[page 237]
REPORT
OF
The Hon. E. Lyulph Stanley, Sir John Lubbock, Bart, M.P., Sir Bernhard Samuelson, Bart., M.P., Dr. Dale, Sydney Buxton, Esq., M.P., T. E. Heller, Esq., Henry Richard, Esq., M.P., and George Shipton, Esq.
Reasons for dissenting from the Report of the Majority of the Commission, and Summary of our own Recommendations.
We humbly lay before your Majesty the following report:
We regret to be unable to sign the report which has been agreed to by the majority of our colleagues. After a long period of co-operation in the work of hearing witnesses, digesting returns, and deliberating upon conclusions, we should have been glad if we could have so far agreed with them as to have been able to sign their report, subject to reservations as to certain points of dissent. But unfortunately in the present case the differences of opinion, which apply as much to the general tone and arguments of the report as to its summary of conclusions, have been so many and so important that our signature would have conveyed a false impression. The proposal, more especially that voluntary schools should be enabled to claim aid from rates, would, it appears to us, re-open the whole settlement of 1870; and, further, while we recognise that the formation of the character of the children attending our elementary schools is of paramount importance alike to the children, the parents, and the nation, we fear that the recommendations regarding religious instruction contained in the report of the majority would lead to a renewal of bitter disputes and rivalries, which were and are happily subsiding. These differences alone, even in the absence of any others, compel us to set forth our conclusions in this report.
Some of us have desired to set out their deductions from the evidence, and the arguments by which they support their recommendations at considerably greater length, and they have done so in the separate report which follows this one.
Before entering upon the consideration of the questions on which we dissent from the majority, it may be convenient that we should point out some of the more important conclusions of their report on which (subject, as to some of us, to points of detail set out in our fuller report,) we agree generally with them, in order that we may give our united support to these recommendations, as to which we are in substantial agreement.
We agree, as to the school supply, that accommodation is needed throughout England and Wales for one-sixth of the population, though in certain districts, such as Lancashire and the West Riding, the requirements amount to nearly a fifth.
As to the structural suitability of the present school supply, we agree with the majority that "the time has now come when the State may well be more exacting in requiring for all children a proper amount of air and space, suitable premises, airiness, and lightness of site, and reasonable extent of playground"; and we approve the rule of the department that 10 square feet and 100 cubic feet should be the minimum
[page 238]
amount of accommodation provided for each child in average attendance in all school buildings in future to be erected.
That superficial area is but a rough approximation to the actual accommodation of a school, and that the truer criterion, especially in schools for older children, is to be found in the amount of seat room provided.
That the proper measure of a school's accommodation should be the seat supply, and that measure might well be acted on by the Department in any review of the sufficiency of the accommodation in accordance with the ground plans of the school submitted to them.
That existing schools should gradually, but within reasonable limits of time, be brought up to the higher estimate of the space required for school accommodation.
That care should be taken that the school furniture should always be suited to children. It should always be the first consideration in the fittings of a school that they should be primarily adapted to day-school education, due regard being had to the age, size, and physical comfort of the scholars.
As to school management, we agree that the farming of schools to teachers should be prevented. That the accounts of voluntary schools should be made public.
That co-operation among managers of voluntary schools, such as exists at Huddersfield, would greatly improve these schools, and that we should be glad to see help given towards the salaries of inspectors, science teachers, &c.
We agree, generally, in the recommendations of our colleagues as to the inspectorate; but we wish to lay special stress on all ranks of the inspectorate being thrown open to elementary teachers, and on the importance of securing that inspectors shall have had practical experience as teachers.
That the teachers ought to be paid fixed salaries, which should not vary with the grant.
That it is desirable that the head teacher should not be dissociated from actual instruction in addition to general superintendence, but that no definite rule should be made interfering with the discretion of managers and head teachers in the organisation of the school.
That the imperfect preparation of the students at entrance is a serious obstacle to their progress in the training colleges.
That the Code requirements as to staff should be considerably increased.
That pupil-teachers, especially in their first year of service, should be allowed more time during school hours for their studies than is now common, and that the instruction given by the head teachers should be, wherever possible, supplemented in respect of some of the compulsory as well as the optional subjects by central class teaching.
That extra grants should be offered to those managers who successfully adopt this course.
That where central class teaching is obviously impossible, grants should be made to managers who successfully employ other special means to secure the thorough instruction of their pupil-teachers.
As to training colleges, while regretting the limitations which restrict the force of our colleagues' recommendations, we are glad to agree with them in desiring a third year of training for selected students; and the extension of training generally by the association of day students with places of higher general education; and in the recommendation of a conscience clause for day students who might be admitted to the existing training colleges.
As to compulsion, we cordially concur in the recommendation that the minimum age for half-time exemption from school attendance should be 11, and for full time exemption 13, and that half-time should only be conceded to those who are beneficially and necessarily employed at work.
We agree with the majority that the process of recovering fines under the Summary Jurisdiction Act of 1879, by distress instead of by commitment, has, in some cases, encouraged parents to defy the law, and has added greatly to the labour involved in carrying out compulsion.
We agree in recommending the establishment of truant schools; that local committees should be more generally appointed under section 32 of the Act of 1876;. and that school attendance committees should hold meetings from time to time in various parts of their district.
We agree also in the recommendations made by our colleagues in reference to children at theatres, that theatrical employment should be brought under the Factory Acts, with necessary modifications.
[page 239]
As to the curriculum, we agree that drawing should, as far as practicable, be a compulsory subject for all boys, and that in the case of girls it should be encouraged under suitable conditions.
We think, with our colleagues, that history might be introduced earlier than at present into the school curriculum. We approve of the extension of the practical teaching of cookery. We agree that the present special preference of English above the other class subjects should be removed from the Code.
We agree in the continuance of the recognition of teaching singing by ear, but we believe that gradually singing by note may become practically universal. We approve of the extension of systematised physical exercises, and we think that it is through the training colleges that the teaching of a safe and scientific system should be introduced generally into our schools, by making instruction in these exercises, and some knowledge of physiology, a part of the college curriculum.
We agree also generally with our colleagues in the minimum curriculum laid down by them for village schools, which includes reading, writing, arithmetic, needlework for girls, linear drawing for boys, singing, English, so as to give the children an adequate knowledge of their mother tongue, English history, taught by means of reading books, geography, especially of the British Empire, and lessons on common objects in the lower standards, leading up to a knowledge of elementary science in the higher standards.
We agree largely in some of the recommendations of our colleagues on other points of the curriculum, especially in reference to the increase of the number of reading books, the diminution of the importance to be attached to spelling, especially in the lower classes, the re-construction of the arithmetic standards, and the importance of securing an intelligent understanding of arithmetical principles as well as mechanical accuracy in the application of rules.
We agree that the system of standards should be so applied as to give perfect freedom of classifying scholars according to their^attainments and abilities.
We agree with our colleagues in recommending several schemes of instruction, so as to provide for various classes of schools curricula varying in breadth and completeness with the number of scholars in attendance, and with the character and requirements of the population, though we regret that the efficacy of this recommendation is much diminished by no provision being made in the chapter on the Parliamentary grant for additional aid towards the increased cost of such an extended scheme.
We agree with our colleagues that it is desirable that there should be school libraries in every school. And we also agree as to the inexpediency of introducing recognised Government text-books.
We agree, heartily, with the very valuable recommendations of our colleagues as to evening schools.
We also agree, generally, with them as to industrial schools, and the education of workhouse children.
We also agree that Welsh schools, owing to the wide prevalence of the Welsh language, need special treatment, and we agree, generally, with our colleagues on the subject of Welsh schools.
As to elementary schools and higher education, subject to the remark that we regret the reserves which accompany some of the recommendations, we agree that higher elementary schools are a useful (we would rather say a necessary) addition to our school machinery for primary education; and that due precautions should be taken not to exclude the promising children of poor parents from the privileges to be enjoyed in them. That, where such schools cannot be founded, higher classes for children who have passed the 7th Standard should be attached to an ordinary elementary school; that the supply of satisfactory secondary schools should be organised and should be made adequate for the wants of all parts of the country; and that increased funds should be provided out of which to create sufficient exhibitions for deserving elementary scholars needing further instruction at those schools.
We agree with the majority of our colleagues that facilities should be given whereby poor persons may obtain the payment of moderate school fees for their children in voluntary as well as in board schools, without any association with ideas of pauperism. That the guardians should pay the fees of the children of those receiving out-door relief direct to the school managers.
That fees should be paid on behalf of poor persons for children, whether under five years old or exempt from legal obligation to attend school.
We agree with the majority, in the event of some form of proportional representation being retained, as to which we are not all of the same opinion, that large towns should
[page 240]
be divided into constituencies returning not more than five members each, and a majority of us consider the best mode of securing proportional representation to be the single transferable vote.
We also agree that a longer term of office, with partial renewal, would be an improvement in the constitution of school boards.
We now desire to pass to those portions of the report from which we dissent, and to indicate the reasons why we are unable to sign the report of the majority of our colleagues, and we shall conclude by setting out some recommendations in addition to those as to which we concur with our colleagues.
In reference to the introductory or historical part of the report down to the year 1870, while we agree that some notice of the previous state of things might be expedient, we cannot accept the responsibility for the detailed history of the progress of elementary education from the establishment of an Educational Committee of the Privy Council in 1839 down to 1870. Moreover, the earlier part of this period down to 1860 was dealt with by the Duke of Newcastle's Commission. If, however, it were necessary for us to form an opinion, we should say that the deficiencies in popular education, both in quality and extent, and the structural defects in existing schools, were greater than the historical summary of our colleagues admits; and we think that the need for an Act establishing popular education on a secure basis was urgent at that time.
But we are content to begin our consideration of elementary education in England in the year 1870, using what had gone before as matter of illustration and explanation, but not of independent treatment.
We pass to the question of school supply, dealt with in chapter 1 of part 3 of the report.
We dissent from the mode in which the right and duty of school boards to supply accommodation for their districts is stated in the report. Sec. 18 of the Education Act of 1870 runs as follows: "The school board shall maintain and keep efficient every school provided by such board and shall from time to time provide such additional accommodation as is in their opinion necessary in order to supply a sufficient amount of public school accommodation for their district." The right thus conferred on school boards has been generally treated by our colleagues as the contention of Mr. Cumin, or of the Department, or of the law officers of the Crown. It appears to us that the words of the Act quoted are perfectly clear, and we are strongly of opinion that the attacks so frequently made against the Department for recognizing and sustaining the prior right of school boards to supply any deficiencies of accommodation are without foundation, and that the Department would have been guilty of disobedience to the Act of Parliament had it acted otherwise than it has done.
The suggestion that the action of the Department has been at variance with the language used by Mr. Forster when he had charge of the Bill in the House of Commons is not supported by any evidence. No such passage was produced to us; on the contrary, passages in Mr. Forster' s speeches affirm the principle which he is suggested to have opposed. On the 27th June 1870, Mr. Forster said, (Report of Debates on Education Bill of 1870, p. 299). that "If the school board filled up the gap absolutely and entirely, keeping pace with the population there would be no room for any one else; but he had not that faith in human nature to suppose that that would be immediately and thoroughly done in every case, and wherever it was not done any person who was anxious to supply the deficiency would be in precisely the same position as at the present time."
It is stated, as ground of complaint against the Department, that they refuse to exercise the discretion of giving or refusing grants to unnecessary schools which the 98th section of the Act of 1870, in order to meet the equity of exceptional cases, put into their hands, and that it is contended that the interpretation thus given to the Act conflicts with the whole idea of religious liberty, which should give to the parents the right of deciding in what faith their children should be educated, and further on it is stated that the interpretation put upon sec. 98 of the Act by Mr. Cumin is somewhat strained. The section says: "The Education Department may refuse a grant if they think the school unnecessary."
The fact is that the first recorded instance where the Education Department refused a grant to a school on the ground that it was unnecessary was in 1876, when the Duke of Richmond and the present Lord Harrowby were at the head of the Education Department, and the case occurred in a non school board district at Keynsham,
[page 241]
where a Church of England school existed and where a British school was refused annual grants.*
We must therefore dissent from the whole of this summary of the law as to unnecessary schools, and from the impression conveyed, which is that the Education Department has strained the law in favour of school boards and against the recognition of denominational schools.
We dissent from the statement of our colleagues (p. 60) that when the first deficiency of school provision has been supplied, the school board has, under section 18 of the Act of 1870, only a right and not a duty to supply further and future deficiencies.
The earlier part of the section gives the school board the right to supply the deficiency, but the later part of the section describes the function of the school board as a duty, and enacts that the Education Department may send a requisition to the school board, requiring them to perform the duty of supplying a sufficient amount of public school accommodation, and, failing obedience, the Education Department may pronounce the school board in default.
In reference to the paragraph "Remedy for Grievances", while we concur with the majority of our colleagues in the statement that the remedy for such grievances as those of the Roman Catholics in the Dan-y-craig case lies in a more liberal interpretation of the word "suitability", and while we would recommend the amendment of the law in this respect so as to bring it in harmony with the Scotch Education Act, we must dissent from their statement that it also lies in a close adherence to the spirit of the provisions of the Act of 1870. This imputation on the Department is we think, unwarranted. The spirit and the letter of the Act of 1870 do not recognize the right of volunteers to compete with the school board in supplying new State-aided schools for the population. We wish further to point oat that the extension of the meaning of suitability as recommended by our colleagues will involve the supply of board schools under popular management where at present only denominational schools exist, and where the population is not wholly of the denomination of the managers of the school.
In reference to the question "Who may use the supply?" discussed on pp. 60 and 61, we regret the suggestion of a doubt as to the right of all to use the public elementary schools. Even before 1870, persons of the middle class could send their children to elementary schools receiving Parliamentary aid, though capitation grants were not paid in respect of the education of such children; and even this restriction was swept away by the Act of 1870, which merely defined an elementary school as a school at which elementary education is the principal part of the education given, and at which the ordinary payments from each scholar do not exceed 9d a week. The legal right of persons above the operative class to use the schools was challenged by an amendment to exclude the children of persons in receipt of £150 a year from the board schools. This amendment was moved by Col. Beresford on clause 14 of the Bill, and negatived; and we entirely concur with the opinion which Mr. Forster expressed when he said that in many cases there might be considerable advantage in having children of all classes attending the same school. The Education Act for Scotland announces in the preamble its purpose as being "that the means of procuring efficient instruction for their children may be furnished and made available to the whole people of Scotland", and we claim the same advantage for England also.
In reference to the paragraph on voluntary managers, and to the suggestion that the practically sole control of so many village schools by the clergy has the confidence of the country and has worked well, without in any way disparaging the unselfish efforts of the clergy, we are strongly of opinion, that in the country, where there can generally be but one school for the compulsory attendance of all, whatever their religious belief, it is a serious disadvantage that the control of the school should be in the hands of one religious body, and that the community generally should be excluded from a voice in the selection of the teacher and the management of the school, and we shall be greatly disappointed if, among the changes imminent in local government, provision is not made to remedy this state of things.
