it was taken over by a mostly bourgeoisie ruling
committee and it remained in operation only until 1909.

2. There were a few issues that were not addressed in Gorman's case study. For example, we
do not know if there was a demand and a buy-in for an intellectual type of education by the
working class in Egypt or not. Did the working class, for example, prefer a market-driven
type of education that would allow them to make more money? Gorman mentions that
when The Free Popular University fell into the hands of a bourgeoisie administration, it
faced difficulty to attract students for classes like science, applied mathematics and physics
due to the disinterest of youth, their indifference and their attraction to "cafes and other
public establishments" (P.315). As readers, we are not told how the University managed to
attract and retain the working class to its intellectual subjects when it was in the hands of a
more liberal committee of which the majority was from the Anarchists community.
Additionally, throughout his paper, Gorman speaks of the Free Popular University as being
progressive especially in its first two years when governed by the principles of its Anarchist
founders. Meanwhile, he does not define what he means by the subjective term
"progressive". For me, I see the University's progressiveness derived from its non-conformity
to prevailing ideas of higher education at the time. The University opened its doors to all and
aimed at education for the labour and working class rather than the elites or the
bourgeoisie. It also offered equal opportunities to women preceding other higher education
institutions of the time. It broke free from the polarization of imperialist and nationalist
forces in shaping education to a broader internationalist, locally contextualized, perspective.
It preached a liberal discourse where a diverse Egyptian society was represented rather than
dominance by one community. Additionally, the university's philosophy, curricula and
methodology were driven by values of social justice rather than market-values that serve the
colonizer. Similarly, the University did not conform when it came to its financial patronage;
its founders favored self-sufficiency and financial independence through members'
subscriptions rather than depending on authorities funding. On top of all, it was a
University dedicated to the individual improvement as well as the social benefit through
focusing on mind, body and spirit.
I am very passionate about studying similar models of higher education that are conducive
to plurality, diversity and social justice. In the context of our post-modern world, the
question that always concerns me, when studying models of higher education similar to the
one presented in this paper, is how to maintain a balance between an internationalist nature
of an education environment (or in today's language: globalized nature, producing world
citizens) and rooting identity with its complex layers? In other words, how to capitalize on
the power of pluralistic education environments without creating inferiority and superiority
complexes on an intra or inter-cultural level? I don't necessarily have an answer. I think this
balance requires an educational environment that has a bit and a piece of different
educational approaches; this is what I am set to explore!