In reference to the chapter on Her Majesty's inspectors, we do not consider that the suggestion that the examination is made competitive finds any general justification in the evidence; on the contrary, we are of opinion that the evidence rather points to the fact that, owing to the poverty of the voluntary schools, some of the inspectors have lowered their standard to a minimum lower even than the Code, for fear of
*See also the case of the Buckingham School Board, 1875.
[page 242]
shutting up schools which depend on the grant for existence, and which yet fall below the standard of teaching which would deserve recognition and payment, and that this is the danger against which it is most important to guard, and not a tendency to make the examination too difficult.*
In reference to provisionally certificated teachers, we think the conclusion that the system has served its purpose, and is now dying a natural death, is incomplete and inadequate, especially bearing in mind the startling fact that 63 young persons, who failed in the scholarship examination in 1885, were nevertheless recognised by the Department as qualified to take sole charge of schools having an average attendance of less than 60.
We are strongly of opinion that no person should be recognised even as an assistant at the close of pupil teachership without at least passing the scholarship examination in the 1st or 2nd division, and that no one who has not satisfactorily passed the certificate examination should be recognised as a head teacher.
As to pupil teachers, we strongly dissent from the proposition (p. 88) that having regard to moral qualifications, there is no other equally trustworthy source from which an adequate supply of teachers is likely to be forthcoming. Indeed, bearing in mind the statement of our colleagues, in an earlier part of the chapter, as to the valuable influence of women of superior social position and general culture, we can hardly reconcile the two statements, and we are certainly of opinion that the moral securities we should look for in our future teachers are not likely to be diminished, but on the contrary greatly increased by a wider course and a prolonged period of preliminary education before students are trusted with the management of classes.
In general we consider that the pupil teacher system is now the weakest part of our educational machinery, and that great changes are needed in it if it is to be continued the future. We should deplore the reduction of the commencing age to 13, recommended by our colleagues, and we think rather that no pupil teacher should entrusted with a class till he or she is at least 15 years of age; the first year two of apprenticeship being almost entirely employed in learning.
As to training colleges, we do not think that chapter in the report does justice to the greatness of the need for better training.
We cannot admit that Mr. Matthew Arnold favoured us with but few details of the points of superiority in foreign teachers. His evidence and his recent report to which he referred us, are full of emphatic assertions and illustrations of the very great superiority, in his judgment, both in the culture of the professors and in the breadth of treatment of the curriculum in German and French as compared with English training colleges, and the better preliminary training of the students, as causes of the greatly superior teaching efficiency which he recognised especially in the German schools.
We think that the figures given on page 95 disprove rather than prove the adaptation of our colleges to our school system, for while 56.2 per cent, of the school children are said to be in denominational schools, the Education reports show that 662 students were in undenominational, and 2,610 students in denominational colleges in 1887, or nearly 80 per cent in denominational and 20 per cent in undenominational colleges. If the proportions in the colleges were the same as the proportions in the schools, there would be about 1,850 students in denominational colleges instead of 2,610, and 1,422 students in undenominational colleges instead of 662. Moreover, we cannot admit that the annual grant to training colleges constitutes a binding engagement with the State, and we are clearly of opinion that Parliament is entitled to review the conditions on which these grants are made.
In reference to the conscience clause in residential training colleges, we dissent from the arguments and conclusions of the report of the majority. The statement that its introduction would destroy all unity of christian family life, whether in a denominational or undenominational college, and would interfere fatally with the framework of ordinary domestic and moral discipline, has, in our opinion, no sufficient foundation.
Practically, an informal conscience clause does exist in the British and Foreign colleges, where the students are free to go to their own places of worship, and where even Jews have been admitted to training. When we bear in mind the ease with which the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge have adapted themselves to the conditions of religious freedom, and the widest divergence of theological opinion, when we find
*See chapter 14 on comparison of board and voluntary schools.
[page 243]
the same religious liberty working well at the female colleges of Girton and Newnham, we cannot but feel that the mode in which the possibility of a conscience clause has been criticised is far too emphatic.
We must bear in mind that a majority of all the teachers who now get their certificates, and a large majority of the women who get certificates, are not brought up in these residential training colleges, but take service as acting teachers and then sit for their certificates, and yet these untrained teachers are largely employed by the clergy in their village schools. If the discipline of a residential denominational training college were necessary for the formation of the character of a teacher, the clergy would not appoint these acting teachers in the large numbers they now do.
But we must still further dissent from the report of the majority on the ground that we consider the concessions they make to an alternative system of training are too grudging and restricted. Thus they put a veto on the interesting scheme for training suggested by Mr. McCarthy, of the Birmingham School Board, which we should be glad to see tried experimentally, at any rate, in one or two towns.
Our colleagues state that if his proposals were carried out they would at once lead to a claim from the existing colleges for largely increased grants. We fail entirely to see any ground which would justify such a claim. They estimate the cost to the State of each student trained on Mr. McCarthy's plan at £50. Students in existing training colleges cost the State about £100 for each master and £70 for each mistress trained. We cannot understand what moral claim those who now get £100 or £70 per student have to receive more, because others are to be paid £50 per student. The report also complains of Mr. McCarthy's scheme that it would pro tanto supersede the pupil-teacher system. We think in so far as it did this, it would substitute a far better system, and we may refer to the evidence of Dr. Graham, of the Roman Catholic training college at Hammersmith, as indicating that in his judgment a plan of training not very dissimilar from Mr. McCarthy's would be a good one.
We think that the other schemes suggested to us of training students in connexion with places of higher education deserve a much heartier support than they receive in the report of the majority, and we also think that if professional training is to be extended for our elementary teachers, it is improper to prohibit any aid being derived from the rates. Such aid would be a trifling charge compared with the total cost of education, and would bring an ample return in the increased efficiency of the teachers. If twice as many students were in training as are now, that is, if 3,200 more students were trained in day training colleges, we believe that a Parliamentary grant materially lower than that now made on behalf of a student in existing training colleges with reasonable fees of students and a small subvention, which might often prove unnecessary, from the school board or other public authority would suffice to defray the cost of training in connexion with local colleges existing or to be founded.
The recognition of urgent need for more trained teachers is of little value unless effective machinery is provided whereby that need may be met, and we consider the statement of our colleagues that they "cannot doubt that the liberality of those who are anxious to see day training colleges provided will furnish whatever sums are needed", is an assumption which experience does not justify, nor is it reasonable, when an urgent public need is acknowledged, to wait in expectation that private liberality may relieve the public from its consequent pecuniary obligations.
We assent to the continuance of grants to the existing denominational training colleges, partly in deference to the strenuous desire of the advocates of denominational education to preserve a strongly denominational system of training with vigilant domestic discipline, but we cannot assent to the statement in the report that the existing system of residential training colleges is the best both for the teachers and the scholars of the public elementary schools of the country, and we only acquiesce in the continuance of these grants in the hope that the system of training now in force in Scotland may be largely imitated here, in the association of training with higher education, in the great extension of facilities for day students and in the liberal recognition of the rights of conscience, and we look to the adoption of these reforms as enabling us hereafter to dispense almost entirely with the employment of untrained teachers.
[page 244]
In reference to the chapter on attendance and compulsion, we record our opinion that more emphasis should be laid on the want of thorough teaching in our schools, as a reason for the lack of interest and consequent bad attendance of scholars, and for the readiness of parents to withdraw their children from school. We agree with Mr. Stewart that a well found, well taught, school will rarely have to complain of bad attendance.* When we remember the evidence of Mr. Muscott, that, owing to the difficulty of teaching the various standards in a village school, the teacher does not encourage the children to continue their schooling beyond the Fourth Standard, and that in some districts the fees are deliberately raised after the Fourth Standard, for the purpose of obtaining the labour of the children; we think that more prominence should be given to the unsatisfactory state of many of our schools, as a reason for the indifference or reluctance of parents to send their children to school regularly or for a longer period.
We are also unable to agree with the report, in omitting to condemn the manner in which compulsion has hitherto been administered. We think the evidence shows that the magistrates generally have failed adequately to support the local school authorities in enforcing the law, especially in relation to the obligations of the Act of 1876 as to children between 13 and 14, which has become largely a dead letter through the opposition of the magistrates.
In reference to the recommendations of our colleagues as to religious and moral training, we repeat our strong opinion that in the education of the young the formation of the character is of the highest importance. But, having regard to the great diversities of opinion among our countrymen on religious subjects, and having serious doubts whether moral training can be satisfactorily tested by inspection or examination, we do not believe that the recommendations contained in this portion of the report of our colleagues would promote the object which we desire.
We recognise that for the great mass of the people of this country, religious and moral teaching are most intimately connected, and that, in their judgment, the value and effectiveness of the latter depend to a very great extent upon religious sanctions. We think that the present liberty of religious teaching, recognised by the law for local managers, is an ample security, that so long as the prevalent opinion of the country remains unchanged, the education of the children and the formation of their character will be based upon those principles which are dear to the mass of the people.
Bearing in mind the fact that in only 8 per cent of the voluntary schools answering our circular were the registers finally closed before the religious teaching and observances, and that about the same proportion appeared in the returns from head teachers, we dissent from the proposal that the present liberty of managers should be interfered with by requiring them finally to close all registers before the religious teaching and observances. At the same time, in the interest of discipline and punctuality, we should be glad to see any regulations introduced which would not be exposed to the charge of indirectly enforcing that attendance on religious teaching which should be voluntary; we therefore recommend that, where there is but one room and one teacher, attendance be not compulsory till after the time of religious teaching, but where there is more than one teacher and a class room, that children withdrawn from religious teaching be given secular instruction in a separate room.
We dissent from the statement that the fourteenth section of the Act of 1870 merely provided for perfect neutrality among Christian denominations. Jews, free-thinkers, and any other persons who refuse to entrust the religious teaching of their children to others, are all equally entitled both under section 14 and under section 7 to a perfect exemption from any instruction in religious subjects at any time while the school is open.
We think that the evidence shows that the moral teaching under our present school system has been most valuable, and this is given throughout the whole school time largely by the personal influence of the teacher, and is not confined to specific religious teaching, but can also be given through secular illustrations.
While we attach the very greatest importance to the moral element in our national education, we differ from our colleagues in their recommendation that it is to the
*Stewart, Ed. Report, 1887-88, p. 548.
[page 245]
State we should look for increased support to the moral element of training in our schools. We would rather look to the local interest taken and to the influence that managers and parents can bring to bear on the conduct of the school, together with the personal character of the teacher for maintaining that high moral standard among the scholars which it is the object of the State to secure. While we approve of the present requirement that the managers shall satisfy the inspector that all reasonable care is taken in the moral training of the children, we think it would be a misfortune if in any way the duty of fully ascertaining the moral conduct of the school were transferred to the inspector from the managers. The inspector can notice manifest faults of conduct, but he cannot really estimate the full value of the higher moral influences that are found pervading a thoroughly good school.
While we insist upon moral teaching and believe that more systematic moral teaching if given with earnestness would have a very valuable influence on the characters of the scholars, we think that any systematic inspection of morals by Her Majesty's inspector, such as is suggested in the chapter on the Parliamentary grant, would not only be of no value, but would, where the local managers and teachers did not themselves feel the importance of moral influences, be of positive injury as leading to hypocritical and mechanical teaching of that which must come from a free expression of conscientious conviction.
In reference to the chapter on the curriculum, we dissent from what seems to be suggested in the contrast between England and Scotland, namely, that the English people should permanently continue to accept an inferior type of popular education to that which exists in Scotland.
We must further point out that the recommendations of our colleagues on the Parliamentary grant fail to give effect to some important parts of the chapter on the curriculum with which we agree. Thus, the chapter on the curriculum recommends several schemes of instruction, so as to provide for various classes of schools a curriculum varying in breadth and completeness with the number of scholars in attendance, and with the character and requirements of the population. But in the chapter on the Parliamentary grant, no additional provision is made for aid, beyond what may be given for the minimum elementary curriculum required of village schools.
We dissent from the recommendation on page 140, that the instruction to be paid for out of rates and taxes shall be fixed by the Legislature. If all that is permissible to be taught in an elementary school is henceforward to be fixed by Parliament, a proposal from which we dissent, then the limitations should apply equally to voluntary as to board schools. But we think that the right of managers now recognized by the Code to teach other subjects, in addition to those mentioned in the Code, should continue.
The whole of the paragraph entitled "Limits of Elementary Education yet to be defined" seems to us unfriendly to the desirable progress of our educational system.
We dissent from the recommendations of our colleagues as to the management of technical schools when established. This question is one on which we took no evidence, and, in so far as technical schools deal with secondary education, lies beyond the limits of our reference, but if we may venture upon an opinion, we would say that whether the municipality be associated in their management or not, we think it desirable that the school board should also be associated, and that these schools, which should be the crown and development of elementary education, should be in touch and close sympathy through their management with our elementary school system.
The severance of all financial connexion between local authorities and voluntary schools was one of the prominent features of the Act of 1870 as it was passed, and it was to avoid the burning questions likely to be raised if local aid from the rates were granted to schools under denominational and not under public management, that the Parliamentary grant was largely increased.
We hold strongly that local public support implies local public management, and therefore while some of the instruction given by school boards, such as instruction in cookery, and collective instruction of pupil-teachers, or practical, scientific, artistic, technical, or manual teaching in centres, might possibly be thrown open under suitable regulations to the scholars or pupil-teachers of voluntary schools, we cannot see our way to support a proposal to impose on the ratepayers a contribution in support of voluntary elementary schools.
We dissent from the recommendation of the report, that where any structural or sanitary improvements are demanded by the Education Department in schools which
[page 246]
have been already recognised for annual grants, the State shall contribute to such alterations.
It is our duty to point out that a large number of schools are structurally much below any proper standard of efficiency. The Education Department, ever since 1870, having regard to the great pressure in the matter of school accommodation, has been extremely indulgent in tolerating unsatisfactory premises. Nevertheless, for several years past, a steady pressure by the inspectors, coupled in many instances with a growing sense on the part of the managers of what is due to the children, has led to great improvements in lighting, ventilation, class-rooms, furniture, &c.,in many schools. There is no reason why those who have been most remiss in making the school buildings suitable, should profit by their own delay, and get the help of public money to do that which more public-spirited managers have already done at their own cost.
This proposal would amount to a renewal of building grants in their worst form as an encouragement to long accumulated neglect.
The proposal would also arrest voluntary action by managers in the way of improving school premises. Henceforward, managers would be tempted to wait till the inspector insisted on some improvement in order to obtain the Government subsidy before executing it.
If this proposal were conceded, then if an unsuitable building wore absolutely condemned, analogy would suggest a building grant for the purpose of supplying new premises.
We must dissent from the recommendations of our colleagues in Part 4, Chapter 4, as to the transfer of schools to school boards.
Their proposed amendment of section 23 of the Education Act, 1870, would make the consent of the trustees as well as of the managers of a school necessary before a school could be transferred.
There is no obligation proposed by our colleagues on the trustees to conduct the school themselves as a public elementary school in the event of their refusing to transfer it, and we are of opinion that buildings dedicated to the purpose of elementary education and aided by a Parliamentary building grant should, if the existing managers are unable or unwilling to conduct schools in them, be transferred to the local authority charged with the duty of making sufficient school provision for the district. We therefore not only dissent from the recommendations of our colleagues, but recommend that where any building which has been aided by a Parliamentary building grant, exists for the elementary education of the poor, and is not used on week days for such purpose, the school board should be entitled to have the use and occupation of the building for the purpose of supplying school accommodation for their district.
We also dissent from the recommendation of the majority that in a transferred school no structural expenses involving a loan should be incurred without the consent of the trustees who lease the building to the board. We think that in the case of a building erected for educational purposes, the interests of education alone should be taken into account when structural alterations are under consideration, and the Education Department, which must sanction the loan, is the proper guardian of these interests.
We dissent from the recommendations in the chapter on the Parliamentary grant, that the terms upon which that grant is awarded, should be embodied in an Act of Parliament. This would mean in practice that the Code, instead of being issued by the Department as at present, should be part of an Act of Parliament. Such a course would tend to stereotype education, to discourage and delay improvement, and would limit the future control of the House of Commons over the expenditure, as the money would have to be voted and spent in accordance with the terms of the Act, which could not be altered without the consent of both Houses of Parliament.
We object to the proposal made by our colleagues in their chapter on income and expenditure of Schools, p. 190, that voluntary schools should be enabled to receive help from the rates up to a possible maximum of 10s a head, on the ground already indicated, that such a proposal seems to us unsound in principle, destructive of the settlement of 1870, and certain, if it became law, to embitter educational politics, and intensify sectarian rivalries.
We dissent from the recommendation on page 192, that the Education Department should not be entrusted with any censorship of fees in voluntary schools. It is as necessary that the poor should be secured a reasonable fee in districts where there are no board schools as where there are, and we think the remedy suggested, of the possible action of the inspector illusory, as it would only be used in a very extreme case.
We think that if the fee system is to be maintained, it needs many corrections to make it work fairly and tolerably to the poor, and to prevent the imposition of varying
[page 247]
fees in the same school from being used as a means of oppression and of selection and exclusion of scholars.
We dissent from the chapter on local educational authorities, because we think it essential while recognising the continued existence of voluntary schools that there should everywhere be an educational authority able at once to meet a deficiency and provide schools, whereas at present in the absence of a school board, delays are repeatedly interposed before the Education Department finally orders the election of a board, and the provision of necessary accommodation.
We also regret that the remarks on page 199 on rural school boards should have stopped short without recommending that which was supported by nearly all the evidence we took, the extension of the area of the rural school board from the parish to a unit, such as the Union or new proposed county district.
In recording our dissent from so many of the conclusions of our colleagues' report we would add that we have further this general objection, that their report appears to us too often to approach proposals for the improvement of education from the point of view of considering how such improvements may affect the interests of certain classes of schools rather than how far they are desirable; and that it does not do justice to the wish that we entertain for an expansion of education, a widening of its aims, and its establishment on a broad base of local support and popular management, which would enable us to dispense with much in the present system of State aid and examination which we think unfavourable to the best modes of imparting knowledge.
There are certain points, which were either raised by our preliminary syllabus of points for inquiry, or by the evidence, or which we think worthy of note, on which we now proceed briefly to express our conclusions.
In reference to the question to what extent provision should be made for children between three and five, we are of opinion that, without dictating any exact proportion between the supply of places for infants and for elder children, it is important that there should be ample accommodation for infants, and that the attendance of children under five years of age should be encouraged.
We think in addition to the recommendations made as to the character of the accommodation in recognised efficient schools, that no building should be permitted to be used as a school, whether recognised as otherwise efficient or not, which is not satisfactory on sanitary grounds, and that any building used as a school should be certified as fit to hold such a number of children as can with due regard to their health and comfort be properly instructed in it, and that any overcrowding of such a building should be an offence, and should expose the occupier to the forfeiture of the certificate, and that it should be an offence to conduct a school in uncertified premises.
We think that it would be a material improvement and tend to raise the general education of the country if, for the purpose of school supply, smaller country parishes were consolidated, and the smaller school boards united; and, provided the areas of administration are sufficiently large, we think that in those cases where there are no school boards, there should be a competent local representative authority to whom should be entrusted the supply and management of any additional schools required.
We recommend that throughout the country, where there is a reasonable number of persons desiring them, there be schools of an undenominational character, and under popular representative management.
We recommend that persons desirous of starting a voluntary school be admitted to the receipt of annual grants on their satisfying the Education Department that there is a reasonable number of persons desiring such a school, for whose children no sufficient provision exists, regard being had to the religious belief of their parents.
We recommend that pupil-teachers be not indentured, except in schools where Her Majesty's inspector is satisfied that due care will be taken in their instruction and training.
That where, in the opinion of Her Majesty's inspector, such due care has not been taken, the permission to have pupil-teachers may be withdrawn.
That in the earlier part of their apprenticeship pupil-teachers be not reckoned on the staff, and that, in the case of unsatisfactory pupil-teachers, there be a discretion in the Department to determine their apprenticeship not later than the end of their third year.
[page 248]
That the results of the yearly examination of the pupil-teachers should be promptly made known to the managers, and that, if necessary, the matters not tested at the collective examination should be examined at a special visit to the school.
That the "person over 18 approved by the inspector" recognised by Art. 84 of the Code, should cease to be accepted, except in small country schools with less than 60 in average attendance, and that in any case she be required in a year to qualify by passing an examination.
Ex-pupil-teachers should not be recognised beyond a certain age unless they pass the certificate examination in the first years' papers, and after two years interval in the second years' papers.
No acting teacher who has not got his parchment, and no person who henceforward passes lower than the second division on the second years' papers should be recognised as a head teacher.
We recommend that there be a re-adjustment of the existing grants to training colleges, so as to aid more students in day training colleges without any considerable further demand upon the public funds.
We recommend that no student be sent away from a training college without an appeal to the Education Department, which shall deal with the case as may seem equitable to it.
We recommend that the Department be specially directed to review the school supply of the country, and that the conditions under which certified efficient schools (not being public elementary schools) are now recognised be altered, so that no such school be recognised after a given date which does not comply with the educational and structural requirements imposed on public elementary schools, and which does not year by year come up to the standard of a good school.
We recommend that in infant schools the principles laid down in the instructions to inspectors should be fully carried out, and that no pressure, direct or indirect, be put upon teachers to classify the infants otherwise than according to their intellectual and physical development, or to give prominence to direct instruction in reading, writing, and arithmetic to the younger children, and that the Department should encourage the special training of mistresses for infant schools, and secure that their preparation shall be as complete and thorough as for other departments.
That in lieu of the present standards, detailed graded curricula of instruction be set forth by authority varying in fullness with the capabilities of varying classes of schools.
In reference to the subject of technical and scientific instruction, we draw an important distinction between technical instruction or instruction which is designed with special reference to, and as a preliminary training for, the commercial or industrial occupations of life, and manual instruction regarded as a training of the hand and eye so as to bring them under the control of the brain and will, as a general preparation for the future career in life, whatever it may be.
Bearing in mind the age of children in elementary schools, it may be a question whether technical instruction, as we have defined it, should be commenced any earlier than the Sixth Standard. But we are of opinion that, after the children have left the infant school, transitional methods should be adopted, which will develop their activity and train their powers by drawing in all cases, and by such other means as, for instance, modelling, or the collection and mounting of botanical specimens.
This training would, on the one hand, be advantageous as naturally leading up to technical instruction, and, on the other hand, far from interfering with the more literary studies, the latter would, we believe, benefit considerably by the variety and relief which would thus be introduced.
We recommend that the examination of the scientific teaching given in our elementary schools should be mainly oral, especially up to and including the present Fifth Standard. If science is to be well taught, care should be taken that where the ordinary teachers are not qualified, specially trained teachers should be employed.
Higher grade schools should be encouraged which will prepare scholars for advanced technical and commercial instruction.
[page 249]
Care must be taken not to interfere with general instruction in order to press forward technical or special teaching.
Technical teaching in the school cannot replace the practical teaching, which is best learnt in the workshop.
In ordinary elementary schools good teaching of drawing and of elementary science are the best, and in the lower classes the only fitting preparation for the work of the technical school, and these subjects should be generally taught.
Technical instruction should cover commercial and agricultural, as well as industrial instruction.
In reference to the Parliamentary grant, and to payment by results, we are of opinion that the best security for efficient teaching is the organization of our school system under local representative authorities over sufficiently extensive areas, with full power of management and responsibility for maintenance, with well graduated curricula, a liberal staff of well-trained teachers, and buildings, sanitary, suitable, and well equipped with school requisites. That it should be the duty of the State to secure that all these conditions are fulfilled, and to aid local effort to a considerable extent, but leaving a substantial proportion of the cost of school management to be met from local resources other than fees of scholars, and by its inspection to secure that the local authority is doing its duty satisfactorily.
Such a system, in our opinion, would enable us to dispense with the present system of State grants variable according to the results of yearly examination and inspection. which, in our judgment, is far from being a satisfactory method of securing efficiency, and is forced upon the country by the irresponsible and isolated character of the management of the majority of our schools. In the meantime, as the system we prefer cannot in deference to existing denominational interests be secured, we recommend that there be a material change in the method of distributing the grant, that a larger fixed grant be given in consideration of increased requirements in the matter of staff premises and curriculum; that more money be given towards specific educational objects, such as the salaries of special teachers of science, drawing, cookery, &c., of local inspectors and organising masters, of the better instruction of pupil-teachers, and further aid to secure the diminution of their hours of work, especially during the earlier years of apprenticeship. Further aid should be given to small rural schools which especially need such aid and must be costly, and the grants should be larger to managers whose fees are low than to those who have a large fee income. As to the residue of the capitation grant, which we think must, under the present conditions of English education, continue variable, we recommend that the present system of paying a percentage grant for the standard subjects shall cease; that there shall no longer be a general merit grant, but that the variable portion shall be distributed among the various subjects of instruction included in the recognised curricula, on the principle of the present class grant. We think, further, that schools which properly take up a fuller and more thorough course of studies should receive larger grants to meet their larger local expenditure.
We think that, whether free education be or be not desirable, no practicable scheme for universal free schools, consistent with the continuance of the voluntary school system, has been presented to us.
We think that where a school board wishes, it should be at liberty to make any one or more of its schools free, or to lower the fee without requiring the consent of the Education Department.
We think that in voluntary as well as in board schools the Education Department should be required to approve the fee in order to secure that it is not beyond the means of the generality of the parents.
We think that the fee should cover all the cost of the school to the parent, and should, as a rule, be uniform, not rising with the class or standard.
All these conclusions we humbly submit to Your Majesty's most gracious consideration.
E. LYULPH STANLEY.
JOHN LUBBOCK.
B. SAMUELSON.
R. W. DALE.
SYDNEY BUXTON.*
THOMAS EDMUND HELLER.
HENRY RICHARD.
GEORGE SHIPTON.
July 12, 1888.
*Subject to the reservation bearing his signature.
[page 250]
RESERVATION
I feel obliged to express dissent from the above report on one point, namely, on the question of the abolition of school fees.
The arguments and the evidence are, it seems to me, on the whole, in favour of the introduction of a system of free schools - a system, however, not compulsory, but permissive. In order to obviate any injury to the voluntary system, the same terms ought to be offered to voluntary as to board schools; namely, that the managers of any and every public elementary school should, if they desire the abolition of the fee, be entitled to demand an additional annual grant from the Consolidated Fund. This additional grant might be calculated on the general average of the fees charged throughout the elementary schools of the country, and depend on the average attendance at the particular school in question.
SYDNEY BUXTON
[page 251]
We, the undersigned Commissioners, in addition to the report dissenting from the majority, and summarising our own conclusions which we have already signed, beg to submit to Your Majesty this further report, discussing more in detail the evidence taken by us, and the general position of Elementary Education at the present day.
CHAPTER 1
SCHOOL SUPPLY
The Act of 1870 found this country in a lamentable position of deficiency in respect to the supply of schools, the quality of elementary education, and the attendance of children at existing schools.
The accommodation needed in that year was for 3,682,000 scholars, and the total number of places in schools under Government inspection was 1,878,000, or little more than one-half of that number. Even these were not well distributed, nor could the buildings, in many cases, be considered anything but most unsatisfactory; and the education given, which, according to the Duke of Newcastle's Commission, was generally far from efficient, is represented by many witnesses not to have improved between 1862 and 1870. The total number of children in average attendance in inspected schools in 1870 was 1,152,000; the total number on the roll of the same schools was 1,693,000, or about 46 per cent of those who should and might have been at school.
To meet, and, as far as possible, to remedy, this state of things, was the object of the Act of 1870. It was introduced, avowedly as a compromise between the various persons, parties, and bodies who were interested in the question of education, and whose conflicting views had till then prevented any general scheme of legislation. Many were in favour of establishing a national system, under popular management, in the place of the voluntary and mainly denominational schools, which, up to that time, were the sole recognised means of public instruction. But the Government of the day determined not merely to accept the aid which voluntary bodies had hitherto given to the work of education, but while throwing on the school boards then called into existence the primary duty of supplying existing and future deficiencies of school provision, to give special facilities for a limited period to voluntary effort to assist in meeting those deficiencies, and not to exclude their co-operation in the future.
Mr. W. E. Forster, in the debate on the third reading of the Bill, after noticing some of the changes which the measure had undergone in its passage through the House of Commons said - "The principle of the Bill has been adhered to, and I think the mode in which it has been decided to carry out that principle is not unworthy of it. The principle was this: a legal enactment that there shall be efficient schools throughout the kingdom, and compulsory provision for the schools where needed, but not unless such need were proved. It was in these words that I described the Bill when I introduced it, and when we send the Bill up to the other House this principle will still be in it."
The history of elementary education since the passing of the Act of 1870 has been one of remarkable progress, and considering the many burning questions which are closely associated with the relations of the State to education, we may congratulate ourselves that, on the whole, so much good work has been done with comparatively little friction.
Dealing first with that which was put most prominently forward by the framers of the Act, the supply of efficient schools throughout the kingdom, we proceed to consider how far that object has been accomplished.
For many years the Education Department has assumed that school provision is needed for one-sixth of the population in any locality. The bulk of the children attending elementary schools are between the ages of 3 and 13, and the proportion of children of the whole population between those ages was in 1871 rather more than 23 per cent. About a seventh of the population are reckoned as above the class
[page 252]
usually frequenting elementary schools; and, after deducting these, a further deduction of one-eighth is made for various causes of absence, including the proportion of children under five whose parents prefer not to send them to school. The more recent census figures show that the proportion of children between 3 and 13 to the whole population is larger than when this estimate was framed.
Jt has been urged on the Commission by some witnesses that children between three and five should not be reckoned in estimating the need for school provision, and it appears to be suggested in some questions and answers that it is barely legal to make provision for them. In reference to this point, it may be observed that long before the Act of 1870 was passed, the encouragement of the attendance of young infants was a characteristic of English education. This country took the lead in the establishment of infant schools, and Parliament recognised them by grants of money from the early days of capitation grants. They were a part of the existing system of education when the Act of 1870 was passed; the Code in force in 1870 recognised and provided for payment on account of them; and it seems difficult to imagine any illegality in a system which has been for many years sanctioned and aided by the Codes of the Education Department and by Parliamentary Votes. A very few witnesses, specially the Rev. D. J. Stewart, have questioned the advantage of admitting these very young children into school, but the overwhelming mass of testimony - with which we agree - is in favour of their retention, not only on grounds of convenience to poor parents whose children are cared for, while they themselves are set free for their work, not only on the ground of the happiness of the children who are received in warm, bright rooms, and animated by cheerful occupations, instead of being relegated to the streets, but on the ground of the valuable moral training in habits of tidiness, order, and obedience, and the awakening of their intellects, and development of their activity by the suitable methods of the kindergarten now so widely practised in our best infant schools.
Other critics, among whom the Rev. J. Diggle, Chairman of the London School Board, may be included, do not absolutely object to the reception of these infants, but think an undue amount of accommodation has been provided for them.
On this point it may be noted that the Education Department has never dictated the proportions in which school provision should be distributed between boys, girls, and infants, and the different school boards in the country have used their own discretion in planning their schools. If yearly averages are made the test of the accommodation needed, then rather more accommodation should be provided for boys than for girls; for undoubtedly the value of an elder girl in the household leads to greater irregularity of attendance, which makes the average attendance in a girls' school almost invariably lower, and commonly lower by two or three per cent than in boys' schools; but it would be a great mistake on this account to diminish the relative size of the girls' schools. So too there are exceptional circumstances which will be dwelt on hereafter, which cause infants' schools to be extremely fluctuating in their attendance, and therefore render it necessary that there should be an apparently larger surplus of accommodation in infant than in boys' or girls' schools. The testimony of Mr. Williams, Superintendent of Visitors of East Lambeth, is very strong in favour of the ample provision of infant school accommodation. But even supposing that in the distribution of a thousand school places rather fewer should be allotted to the infants, this would not affect the principle that places are needed for at least a sixth of the population, for we find, as will be shown further on, that in districts where there is no very large proportion of infant accommodation, school accommodation is required by more than a sixth, sometimes by nearly a fifth of the population of the district.
Experience has proved that where sufficient schools are provided it is common to secure the enrolment of one-sixth and more than one-sixth of the population. In Lancashire and in the West Riding it is not uncommon to find close upon a fifth of the population on the roll of the public elementary schools of the town. The same is shown by the evidence of Prebendary Roe as to the small rural parishes of Somersetshire. A minimum school provision for one sixth of the population is therefore a moderate demand for the Education Department to make; and where the population is largely made up of the operative class, it has been found necessary to supply schools for nearly a fifth.
On the assumption that all the school places in the public elementary schools of the country are available and. suitable, it would appear that the deficiencies of school accommodation have been substantially overtaken.
In 1870 one-sixth of the population was 3,682,000, and the public elementary school accommodation was 1,878,000 places, or about 51 per cent of the amount needed.
[page 253]
No doubt there were many uninspected schools in those days, mostly belonging to the Church of England, which were supplying some kind of education. It was alleged by the National Society that there were 600,000 places in such schools. There were also a certain number of similar schools not connected with the Church of England, and some private adventure schools and dame schools, a few of which still exist, but not in numbers sufficient to affect materially the figures of school accommodation at the present time.
Comparing the year 1870 with the year 1886, we find that in the former year one-sixth of the population of England and Wales was 3,682,000, and there were 1,879,000 school places, 1,559,000 children on the roll, and 1,152,000 children in average attendance in day schools inspected for annual grants; thus the school places were 51 per cent, the children on the roll 42 per cent, and the children in average of the attendance 31 per cent of one- sixth of the population.
In 1886 one-sixth of the population was estimated at 4,645,097. In day schools inspected during the year the school places were 5,145,000, the scholars on the roll 4,506,000, the scholars in average attendance 3,438,000; thus the school places were 111 per cent, the scholars on the roll 97 per cent, and the average attendance 74 per cent of one-sixth of the population.
Again, in 1870, though a much smaller proportion of the population was provided with schools, the relation the number on the roll bore to the accommodation was 83 per cent, in 1886 the number on the roll was 87 per cent of the accommodation.
In 1870 the average attendance was 61 per cent of the accommodation. In 1886 the average attendance was 67 per cent of the accommodation.
The regularity of attendance in 1870 was expressed by the fact that the average was 74 per cent of the number on the roll. In 1886 it was 76 per cent of the number on the roll, notwithstanding the fact that large classes of the population who could not previously be reached have been swept into school.
The Church of England schools have gone up from 1,365,000 places to 2,549,000 places, a growth of 1,184,000 places, and this in spite of the transfer of a considerable number of church schools to boards. Of this increase, a large proportion is probably due to the improvement of the schools which in 1870 were not under Government inspection, but if we take those brought under inspection as containing 500,000 places, or even at the full number of 600,000 estimated by the National Society, we shall still have evidence of great activity and voluntary effort on the part of members of the Church of England to extend the school system connected with their principles.
The school boards, which had practically no schools except a handful of transferred ones (many of them ragged schools) before 1873, had 1,750,000 places in the year ending August, 1886; of these a certain number, probably more than 160,000 were in transferred schools, but the great bulk of these places have been provided in new schools built by loans at the cost of the several localities on the security of the rates.
The whole increase of voluntary schools since 1870, is from 1,878,000 places to 3,417,000 places, an increase of 1,539,000 places, of which, 1,184,000 places being due to the Church of England, the remaining 355,000 places must be distributed among the Roman Catholics, the Wesleyans, the British and other undenominational schools.
Now, if all this accommodation were well distributed, and were fully available, it might be said that there was a sufficient margin to enable us to consider the work of school provision practically complete, except in localities where a sudden growth of population might disturb our calculations; but there are two or three reasons why we cannot reckon on these nominal 5,145,000 places to the full extent. In the first place they are very unequally distributed. Taking the table at page xli. of the Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for 1886-7, where the total number of school places is given at 5,200,685 (it may be noted that the figures often differ in various parts of the blue books according as they are the figures of the schools inspected within the year or the totals of schools receiving annual grants), we may compare the accommodation county by county with the population according to the census of 1881. Of course, in some parts of England, the population has increased since then, and we have not therefore an accurate standard of comparison, but even allowing for this, it will be found how unequally the school provision is distributed. Thus in Lancashire the theoretic proportion of one-sixth was 575,744, the school provision was 780,134 places, an excess of nearly 205,000 places, or more than 37 per cent. In Yorkshire the excess of school places over one-sixth of the population was 120,000, or nearly 25 per cent; in Durham, 35,000, or more than 24 per cent; in London it was 11,000, or not quite 1¾ per cent; in Wales it was 81,000, or nearly 31 per cent.
[page 254]
On the other hand, in the principal towns of England with more than 100,000 inhabitants, there is accommodation for less than a sixth of the population. Thus, in Liverpool, the estimated population in 1886 was 586,320, and the school provision in the return to our Circular B 85,765 places, or 12,000 less than one-sixth. In Birkenhead the estimated population was 95,370, the school provision 15,416, or about 600 less than a sixth. In Hull the estimated population was 191,501, and the school provision 29,924, or 2,000 less than a sixth. In Sheffield the population was 310,957, the school provision 47,416 places, or 4,300 places less than one-sixth. In Sunderland the population was 127,487, the school places 17,858, or about 3,300 less than one-sixth. In Newcastle the population was 155,117, and the school provision about 2,500 less than one-sixth. In Birmingham the estimated population was 434,381, the school places were 62,915, or about 9,500 less than one-sixth. In Nottingham the estimated population was 217,733, the school places were 33,570, or about 2,700 places less than one-sixth. In Bristol the estimated population was 220,915, the school places were 32,366, or about 4,400 less than one-sixth. In Portsmouth, with an estimated population of 136,276, the school places were 4,000 less than one-sixth. In Brighton the school places fell short of one-sixth of the population by about 2,500.
The annexed Table shows the growth and the relative proportions, from 1870 till now, of all public elementary schools, of voluntary and of board schools to one-sixth of the population:
[click on the image for a larger version]
These figures show how far the deficiencies of school provision existing in 1870 had been overtaken by 1886.
The constant demand for new schools which still continues in the urban and populous districts of England can only be effectually met by the action of school boards. In cases where school boards have not been called into existence there has
[page 255]
been delay and difficulty in securing school provision, and many inconveniences are shown to have resulted, as may be seen in the pages of the yearly blue books. Where school boards exist, the practice of the Department has put administrative hindrances in the way of the power of providing schools which was conferred on the boards by the Act of 1870. Section 18 of the Act of 1870 provides, "The school board shall maintain and keep efficient every school provided by such board, and shall from time to time provide such additional school accommodation as is in their opinion necessary in order to supply a sufficient amount of public school accommodation for their district." These words, are very clear - the discretion is vested in the school board, and it is their opinion which is to determine the amount of additional accommodation necessary. If any further proof were needed of this, it would be found in the fact that Mr. Cawley proposed in committee to amend clause 18, by inserting the words "with the sanction of the Department" in order that there might be power "to prevent the possible vagaries of a board elected by a political or sectarian party which might unnecessarily erect a school for their own purposes", but Mr. Forster said "he did not think a school board should always be asking the sanction of the Department", and the amendment was withdrawn.
The Department has a discretion as to whether it shall promote a provisional order for the compulsory acquisition of a site, and whether it shall or shall not recommend a loan, but the school board, by sections 18 and 19, was clearly intended to have power at its own discretion to set up schools if it could dispense with these two aids. The Department, however, having to consent to the fee, claims the power, by withholding that consent, to prevent the school from being conducted as a public elementary school in compliance with the Code and, therefore, to subject the board so conducting the school to a surcharge. It is not desirable that the Department should in this way defeat the plain meaning of a section of an Act of Parliament, and there is no reason why the elected representatives of a locality should not enjoy the full power which the above section of the Act gives them. It is necessary that the Department should have all the powers given by the Act to compel school boards to build sufficient schools, but it is of no advantage to education to prevent a school board from establishing a school where they think one necessary.
In considering the question of school supply, it is sometimes contended that the Education Act was intended only for the working class, and that it is an abuse for the public elementary schools to be used by the children of well-to-do people. This contention is most often maintained in reference to the board schools, but it finds no support in the Act of 1870; on the contrary it is inconsistent with the Act. Before 1870, the elementary schools of the country received no aid on account of scholars who were considered above the working-class. They were not expected to be excluded from the schools, but they had to be returned on a schedule in such a way that they might not be the means of earning government grants for the school.
It was proposed by Colonel Beresford in committee on clause 14 of the Act of 1870, to insert these words, "Provided always, that no parent shall be entitled to send his or her child or children to be educated at such public elementary school whose net income shall amount to £150 a year." The amendment, however, was negatived, and in the debate of June 24th, on the motion that the Speaker leave the chair, Mr. Horsman having said "The Vice-President of the Council indeed said that, he spoke in the interests of the children, and that his Bill insured that every poor man's child should have the benefit of religious instruction", Mr. Forster interjected "I never said that. The Bill ensures that elementary instruction should be given to the whole community."
The Act of 1870 imposed only one restriction on public elementary schools as to fees, and that was that the ordinary payments in respect of the instruction from each scholar should not exceed ninepence per week. And the construction put upon this enactment has allowed individual scholars to pay fees amounting to several pounds a year, provided the average fee does not exceed ninepence. Prebendary Richards has a Church school at Isleworth where the boys in the upper department pay £5 a year fees, and yet the parliamentary grant is paid for them.
It is important to bear this in mind as to the Act of 1870; because the only reason why schools are not demanded for all the population between certain ages is, that in fact many of the well-to-do abstain from using the elementary schools of the country, but they have by law a perfect right to use them, and in proportion to the growing popularity and efficiency of our public school system, we may expect to see persons in easy circumstances use them more and more. We know that the elementary schools in Scotland are largely used by the middle class, and the same is the case in
[page 256]
America and in the colonies, and already there is evidence in this country that where the schools are good there is a growing tendency to use them among classes who previously held aloof from them.
Should those who now send their children to small private schools at charges ranging from three to six guineas a year (a considerable class at present), turn to the public elementary schools and use them, they would probably get a far better education than they do now, and would be recouped for what they feel the heavy burden of the rate. There is no reason or law against their doing so, and the children of persons of the same station on the Continent habitually frequent the public primary schools of their country, and we are of opinion that their presence in our elementary schools in larger numbers will be a good thing for the schools and for themselves.
It may also be noticed that it will be commonly found that with the increase of school provision, not only is the proportion of the child population under instruction increased, which is natural; but what might be less expected, the schools as they multiply are frequently fuller than when they were few, the inference being that as education spreads and the margin of uneducated children becomes narrower, the appreciation of education also spreads, the schools are improved by the competition, and all, board and voluntary alike, benefit by the improved tone of public opinion.
CHAPTER 2
CHARACTER AND STRUCTURAL SUITABILITY OF THE PRESENT SCHOOL SUPPLY
In our previous chapter we have shown that, roughly speaking, school provision is needed throughout England and Wales for one-sixth of the population, though in certain districts, such as Lancashire and the West Riding, the requirements rise to nearly a fifth. We have shown what has been done to supply this deficiency, and that if we reckon all schools as fully available, without regard to structural defects, to local excess or deficiency, to high fee or other cause of unsuitability, this proportion is now provided, and more than provided, for the country as a whole.
But in addition to the fact that many schools are so placed that their surplus accommodation is not available to meet school deficiencies elsewhere, there is a further deduction to be made from the nominal totals of school accommodation. In the case of board schools the accommodation is reckoned in the senior departments on the number of seats which correspond roughly with 10 square feet per child. In the voluntary schools the accommodation is reckoned throughout at 8 square feet per child. If the voluntary accommodation were measured on the same basis as the board accommodation, the nominal number of about 2,400,000 places in senior departments could only be reckoned at four-fifths of their present number, a reduction of 480,000 places.
But this is not all. The board schools have been built on plans approved by the Department, and are well-lighted, of suitable width, and so arranged as to make all their space properly available. The Department refuses to recognise a school above a certain width as suitable to seat children beyond a certain number of rows of seats; but many voluntary schools have been built largely for parochial or denominational, and not solely for school purposes; they are therefore often large rooms, 30, 36, and even more feet wide; great undivided halls, which at 8 feet per child, would in some cases seat 400 or 500 children, but in which it would be undesirable to teach even 200 children, on account of the noise and confusion of several classes working at once. Moreover, in many cases the class-rooms of voluntary schools are quite unfit to be reckoned as class-rooms, being often more like closets than rooms, too small for effective use, and such as the Department would not sanction if the plans were submitted to it.
If, in addition to these considerations, we bear in mind the number of schools which charge fees of 4d and upwards, and are therefore not available for the poor, and yet have a large number of unused places, if we consider the Roman Catholic schools in Protestant districts, built larger than was needed for the Roman Catholic population; and if we also bear in mind the schools larger than are required for their immediate district, but which are not available for children at a distance, we shall see that so far
[page 257]
from there being an excess of school provision, the country is still considerably behind a sufficient supply of school places, even on the assumption of one-sixth of the population being enough.
In the earlier years, after the passing of the Act of 1870, the deficiency to be encountered in the matter of school accommodation was so vast, that it was not politic for the Education Department to examine too curiously into the quality of the school provision then available. A very great strain was thrown on the resources of the populous and growing districts where school provision was mostly needed. Where school boards were doing their best, a temporary recognition of accommodation not thoroughly suitable, was expedient as a makeshift. For the same reason, while school boards are actively engaged in making further provision for school accommodation, the Education Department recognises as a temporary measure the crowding of the board schools to the limit of 8 square feet per child, the standard permitted in voluntary schools. But now that the chief stress of school provision is past, the time has come when the State may justly claim for all children that amount of air and space, that suitability of premises, airiness, and lightness of site, and reasonable extent of playground which are provided where the education of children has been made a public and municipal duty.
No reason can be alleged why if 10 feet per child are needed in a board school, less than that should be considered sufficient in a voluntary school. Indeed, anyone who is familiar with many voluntary schools, especially in towns, will recognise that the new board schools can be crowded on the basis of one child to 8 feet, with much less hindrance to the teaching, and with much less sanitary injury from foul air than the older and less well-arranged schools. The time is come when even in well-arranged schools 10 feet should be treated as the minimum floor space for each child in average attendance, and this should apply to infant schools as well as to senior departments. When we consider the great importance in a well-conducted infant school of plenty of free floor space for games, for action songs, dances, and marching, and all the other cheerful methods now recognised as essential for a good infant school; and when we also bear in mind the very great difference in attendance in an infant school between summer and winter, the great depletion to which an infant school is subject by the removal of, perhaps, a third of its numbers on one day, after the examination, and the wave of infantile epidemics which often sweeps over such schools and leaves them half empty for months together, we shall see that any rule of accommodation based on yearly average attendance should be based on considerably more than 8 feet per child.
In the Scotch Code, it is now stated that 10 square feet of area for each child is to be considered as the normal scale of an efficient school.
Indeed, we are of opinion that the rule of measuring accommodation by yearly average attendance is a very mischievous rule in the interest of school efficiency. Mr. Stokes, Her Majesty's Inspector for the Southwark division of London, has called attention to this in the following weighty remarks: "A school cannot properly be filled by its average attendance unless no child is ever absent from it. For as soon as cases of absence have occurred, compensation to make up the full average cannot be gained without improper overcrowding. In the returns of the department 'average attendance' is calculated for periods of twelve months. In every year there are days or seasons of extreme cold or storm or epidemic sickness when the infant school will be half empty. Defect in heating apparatus during winter is cause enough. Indeed, want of warmth within the room empties fin infant school more effectually than rain or snow outside. I was formerly acquainted with an infant school designed to hold about 300 children, and which continued to draw grants upon an average attendance of nearly its whole complement. Yet during winter for weeks together that school was rarely attended by more than 30 infants. If on 25 days in the year the attendance was as low as 30, then 6,750 attendances would be lost, and in order to make up the average attendance to 300 a day, an aggregate of 6,750 children must one day or another be admitted in excess of the accommodation. The injurious effect of overcrowding upon health is lessened in fine weather by having doors and windows always open, and by keeping classes in the open-air in the playground, but the injury to instruction cannot be met, since a teaching staff adequate to manage 250 or 300 cannot properly attend to 400 or 500 children. The mistress cannot teach a double number at midsummer because her scholars absented themselves at Christmas. Overcrowding at particular seasons will henceforth be checked by the inspector's visit of surprise. The point I wish to insist on is, that it will not be enough to provide accommodation in school for
[page 258]
the average attendance of children, but places must be provided for all or nearly all the children, because all or nearly all will attend together at certain seasons, and all, or nearly all, will be absent together at other seasons under the influence of causes operating upon the bulk of them." (See Report, 1871, pp. 72-3).
In the same Blue Book, p. xvi., the department lays down a similar rule as to accommodation. The report of the Education Department states: "We assume that in England and Wales with a population of upwards of 22 millions, the average daily attendance at efficient schools ought to amount to about three millions, the accommodation for this number of scholars ought to be considerably in excess of the average daily attendance, and to provide for a maximum attendance of not much less than four millions." And in the Education Report for 1872, p. xvii, the same principle is affirmed.
The rule of the Department, which really indicates the extreme limit of overcrowding, the violation of which will entail possible forfeiture of the grant, has too often been treated as a normal and reasonable measure of the proper relation between the accommodation and attendance; and the difference between the accommodation and the yearly average attendance is frequently quoted as empty places and available accommodation which are urged as reasons against further school supply.
The proper measure of a school's accommodation should be the seat supply, and that seat supply should be authorised by the Department according to the plans of the school, and as it is shown on the plans. This would get rid of a great deal of nominal accommodation which is not, and never can be available, but which appears in yearly official returns of the Department, and is consequently most misleading. And this seat accommodation should have reference to the number on the roll and not to the average attendance. Even then a school may be overcrowded though the number on the roll do not exceed the seat accommodation, if it be the average number on the roll throughout the year. It often happens that in a large school there are upwards of 200 infants promoted to the senior departments. Either admission must have been refused for two or three months before the examination in order to keep room for these expected new comers, or the senior department with its 400 or more places and the same number of occupants, must be overcrowded with an excess of 100 scholars until the gradual departures of scholars bring down the number on the roll to a balance with the accommodation. And. again, in a large school divided into class-rooms, as is now fortunately growing more and more the practice, it is impossible to secure that the classification of the children shall coincide exactly with the accommodation of the rooms. Taking the normal unit of a class-room as 60, which is the rule of the Education Department in passing plans for school buildings, it is probable and usual that the 6th and 7th standards in such a school as we are considering, will number only 40 children, and the 5th perhaps 50 children. Again, in the lower part of the school, the 2nd or 3rd standard may contain 110 or 120 children, making two classes, neither of them giving an average of more than 50, and yet each requiring a separate teacher in a separate room. To meet these constantly recurring difficulties of classification there must be some elbow room, some surplus accommodation, but this is not vacant or unused in any reasonable sense of the term.
It may be noted that in the General Report for the year 1886, of Mr. Blakiston, Chief Inspector of the Northern Division, we find this paragraph: "We are glad to report general improvement in regard to the state of school buildings and premises. More attention is paid to cleanliness and repairs, and to the supply of apparatus. But in view of the evil effects of habitual and temporary overcrowding which we are constantly encountering, we are unanimous in recommending that the minimum in all voluntary schools and in infant schools be raised from eight to ten square feet per child."
Another very important matter which needs attention in schools is the ventilation. The rule of the Department requiring a minimum of 80 cubic feet for each child is of very little value for sanitary purposes. These 80 cubic feet are measured throughout the whole school, and are taken on the yearly average. Thus in an infant school at its fullest in the hot summer months we may find a particular class-room so over-crowded, that instead of 80 cubic feet, each child may have much less, possibly only 50. Moreover, the calculation of fresh air by cubic feet in the room is a very unscientific and unsatisfactory method of securing the result aimed at. It is the constant changing of the air rather than the size of the reservoir which determines the sweetness and freshness of the room. Those who enter almost any school towards the close of the school session know how rare it is to find the room pleasant and pure, and how common to find it almost unbearable. The unconsciousness arising from use makes even the
[page 259]
teacher not sufficiently careful on this subject, and the dislike of draughts, and the wish to economise coal, are other reasons why this question of ventilation needs serious consideration in reference to the planning of schools.
The lighting of schools is a matter which has been far too much neglected hitherto. Many schools built by architects who know nothing of scholastic needs, or of hygienic requirements, have lofty open go chic roofs, with picturesque casemented windows low down in the wall. The plans circulated by the department in the annual blue book from 1840 to 1850 suggested and recommended such designs and elevations, and gave building grants on them throughout the country. Even where the windows and ventilation are carried high up, a cross light is very common, and a left side light is comparatively rare. Indeed, the official model plans just referred to, positively recommended an arrangement by which a cross light became imperative. And when the School Board for London first began to submit plans by which a side light was secured to the great majority of the class-rooms, objections were raised in the first instance by the Education Department, though waived on the School Board pressing their contention.*
All who take an interest in education agree that a playground is one of the most important adjuncts of a school, valuable for the health of the children, for the formation of their moral character, and as a most important aid to discipline; and by affording means of suitable shore breaks in the course of the daily instruction a preventive of over-pressure. The Department has recognised this to some extent by laying down in its rules that the minimum area for a school site should be a quarter of an acre. This is not really sufficient for a large town school where five or six hundred children, and more, are congregated. A playground is far more essential in a town than in the country. But questions of cost and the difficulty of securing sites have caused a very large proportion of the voluntary schools in towns to be without this essential adjunct. However expedient it may be not to press hardly on schools already in existence and doing the best they can under disadvantageous material conditions, there is no reason, now that the education of children has become a public duty, why any new schools should be recognised which are in any way inferior to what the Department would secure and insist upon if they were erected by a school board. It is the interest of the children and of education which the Department and the country have to consider, and not how cheaply a substitute may be found for the discharge of a public duty.
The returns to our circular B show what a large amount of unsuitable and unavailable accommodation is still recognised by the Education Department, especially in Lancashire. A special examination of the case of Stockport will show how far the abolition of the school board of that town, sanctioned by the Department on the plea that the accommodation was sufficient, was really in the interests of education.
Meantime, we may call attention to the rules of the Education Department on school planning, which show what are the suitable arrangements for health and for education on which the Department now insists.
1. The accommodation of each room depends not merely on its area, but also on its shape (especially in relation to the kind of desk proposed) the position of the doors and fireplaces, and its proper lighting,
2. The proper width of a schoolroom is 18 to 20 feet or 22 feet, Accommodation is calculated by the number of children seated at desks and benches. Wasted space cannot be considered.
4. (a) The walls of every schoolroom and class-room, if ceiled at the level of the wall plate, must be at least 12 feet high from the level of the floor to the ceiling, and if the area contain more than 360 superficial square feet, 13 feet, if more than 600 feet, then 14 feet.
(b) The walls of every schoolroom and classroom, if ceiled to the rafters and collar beam, must be at least 11 feet high from the floor to the wall-plate, and at least 14 feet to the ceiling across the collar beam
5. The principal entrance to a school should never be through the cloak room. The latter should be screened off or separated. Gangways should be at least 4 feet wide, and amply lighted from the end. Hat pegs should be 12 inches apart, and of two tiers. There should be a separate peg numbered for each child.
6. Class rooms are calculated at 10 square feet if not providing accommodation for more than 60 children. The minimum size of class room is 18 feet by 15 feet.
*Note. - This was before the appointment of the present advising architect of the Department.
[page 260]
The class rooms should never be passage rooms from one part of the building to another, nor from the schoolrooms to the playground or yard, and should be on the same level as the schoolroom. Each should be easily cleared without disturbance to any other room.
8. Windows - (a) The light should as far as possible be admitted from the left side of the scholars. All other windows should be regarded as supplementary or for summer ventilation. In cases where left light is impossible, right light is next best. Where neither is possible, the light should be admitted from a high point.
(c) The sills of the main lighting windows should be placed about four feet above the floor, and the tops of some should always reach nearly to the ceiling.
9. Staircases. No triangular steps or "winders" should be used in staircases, each step should be about 13 inches broad, and not more than 6 inches high. The flights should be short, and the landings unbroken by steps.
12. Number of closets and privies required.
| for girls | for boys |
Under 50 children | 3 | 2 |
Under 100 children | 5 | 3 |
Under 150 children | 6 | 3 |
Under 200 children | 7 | 4 |
Under 300 children | 8 | 5 |
13. Desks. Benches and desks graduated according to the ages of the children should be provided for all the scholars in actual attendance.
14. - (a) Every school should have a playground.
(b) In the case of a mixed school, playgrounds must be separate for boys and girls.
15. Infant schools. Infants should not, except in very small schools, be taught in the same room with older children, as the noise and the training of the infants disturb and injuriously affect the discipline and instruction of the other children.
19. The width of an infant school should be in proportion to its size, and may be 24 feet.
20. The accommodation of an infant schoolroom is calculated at 8 square feet for each child, after deducting wasted and useless space.
The above extracts from the rules of the Department indicate a standard of school accommodation which, if applied to voluntary schools, would very materially diminish their nominal accommodation, and yet it cannot be said they are unreasonable or excessive; indeed if the French official regulations for school planning be compared with them, it will be seen that in many respects the English standard is lower than that of our neighbours.
The question of school furniture and material falls partly under the head of school provision, partly under that of school management. The desks and benches which are part of the original equipment of the school, may more properly be touched upon here. It is not advisable that any absolute rule should be laid down as to the character of the desk, whether single, dual, or longer; but care should be taken that the school furniture should always be suited to children and to day-school use. Too often the school exists "a double debt to pay", and we find heavy benches and reversible desks evidently intended quite as much for parish meetings of adults, tea parties, and feasts, and other general purposes, as for the instruction of the children. It is a piteous sight to see, as one may sometimes, infants with their legs dangling in the air, and children kept for a long time sitting on benches with no backs to them. Many old schools have improved their furniture, but too many still go on with desks and benches of the most unsuitable character, and the time has come when the Education Department should insist on the improvement of this part of the school material.
The Blue books are full of complaints by the inspectors of the unsatisfactory character of the school buildings and furniture in too many schools.
Thus, in the Education Report for 1886-7, Mr. Blakiston, Chief Inspector for the North-Eastern Division, whose remarks we have already quoted as to the need for 10 square feet per child and for better ventilation, writes, p, 265, of the deficiencies, in many schools otherwise satisfactory, as to cloakroom arrangements, means of washing, and facilities for drying wet boots, &c.; he calls attention to the bad lighting, and to the general want of pictures in the schools; he further complains, p. 270, of inconvenient desks and bad lighting.
Mr. Johnstone quotes Mr. Vertue, p. 320, as to badly lighted, badly ventilated, and dirty rooms, and Mr. Greene as to the want of desks for infants, and the deficiency of local maps and of globes.
Mr. Williams, Chief Inspector for Wales, says, p. 364, the ventilation of schools is seldom good, and also finds fault with the heating. On this point he quotes
[page 261]
Mr. Munro, p. 341; he quotes, on the same page, Mr. Bancroft, who says, "A large number of the old school buildings, which were accepted after the passing of the Act of 1870, I would gladly see pulled down and rebuilt or replaced by new ones; but, in the present bad times with agriculturists, it is difficult and indeed hardly possible to get managers to move in the matter." Mr. Morgan Owen is quoted, p. 342, as to the substitution of a wood floor for tiles in deference to a recommendation 11 years old; he also complains of class-rooms unsuitably furnished.
Mr. Oakley, p. 423, reporting of the practising school of the Bangor Training College, finds the apparatus and desks not yet altogether satisfactory.
Mr. Fitch finds fault with the premises of the Norwich Training College, and with the equipment of their practising school, pp. 465-6.
In 1885-6, Mr. Barry, Chief Inspector for the West Central Division, complains, p. 246, of want of class-rooms and cloak-rooms, and of playgrounds, of unsatisfactory offices, of bad light, and of bad desks.
Mr. Oakley, the Chief Inspector for the North-Western Division, speaks of the schools in the suburbs of Manchester where several of the rooms are defective as to ventilation or in some other respect, and where the accommodation for infants often falls short of modern requirements (Education Report, 1885-6, p. 265), and he quotes Mr. Freeland (p. 269) that the premises in the Burnley District are in many cases ill adapted for modern requirements. At p. 270 Mr. Coward is quoted for the statement that "in estimating school accommodation, 8 square feet per child is wholly insufficient, and produces overcrowding with its obvious ill effects. What is called over-pressure is greatly due to overcrowded rooms."
Mr. Stewart (p. 308) quotes Mr. Milman, who still finds stone floors in the Leamington District, and apparently has difficulty in getting the managers to do away with them.
Mr. Stokes, reporting on the South-Eastern Division, says (p. 330) that visits to Canterbury, Ramsgate, Maidstone, Folkestone, Beckenham, Dorking, Reigate, Croydon, Hastings, Eastbourne, Arundel, and Worthing, leave upon his mind an impression that in a large number of cases the school premises are inadequate in size and inferior in condition. He says, further, the allowance per child of 8 square feet of floor space measured over main rooms and class-rooms is wholly inadequate for the serious purposes of discipline and instruction, and to accept schools as accommodating a larger number of children than they can really teach is but to encourage irregular attendance. At p. 332 he quotes Mr. Markheim from the Dartford Division: "Every village is or is being supplied with a school, but a great number of schools are overcrowded, and the accommodation has evidently been provided to meet the minimum of actual requirements without due allowance for the increase of population." P. 333, Mr. Stokes says, that in Rochester and Chatham the school buildings are at best old-fashioned and ill-arranged, and at least two of them are distinctly bad. Mr. Ley and Mr. Routledge both ask for a second survey of school accommodation by the Education Department. Mr. Routledge says "A few of the older buildings, such as Boughton Wesleyan School, were passed as satisfactory in what we may call ' the dark ages,' and it is very difficult for the district inspector to condemn them now after so many years of vested interest. It would be well for the chief inspector to call for a special return of such buildings, and to pay a personal visit to them when so reported." Mr. Routledge calls particular attention to the necessity of simple and effective ventilation, and to the offices, which should either be earth or water-closets. He objects to overgrown galleries, to the sacrifice of day-schools to the interest of Sunday schools or other parochial purposes, to dual desks, and to schools without a class-room and a gallery.
In the Blue Book for 1884-5, our colleague, Mr. Alderson, reporting on the South-Western Division, quotes Mr. Codd (p. 250), as to the want of playgrounds and class rooms in the Barnstaple district.
Mr. Blakiston quotes Mr. Rooper (p. 266): Of the townships around Bradford "the premises of the Cleckheaton schools are the least satisfactory both in quality and quantity. The town decided, after the Act of 1870, to dispense with a school board, and to trust to voluntary agency. These experiments are always exceedingly interesting, but nothing justifies them short of success. The rough unplastered interior of St. Luke's resembles a stable more than a schoolroom, and children are refused admission because there is absolutely no room for them. The British school is so inconvenient for teaching the number of scholars in attendance as to make any but its present teacher despair; while the want of a class-room at Westgate drives the reading lesson into the open air."
[page 262]
On the same page, Mr. Colson complains of the buildings and furniture in the Northallerton district.
Mr. Blandford (p. 297) quotes Mr. Kynnersley as to the want of school accommodation in the centre of Birkenhead, a town that has succeeded in avoiding the formation of a school board; and as reporting that in Chester the old buildings of the parish of St. John, which had been continued till 1884, were defective in every good quality. Chester is another town in which there is no school board.
Mr. Lott (p. 298) notes the inadequacy of the infant school supply of Derby.
Mr. Fitch reporting on the Eastern Division of England and on East Lambeth, quotes Mr. Oliver on the Boston district (p. 307), as to the need of class-rooms; and Mr. Synge reports of Norfolk, on the same page, that the school supply in that district is not complete, and that there are schools still existing which were passed in 1871, but have never come into the ranks of certified efficient or annual grant schools.
In the report for 1883-4, Mr. Bernays speaking of Durham, says, (p. 252), "The offices, though better than they were, are not yet what they should be, and I have still considerable difficulty in getting either managers or teachers to see that they are properly kept, but where warnings are unheeded, the reduction or loss of the merit grant will doubtless have the desired effect."
Mr. Cowie, at p. 279, gives an instance of the long suffering of the Department, and of the power of resistance of a small rural school board in resisting school provision. At Shaugh Prior, the parish has had a school board since 1874, and for nine years from that date the board contrived to stave off the question of providing efficient schools.
Mr. Danby, at p. 287, complains of insufficient desk accommodation for infants in the Edmonton Division, and, at p. 289, he notes the inadequate care bestowed on light, warmth, ventilation, arrangement of desks, position of offices, &c. He also criticizes the convertible desks, movable platforms, and the like, introduced into schools, which are intended to serve a double purpose.
Mr. Gleadowe, writing of the Crewe district, says (p. 298), "In buildings we are much worse off than many of our neighbours, most of the buildings were established years ago, and there are comparatively few rooms that thoroughly satisfy present requirements." And at p. 300, he speaks of the unsatisfactory buildings of a school in Crewe, where the board has not made any provision for school supply.
Mr. Moncrieff writes of the Bristol district (p. 342), "ventilation is generally defective, and I do not doubt the truth of Mr. Ewen's closing words, 'that defective ventilation causes many headaches that are put down to long hours, anxiety, or hard study'."
Mr. Sharpe, writing of the City of London, says (p. 379), of the voluntary schools, after excepting two held in temporary premises, which are to be rebuilt: "All the other buildings can only be regarded as fair, except the Graystoke Place Board School, which presents the usual excellent features of a .board school, Aldersgate Ward, Lady Holles' Charity, and Bishopsgate Ward Girls' School, i.e., there are really only four good school buildings in the City."
Mr. Stevelly, speaking of the Hull voluntary schools, says (p. 38): " The walls, floors, and out-offices, should, in many instances, be cleaned much more frequently than they are." He gives as a reason for this neglect the insufficient pay of the school cleaner.
Mr. Stokes (pp. 401-2), speaks of the badness of the old Southwark schools, and of the progressive improvement of the board schools; on page 404, he speaks of the evil of overcrowding, and repeats the opinion we have already quoted, that the accommodation should not be reckoned on the average attendance, but on the highest number ever present. He notices at p. 408, as to the south-eastern district generally, the unsatisfactory character of much of the school accommodation, a repetition of which complaint we have quoted from him in the year 1885-6.
Mr. Tremenheere, reporting on the schools in the Kendal district, urges (p. 410), that there should be a review of the character of the schools, and of the quality of the teaching in schools passed in 1871. He says, the requirements of Circular 137 are really absurdly inadequate in the year of grace 1883.
It will be evident, on a perusal of the reports of Her Majesty's inspectors, that much has been done of late years in the direction of improving furniture and premises, in compliance with the representations of the inspectors; and there is a large amount of testimony that great willingness has been shown by many managers of voluntary schools to introduce needed improvements in the structure and arrangements of their
[page 263]
schools; there is, therefore, no reason to think that any good managers would object to the demand that the structural suitability and efficiency of all schools should now be made completely satisfactory.
As a rule, we may say, that in the rural districts, where the voluntary schools are mainly responsible for the education of the children, it is not so much schools that are wanting, as well-equipped and well-arranged schools; what we need is the improvement of some of the existing schools rather than the establishment of additional school provision.
in addition to public elementary and certified efficient schools, there are a certain number of private adventure schools, which are accepted by the educational authorities, as furnishing a part of the school supply of the district. We are of opinion that no insanitary or otherwise unsuitable premises should be used as a school. Before any building is used as a school, the premises should be approved on structural grounds by Her Majesty's inspector, who should certify the number of children for whom it may properly be used, and any person using a building not so certified as a school, or for more children than the number for which it was certified, should be guilty of an offence, and power should be taken to close the school.
To sum up the question as to the sufficiency in quantity and the adequacy in quality of the school provision now existing, we may say that nominally, except, in the large towns and rapidly growing industrial districts, the accommodation is sufficient in quantity for the child population of the country, and though the apparent abundance of school provision is subject to some deduction, yet the stress and pressure of school building is over. But when we come to the question of quality, much is lacking, and requirements of efficiency which were kept in the background, while so much work had to be done may now be justly pressed. There is a practically universal agreement among the witnesses that the 8 feet per child in average attendance should be raised at any rate in senior schools to 10 feet, and this would be a great and proper improvement to introduce also in infant schools. As to school furniture, much has been done, and is being done, to improve it by managers, who in many cases respond willingly to the recommendations of the inspector, and we may rely on the Department to continue their action in this direction. But the time has come when the seat accommodation as shown on the plans should be substituted for any mechanical measurement of square feet in determining the amount of school places available. This would, in the mass of schools, be equivalent to a 10 square feet measurement, but measurement by seat accommodation is needed for the purpose of ascertaining the real scholastic utility of many large halls, used for, rather than adapted to, school purposes. As to lighting, the Department should take more pains to secure in all new schools the best light for the health and comfort of the children and of the teachers, and even in old schools, by skylights and the alteration of windows to introduce considerable improvements. In the ventilation and warming of schools, also, two matters which should be treated together, there is great need for improvement. And adequate playgrounds should be an imperative necessity in all schools applying for recognition. In noting the improvements needed in this part of the means of education, it would not be just not to recognise the great willingness that has been shown, in many cases, by voluntary managers to meet the growing demands resulting from a sounder appreciation of what is due to education, and the wonderful progress that has been made by school boards in the excellence of their plans and arrangements, progress which makes many of the new schools of our larger boards as great improvements on the schools built 10 years ago, as those schools were on their predecessors built before 1870.
CASE OF STOCKPORT
The Act of 1876 permits by section 41 the dissolution of a school board by the Education Department under certain special conditions. First, that two-thirds of the persons present and voting of the same body as that charged with the power of calling a school board into being should concur in its dissolution. Secondly, that the board has no school or site for a school in its possession or under its control, and that the Education Department are satisfied that there is a sufficient amount of public school accommodation for the district. Thirdly, that no requisition has been sent by the Education Department to such school board requiring them to supply public school
[page 264]
accommodation. And, fourthly, that the Education Department itself, after taking all the circumstances of the case into consideration, is of opinion that the maintenance of a school board is not required for the purposes of education in the district.
There have not been many cases of the dissolution of school boards under this section, but one of the most important was the case of the borough of Stockport. This large town, with a population at the census of 1881 of 59,583, had a school board, but there being a great number of voluntary schools, the board had no schools of its own; and as the friends of denominational education were in a considerable majority in the town council, they passed a resolution by the requisite majority for the dissolution of the board, which was assented to by the Education Department on November 13th, 1879, and since then there has been a school attendance committee in Stockport. The chairman of that committee attended before us and gave evidence which will be found at pp. 155-160 of our Third Report.
Before examining his evidence it may be well to state certain facts which appear from returns furnished to us by the managers of the public elementary schools of Stockport. These schools appear according to the most recent report of the Education Department to number
According to the general rule of the Department, accommodation is needed for one-sixth of the population, in which case about 10,000 school places would be the proper school supply of Stockport. But in Lancashire and in the more industrial districts, it is found that accommodation for one-fifth of the population is not excessive, and on that basis of calculation school places for 12,000 would be requisite. In either case it would appear at first sight that the town of Stockport is sufficiently provided with school places. But the character as well as the nominal amount of school places should be examined before we can finally accept the figures before us. It must be remembered that these 13,825 places are generally reckoned by measuring all these schools at 8 square feet per child in average attendance. But the nearly unanimous testimony of those who have given evidence on the subject is that, at any rate in senior departments, 10 ft. per child is requisite.
The schools of Stockport with 13,825 nominal places, have according to their return, 3,631 places for infants, and 10,194 places for senior scholars. Assuming all the buildings to be well arranged and otherwise suitable, we should then, according to the rules of the Department for school planning, have, reckoning the senior departments at 10 feet per child, places for 3,631 infants and for 8,155 seniors, making a total of 11,786 places, which would be nearly equal to the one place in five found desirable in the manufacturing towns. But the size and shape of the rooms generally make it impossible to reckon the real space available equal to the above theoretic computation.
In reference to the regulations of the Education Department as to building quoted in the last chapter, there are many regulations about lighting, offices, cloak rooms, playgrounds, &c., which there is no reason to believe are satisfied in such buildings as the Stockport schools are shown to be by the measurements given. But dealing only with the following rules laid down by the Department, - (1) That the maximum available width for desks is 22 feet in a school-room, and that the accommodation is to be measured by the seats shown (which by other detailed regulations works out at rather more that 10 feet per child, but may be taken at 10 feet up to a width of 22 feet, all extra width not being available). (2) That class-rooms for not more than 60, may be measured at 10 feet per child, provided they are not smaller than 18 x 15 feet, below which dimensions they are not recognised. (3) That the minimum height of small rooms is 12 feet, or 11 feet to the wall plate if ceiled at the collar beam. (4) That the maximum width for an infant school-room to be measured at 8 feet is 24 feet, - we find the following results in the Stockport schools.
[page 265]
The 3,631 infant places are reduced to 3,004; there being among them rooms with the following dimensions:
60 feet x 30 = 1,800 sq. ft. 225 accommodation at 8 square feet. (No class room.)
52 feet x 32½ = 1,680 sq. ft. 210 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
60 feet x 28 = 1,680 sq. ft. 210 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
33 feet x 30 = 990 sq. ft. 124 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
47 feet x 35 = 1,645 sq. ft. 206 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
39 ft. 7 x 31 = 1,227 sq. ft. 153 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
45 feet x 28½ = 1,282 sq. ft. 160 square feet accommodation at 8 square feet.
88 feet x 28 = 2,864 sq. ft. 308. (No class room.)
The following are some of the dimensions of the class-rooms:
At St. Thomas' Infant School, three class-rooms, each 12 feet x 25½.
Brinksway Infant School, a class-room 14 feet x 10.
Chestergate British Infant School is 30 x 26, and 10½ feet high, having an area 780 feet. It should by the rules of the Department have a minimum height of 14 feet.
Union Chapel British Infant School has two class-rooms, each 23 feet x 12, being 3 feet narrower than the minimum allowed, and they are 11½ feet high.
Brentnal Street Wesleyan Infant School has four class-rooms less than the minimum width of the Department's rules, one 15 x 14, one 18 x 14, one 11½ x 14, and one 11 x 14 feet.
Portwood Wesleyan Infant School has two class-rooms 13½ feet wide.
Edgeley Wesleyan Infant School has two class-rooms 14 feet wide, and one 12 feet wide.
New Bridge Lane Wesleyan Infant School has three rooms, all 10 feet high, the largest having an area of 1,282 square feet, it should, therefore, be 14 feet high; the other two rooms are respectively 14½ x 12½ and 11½ x 11 feet.
St. Mary's Roman Catholic Infant School, Heaton Norris, has a class-room 14 x 14 feet and 10 feet high.
No one can consider such infant schools as those measuring the one 60 feet by 30, the other 88 feet by 28. neither of them having a class-room, as in any way satisfactory for the education of infants, much less the one as suitable and available for 225 and the other for 308 infants.
Passing from the infant schools to the senior schools, we find in St. Mary's National School a class-room in the girls' department 18-6 x 13-2 by 10-6 feet in height, thus contravening the principles recognised by the Department, both as to width and height.
In St. Peter's National School there are two class-rooms, one 13-4 x 12 feet by 10-7 in height, the other 13-4 x 12 by 10-7 height.
St. Thomas' National School has a room described as a class-room, 50 feet by 37 feet, and 8 feet high. Such a room, measured at 8 feet per child, would be set down as accommodating 231 children. It is difficult to think of any educational use to which it could properly be put, except as a sheltered playground or drill shed in wet weather. This school has a higher grade department where the fees are 6s and 9s a quarter. In this department there are two class-rooms 24 x 25½ feet and 11 feet high, and one room 12 feet x 25½ feet and 11 feet high.
Edgeley, St. Matthew, has three class rooms, 14 feet wide.
Christ Church, Heaton Norris, has four class-rooms, two 10½ feet high and two 10 feet high.
Chestergate British School has two class-rooms, 10½ feet broad by 10½ feet high.
Hanover Chapel British School has two class-rooms, 10 feet broad.
Union Chapel British School has two class-rooms, each 20 x 12, one 18 x 10, and another 10 feet by 10.
Brentnall Street Wesleyan, described as a higher grade school, and charging in the upper classes, 8d, 9d, and 1s a week, has class-rooms 21 x 14 feet, 15 x 14, three rooms each 11½ x 14, and one room 12 x 8 feet.
Portwood Wesleyan, also called a higher grade school, and charging 9d in the upper school, has a class-room 15 feet by 13½ feet.
Edgeley Wesleyan School has two class-rooms 14 feet wide.
On the other hand. New Bridge Lane Wesleyan Senior School, with accommodation at 8 square feet for 217 children, has no class-room.
St. Mary's Roman Catholic School, Heaton Norris, has a class-room 17 x 10 feet, and one 9 x 8 feet, and 9 feet high.
[page 266]
Other rooms might have been mentioned which fail to come up to the standard laid down by the Education Department.
If the schools were re-measured and recognised according to the official rules above-mentioned, apart from the question of height, which has not been considered, they would contain instead of 13,825 places, 8,619 places, a deficiency of 1,380 places on a population of 60,000, even if one-sixth of the population were an adequate school supply, which, in these Lancashire towns it is not; and the population of Stockport is now between 63,000 and 64,000.
But in addition to the character of the premises, the fee charged has to be considered. In all the Stockport schools, except the Roman Catholic schools, the fee for the higher standards goes as high as 6d, and in some schools higher. In St. Thomas' mixed the fee is 5d, and, possibly, these children may continue through all the standards. In some cases it is stated that the means of the family are considered in fixing the fee, but there is no school where a poor man can, as of right, send his child and give him a complete elementary education and claim his reception at a moderate fee of 2d, or, at most, 3d. Even in the infant schools it seems common to charge a fee of 3d to children of 5 years old.
In Stockport, in 1884-85, the average attendance was 8,776; the grant earned in 1884-85 is £8,399, or 19s 2d a head.
The subscriptions amounted to £600, or 1s 4 1/3d a head, and the fees to £8,214 or 18s 9d a head.
The total expenditure was £16,899 or £1 18s 6d a head.
Thus the parents contributed 48.6 per cent of the total cost.
The taxpayers contributed 49.1 per cent.
The subscribers who have the whole management contribute 3.5 per cent.
The evidence of Mr. Leigh, Chairman of the School Attendance Committee of Stockport, is very instructive. He thinks one or two free schools might be erected. He notices that at the time of the dissolution of the school board, 300 or 400 Protestant children were attending Roman Catholic schools. He states that there has been a steady raising of the school fee for the last 15 years. They have, he says, had some difficulty owing to teachers refusing children who have been turned out of other schools. He also says, there are certain schools which have succeeded in erecting themselves into middle-class schools virtually, and they exclude as much as they can these exceptional children (waifs and strays). The fees in Stockport go up, he says, to 9d, 10d, and upwards, rising with the standards and the higher subjects. He adds that the schools are ill placed, crowded in some parts of the town and deficient in others, though that has been somewhat remedied. One school was an old manufacturer's warehouse, a portion of it was converted into a school, another portion into a chapel. It is a matter of suspicion that some of the schools are farmed to the teachers, and he says: "We generally expect that the schools shall be self-supporting, with the Government grant and the children's fees. It is an exceptional circumstance for anyone to have to subscribe to schools within the borough, as I understand." In the Blue Book for 1886-7, we find Mr. Blandford's report, p. 293, that Mr. Lomax reports of Stockport: "In some of the best attended and most efficient schools in this district, persistent irregularity on the part of a scholar is punished by expulsion from the school, but recourse to this extreme expedient is seldom needed." Mr. Blandford remarks on this, p. 294: "The managers and teachers, especially of a voluntary school which has obtained the merit grant of excellent, or even of good, being, as to its support, in great measure dependent on the amount of grant earned, do not look with favour upon the admission or retention of children, who, being irregular in their attendance, are likely to have an adverse influence on the amount of grant earned. Head-teachers are slow to admit children of this description, and when admitted they are not without ingenious devices for excluding them from the annual inspection, or of getting rid of them altogether." Then, after quoting the remarks of Mr. Lomax, he adds, "Upon this I have to observe that the expulsion of children from a school in the receipt of annual grants on account of irregular attendance, is, in my opinion, wholly unjustifiable."
The conclusion we draw from the case of Stockport, as thus described, is:
First, that school accommodation should be suitable and good, as well as numerically sufficient, before it can be considered under the Act of 1876, that a school board is unnecessary, and that in the case of Stockport, the school provision is in its character and structural accommodation highly unsuitable.
[page 267]
Secondly, there should be schools with a reasonable fee for all standards, available for the population, and that where the voluntary schools are not of this character, board schools should be established; and this applies to Stockport.
Thirdly, that the working of the voluntary schools mainly by means of the fees and the grant, leads to undue taxation of the poor by raising the fees, and is an incentive to dishonest management in the way of excluding unsatisfactory children; and that these evils are best remedied by schools under public representative management.
CHAPTER 3
THE PUPIL-TEACHER SYSTEM; ITS DEVELOPMENT FROM THE MONITORIAL SYSTEM; ITS DEFECTS; ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE IT
The most important subject of our inquiry, that which lies at the root of all educational progress, is the quality of the teaching and the character of the teacher. We owe a duty to him and to the children to secure that their work shall be done with no external hindrances, with the best appliances, and with well adapted premises; but after all, the main factor in the success of the school is the teacher; a well educated, able, and high principled man or woman will be successful, even in dark uncomfortable rooms, with scanty school material, and with the most unpromising scholars, swept in from the streets; but a shiftless, mechanical, unconscientious head teacher will soon ruin a school, though he have every external help and though he received it in good condition.
We shall do well, therefore, in dealing with the education given in our schools, to begin by considering the qualifications and training of our teachers; and, first of all, we must examine the main source of our supply of teachers, that specially English contrivance - the pupil-teacher.
In the infancy of the educational movement in England, two men, Bell and Lancaster, hit on the same device for a rapid and cheap extension of popular education, - Dr. Bell, a clergyman, and afterwards associated with the National Society; Mr. Lancaster, a Quaker, the founder of the British and Foreign Society; they were championed by the two political parties, and an angry literary warfare raged round their respective merits as the inventor of the monitorial system. It would be unjust not to recognise the enthusiasm and the public spirit which both these men showed in working as pioneers in the cause of popular education. But when we look back at the competition for the honour of having invented this method of teaching, we are apt to be surprised that no one on either side of the educational belligerents should have flung on the other the reproach of having advocated such a system rather than vindicate it for his own party. The importance of their work is chiefly in this respect, that they both aimed at introducing collective instead of individual teaching. If the mass of the people were to be educated, it was clear that the schools would have to be large. It was clear also that teachers did not exist, and that the cost of supplying teachers in reasonable numbers would be greater than the public opinion of the day was ripe for. In these conditions both Bell and Lancaster fell back on the expedient of making one able and vigorous man multiply himself through the agency of the cleverer boys of the school, who were picked out as monitors, and entrusted with the subordinate education of the classes. The plan was glorified to this extent, that it was contended that by it one master could educate a school of six or seven hundred children; that a child only needed to know how to read, to teach even that which it did not know, for instance, arithmetic, and that through certain economical devices one book would suffice for a whole class. The monitorial system crossed the channel, and became under the name of "le système mutuel" the weapon with which the liberal party in France assailed the clergy, and sought to oust them from the control of education. The following passages from the work of M. Gréard, "l'enseignement primaire à Paris de 1867 à 1877" may equally be applied to the monitorial system in England, and indicates what its character really was. He says, page 77, "All that was needed was to collect the children round reading charts. The calculations had been made. A building 150 ft. long by 30 ft. wide should hold 1,000 scholars directed much
[page 268]
more easily by one master than 30 children under the old system. Moreover, but one book of 140 to 200 pages was needed, which the children never touched, and which consequently lasted several years, &c."
Mr. Gréard goes on to explain the striking character of the exhibition which these schools afforded, and which was calculated to impress the spectator, and cloak the hollow and false character of the education; the elaborate system and hierarchy of the monitors, the complicated code of signals and orders, the discipline with which directions were transmitted; all this may also be found in the writings of Joseph Lancaster and in old articles of the Edinburgh and Quarterly Reviews.
The great spring of the mutual school was the monitor. The greater number of the scholars knew no teacher but him, it was through him that the master saw, spoke, and acted. The great object, therefore, was to have good monitors, and they were the objects of all his care. The school only opened for the scholars at 10. From 8 to 10 was the class time of the monitors. Unfortunately the special object of this class dictated the direction and spirit of its teaching. The interest of the master was promptly to form a good instrument. As for the pupil, it was much less a question for him to learn thoroughly for himself than to learn rapidly and for others. Even among the picked scholars, there must needs be different aptitudes and different degrees of aptitude. Instead of seeking to make the monitors learn from one another and to sweep them forward in that great current of general emulation which, under a common direction, ends by rousing all, the class was divided into groups, and the monitors had their own monitors. No thought was given to the balanced development of the faculties, but advantage was taken of the dominant disposition of each. One had the group of grammar, another that of arithmetic. There was an excessive subdivision of labour without any generalization or unity. The word of the master, which alone quickens, reached the monitors separately, never or rarely collectively. Moreover, a great part of the two hours' instruction was devoted to the recitation of the theory of the ordinary methods of the mutual school. The first object was to drill them to their trade.
What kind of master is such a preparation likely to produce? It has been well said that teaching is learning twice over, but this is only for those who reflect on what they have learnt and on what they teach. In order to bring the light into the intelligence of another we must first kindle the light in ourselves. This supposes the enlightened penetrating and persevering action of an intelligence comparatively ripe and formed. From the class where they had sat as scholars the monitors passed, as though at the touch of a wand, into the teachers of the class of children whom they were to instruct.
They were not even to use a book. Teaching by books was prohibited, at least in the beginning. All they could do was faithfully to transmit the letter of the lesson they had received, for how should they have seized its spirit? Consequently, all they were called upon to do was to apply exactly the mechanical processes in which they had been drilled.
These children under this mechanical discipline often mistook and confounded the formulas they were called on to apply. The only remedy for this was to drive into them by constant repetition their daily course of instruction.
In 1836, when M. Victor Cousin was in Holland, he learnt and proclaimed the worthlessness of the mutual or monitorial system, and declared the system of class teaching by competent teachers the only system worthy of responsible beings. About the same time the late Sir James K. Shuttleworth, whose name is so intimately associated with English education, was introducing from Holland the pupil-teacher system, which superseded the monitorial system in England.
The pupil-teacher system was, undoubtedly, a great step in advance. It secured that the commencement of the teaching career should be at 13, the age when the monitor was disappearing from the school. It provided a graduated system of yearly instruction from the head teacher by which the pupil-teacher was to secure some of the benefit which a secondary school might elsewhere give; and by yearly grants liberal in proportion to the remuneration of child labour, it practically furnished an endowment which continued the education of the most promising children till they could enter the training college at the age of 18. No wonder, then, if the system on its introduction was hailed with a chorus of approval, and that old inspectors who remembered the five or six years before Mr. Lowe's Code when the pupil teacher was finally superseding the old monitorial schools, should look back to that period as a golden age.
[page 269]
Whatever the capabilities of the pupil-teacher system as administered by the Education Department from 1855 to 1861, it must be remembered that Sir James Kay Shuttle-worth himself only looked upon it as transitional, and leading up to a system of adult-trained teachers.
When he began his work of training at Battersea, one of the main difficulties which he encountered was the utter state of unpreparedness of the students. He saw that if full advantage was to be got from the training college the material must be not absolutely raw on its reception; that something to develop the vocation for teaching was needed as a preparation. The pupil-teacher's apprenticeship was the means by which this end was to be obtained, and in the state of English society and of English secondary education at that time, it was an admirable expedient. The youth was indentured directly to the head teacher, who received a direct personal payment for each pupil-teacher whom he trained. He was required to give him special instruction out of school hours for seven and a half hours a week, but not in the night school or along with other pupils.
Not every master or school was entrusted with pupil-teachers; satisfactory security had to be given that the lad or girl would see good teaching and good school methods; and a certain number of posts in the Civil Service were promised to be thrown open to those who at the close of their apprenticeship did not pursue the profession of teacher. The staff, too, required by the department was more liberal in proportion to the numbers taught than that which the late regulations have insisted on, and the number of schools under Government inspection was so small, that a comparatively small number of pupil-teachers was required, and therefore young people of special aptitude and educational zeal were more likely to be secured. Nevertheless, Sir James Kay Shuttleworth stated in his evidence before the Duke of Newcastle's Commission, vol. 6, p. 323. "What will occur, I hope, with respect to the pupil-teacher grant, will be, that there will be a gradual substitution of assistant-teachers for pupil-teachers, and the assistant-teacher will cost the Government somewhat less than two pupil-teachers. He will stand in the place of two pupil-teachers." And at a somewhat later date Sir James Kay Shuttleworth, in a letter to the Times of January 2, 1871, on the supply of teachers to the new schools to be called into existence, said, "The proportion of the teaching staff ought not to be less than one for every 25 scholars, and that of the assistant teachers ought to be much greater than it is. In a school of 150 scholars there ought to be one principal teacher, two assistant and three pupil-teachers. For 100 scholars, one principal, one assistant, and two pupil-teachers. ... We may rather expect that the regulations of the department as to the instruction of pupil-teachers, as to the standard of attainments and skill to be required in each year of the apprenticeship, and as to the conditions of their admission into training colleges, will be more stringent than they have recently been. This will be the first step towards such improvements in the curricula of study in those colleges as will ensure the more complete fitness of the certificated masters for their duties. I hope also to see that a third year's study will be encouraged for masters of superior elementary schools." And even as early as 1853, in his book, "Public Education as affected by the Minutes of the Privy Council from 1846 to 1852", he says, page 130, "Elementary schools cannot be deemed to have received a satisfactory development until every 60 scholars are in charge of a teacher or assistant of 18 years of age, who has passed through five years' apprenticeship, and is aided by a pupil-teacher. Even this arrangement would ultimately give place to one of a more satisfactory nature." But whatever might have been the effects of the pupil-teacher system as it was projected and conducted before Mr. Lowe's Code, serious alterations were introduced to its disadvantage at that time. The number of hours of instruction per week was reduced from 7½ to 5, the fixed payment to the pupil-teachers from the Government was abolished, and the result was that their salaries were often reduced, and an inferior set of pupil-teachers introduced into the schools in consequence.
Since the Education Act of 1870 there have been various changes in the system, such as raising the initial age of apprenticeship to 14, and allowing a reduced term of three, and even two years, with a higher age of entrance and greater intellectual attainments, and a restriction of the number of pupil-teachers permitted to be employed in a school having regard to the numbers of the adult and certificated staff. As a matter of fact, the falling off in the number of pupil-teachers as compared with adult assistants, has been increasing of late years far beyond any obligation
[page 270]
imposed on managers by the Code. The evidence given us in reference to pupil-teachers was very unfavourable.
Many witnesses did not see how to dispense with them, mainly on the ground that if they were abolished it would be difficult to recruit the staff of adult teachers; but the almost invariable testimony, both of the witnesses whom we examined and of the inspectors in their reports published in the yearly Blue Books, is that, whether we look at these young people as teachers or as students, they are the most unsatisfactory part of our educational system.
And this testimony is the more striking when it comes from those who have sympathy with the institution of pupil-teachers, and are not prepared to see it abolished.
Thus the Rev. J. Stewart says, that the pupil-teacher system and training are the proper way to keep up the supply of teachers, and he would revert to the old system before 1862; he finds fault with the centre method of instruction. But the faults which Mr. Stewart finds with the pupil-teachers of the present day may be noted long before the revised Code, and in Mr. Stewart's own old reports the most serious complaints may be found of the difficulty of getting pupil-teachers, and of their very moderate attainments; and in 1877, before any central system of instruction had been established, he complained (Blue Book, 1877-8, p. 546), that the moral bond between the head-teacher and the apprentice was relaxed, and that many pupil-teachers never received any practical instruction during their apprenticeship. Mr. Matthew Arnold, whose old praises of the pupil-teacher system taken from his report to the Duke of Newcastle's Commission, a generation back, will be found quoted several times in the evidence, was forced reluctantly to admit that while his affection for the system remained unchanged, he recognised that the time had come for substituting a higher order of teaching, and for relying more on adult and well-trained teachers.
Mr. Sharpe told the Commission that were he a school manager, with a given amount to spend on staff, he would spend it on adults and not on pupil-teachers.
Not to burden this chapter with quotations, the complaint is general that the pupil-teachers teach badly, and are badly taught. The wretched state of their preparation when they enter the training colleges will be dwelt on when that part of our educational system is dealt with, and the remarkable thing is that the witnesses while complaining generally of the backwardness and ignorance of pupil-teachers, lay special stress on their inability to teach, and on their ignorance of school management.
So, too, in so far as the cry of over-pressure has any real justification, it is mainly to be found in the case of pupil-teachers.
We now proceed to discuss the question of the better instruction of the pupil-teachers whose shortcomings under the present system may be summed up as great meagreness of knowledge, crudeness, and mechanical methods of study, arising largely from neglect of their training by their head teachers. In order to remedy these defects, efforts have been made in various parts of the country to introduce reforms which may render pupil-teachers of value as a source of supply for the future teaching staff of the country.
The first to deal systematically with the instruction of the pupil-teachers, on a large scale, were the authorities of the Roman Catholic Training College at Liverpool. Mr. H. Hughes, Her Majesty's Inspector for Liverpool, in his report for 1873, says (Ed. Report, 1873-4, p. 109): "I wish to bear testimony to the good work carried on in Liverpool by the sisters of Notre Dame in bringing up well-trained pupil-teachers. At their convent in Mount Pleasant, to which the Liverpool Training College is attached, they board about 50 pupil-teachers, gathered from different parts of the country, who are employed in schools in the town taught by the sisters; at a branch convent in Everton Valley about 40 others are shortly to be received. The plan, as it is here carried out, appears to be an admirable one, and, under fitting circumstances, well worthy of adoption by other communities."
In 1876 Mr. Hughes again reports (Ed. Report, p. 498-9): "The Liverpool School Board has now established an organised system of instruction for the female pupil-teachers in its employ, a college having been recently opened in a large house given for the purpose by Mr. S. G. Rathbone, Chairman of the Board. Of this college the board's inspectress is the principal, and the governing council consists
[page 271]
of members appointed by the board, the inspector and inspectress being ex officio among the number. Here the pupil-teachers attend about twice a week, those of the first and second years being relieved of their school duties on one afternoon each week for the purpose. ..."
Mr. Hughes gives details in the same report, showing the excellent results of the teaching of the Roman Catholic pupil-teachers, illustrated by their position in the Queen's scholarship examinations.
In 1881 Mr. Harrison reports (Ed. Report, 1881-2, p. 314): "Lastly, a scheme which has long been under consideration for supplementing the instruction given by their mistresses to the pupil-teachers in the voluntary Protestant schools, has now been realised by the establishment of a college for female pupil-teachers." He goes on with details of the scheme, and expresses his preference for this mixed system where the head-teacher remains the private tutor of the pupil-teacher, and a mixed system of lectures and individual instruction is in force. He testifies to the continued good results at the scholarship examination of the training of the Roman Catholic female pupil-teachers.
Mr. Harrison was examined before us, and gave valuable evidence as to means of improving the pupil-teacher system, and as to the good work done in Liverpool. He says: "I am not very much in love with the pupil-teacher system, " but I regard it as absolutely necessary for the present for keeping up the supply of teachers, and I would rather improve it than sweep it away. ... If I were free from all considerations, I would do away with the pupil-teacher system entirely. ... I should like to see all first year pupil-teachers made half-timers. They are not fit to take charge of a class, so that the loss to a school would be very small, and the leisure thus given would be devoted to the preparation of their own lessons, and would enable them to begin their career with a really good start. They would be relieved for the first year of the hard task of teaching all day and learning after school hours. This would be a very sensible alleviation at the most tender age in the somewhat hard career of a pupil-teacher, especially in the case of girls. In the second and other years I should like to see pupil-teachers free for one afternoon a week at least, when central instruction is open to them, &c." He insists that the central instruction should be supplementary, and that the tie between the head-teacher and the pupil-teacher should be maintained. He goes on to eulogise the central system of teaching as it prevails in Liverpool, and gives illustrations of its successful results. He would insist on all pupil-teachers passing the scholarship examination; he would make the examination at the end of the third year of apprenticeship the test of fitness to continue in the career of a teacher; he would abolish the fourth year's examination, and substitute the scholarship examination to be taken after the close of the four years' apprenticeship. Mr. Harrison states that in Liverpool, both in board and in voluntary schools, they practically get the pupil-teachers at 16 instead of at 14, and that in many cases this is a great improvement, though he would leave managers free to take them at the lower age.
We had much other evidence from Liverpool, both from Mr. Hance, clerk to the school board, and from representatives of the voluntary schools, of the great advantage of the central system of instructing the pupil-teachers. We may state that the benefits of the system as applied by the Liverpool School Board are mainly limited to the girls.
Mr. Hance has handed in the following table, comparing the percentage who passed in the first class at the scholarship examination of the pupil-teachers from the board schools of Liverpool, with the average of the pupil-teachers from the Kingdom at large.
[page 272]
The School Board for London nearly 12 years ago introduced, to some extent, a centre system of instruction for the pupil-teachers, but was compelled by the EducationDepartment to abandon it, owing to the wording of the Code and of the indenture, which then required the instruction to be given to the pupil-teacher by the principal teacher of the school. Representations were made from the London School Board to the Education Department, urging such modifications of the Code as should permit of collective teaching of the pupil-teachers, and also urging an alteration of the indenture so as to substitute a maximum of four hours for six hours a day, and a maximum of 20 instead of 30 hours a week for teaching in school (London Board Minutes, 7 February 1877). Relaxations were made until at length the words ran: Schedule VI, section 5, "The pupil-teacher, when the school is not being held, shall receive without charge from a certificated teacher special instruction during at least five hours a week, &c." When this alteration in the Code made it lawful, the London School Board at once organised classes for the pupil-teachers. These were at first on two evenings and on Saturday mornings, and the pupil-teachers made three attendances a week, amounting in all to seven and a half hours. They were taught by certificated masters and mistresses, both heads and assistants, and from voluntary as well as from board schools, who were selected for their special aptitude as teachers of their subjects, and were paid 5s an hour. At each centre there was a registrar who superintended the work and was answerable for the discipline, but who did not, as a rule, teach. These centres were also under the general superintendence of the board inspectors. The classes were mixed. These classes continued for three years, and educationally their success was proved by the remarkable improvement in the position of the London Board pupil-teachers in the scholarship examination. In 1879, before any special organisation of their instruction had been established, the results of the July examinations for the scholarship were as follows:
This result shows no material difference between the London Board pupil-teachers and the rest of the country, subject to this remark, that the London School Board required all its pupil-teachers to sit for the scholarship, while a very large number of the pupil-teachers throughout the country are content with passing the examination for the last year of their apprenticeship, and so passing into the ranks of ex-pupil-teachers. Moreover the failures are not recorded for 1879 on the two sides, and that element of possible inequality is not set forth. But, in the scholarship examination of July 1884, after two years and a half (January 1882 - July 1884) of evening centre teaching, the following results were obtained:
[page 273]
Great as was this success as far as preparing the pupil-teachers for their college course, it was felt that preparation in their studies was not all that was needed in training pupil-teachers.
When the agitation on the question of over-pressure was at its highest, many of those who did not believe much in the general extreme accusations which were brought against our educational system, felt that there was some truth in that part of the strictures which complained of the overwork of the pupil-teachers. Inspectors, heads of colleges, managers of schools, doctors, and others, had often thought and said that to expect a youth, and especially a girl from 14 to 18, to be working in school all day, and in the evening to attend lectures or other instruction, and to prepare ms or her own studies and school work, was an excessive tax on all but the thoroughly strong, and those of an equable and firm temperament.
But this leisure for study could not be secured without releasing the pupil-teacher for a substantial part of the school hours from school work. Mr. Mundella, by his Code of 1882, insisted on limiting the school hours of the pupil-teacher to a maximum of 25, but even this slight restriction was a good deal opposed at the time by some managers. In addition to the physical question there was a question of morals, or at any rate of manners and propriety to be considered. Friends of education, have long desired to attract teachers from more cultivated and refined homes to take service in elementary schools. It was found that in proportion to the seriousness and thoughtfulness of the parents of the girls apprenticed, there was an increasing reluctance to let their daughters be out habitually week after week till eight at night in attendance at the centre, possibly two miles from home; and it was felt desirable, so as to avoid over fatigue, and in order to co-operate with the reasonable wish of respectable parents, that an end should be put to night teaching, and that the pupil-teachers should have their evenings for quiet study at home.
The London School Board therefore re-organised its pupil-teacher classes, of which it established about a dozen, with about 180 pupil-teachers on an average in attendance at each. To these the junior pupil-teachers and candidates come as half-timers on the five working week-days, and on Saturday mornings, for three hours at each attendance, thus getting 18 hours of systematic instruction every week. The pupil-teachers in their third and fourth years attend two afternoons during the week, and on Saturday mornings, thus getting nine hours a week of definite systematic instruction (besides three hours each alternate week for the girls for needlework).
At first the needlework and the scripture instruction were left to the head-teachers, but it was afterwards thought that these subjects also could be better and more thoroughly taught at the centres, and now the sole educational duty of the head-teacher is the training of the apprentice in the art of teaching. The head teachers are expected also to take a friendly interest in the work done at the centre, and the better head-teachers do take that interest, and co-operate with the responsible teachers at the centres. In order to secure that the heads do not neglect their part of the work, there is a book called the "Pupil Teachers' Journal", in which are entered on the one side the marks assigned by the teachers of the centres for the home work done by the pupil-teacher, and a quarterly summary note of conduct and progress. On the other side of the page are spaces where the head-teacher of the school is to enter weekly a note of the progress of the pupil-teacher in the school, remarks on model lessons, object lessons, criticism lessons, &c. Thus the journal is, or should be, a complete record of the progress of the pupil-teacher in the double capacity of student and of teacher.
The relations of the pupil-teachers to the staff of the school, had, of course, to be re-cast when this system was introduced. This has been done by ceasing to count pupil-teachers till their last two years on the staff of the school. The juniors are to be familiarised with school methods by being directly associated with the trained teachers of the school, so as mainly to observe and study their methods, while helping occasionally in minor details of school work. During the afternoon absence of the senior pupil-teacher, the junior may be entrusted with a class or section of a class, but the afternoon has been chosen for the absence of the senior pupil-teachers, because that is the time when classes can be more easily grouped, and a subordinate member of the staff more easily spared.
The Bradford board, who have also introduced collective teaching for their pupil-teachers, have gone a step further, and have made even the senior pupil-teachers half-timers in the schools.
This plan of instructing the pupil-teachers has met with a good deal of opposition, but has now thoroughly justified itself to those who have the working of it on the
[page 274]
London School Board, including members of the board, inspectors, and head-teachers. Its results, as preparing the pupil-teachers for their college course, have been most successful. The figures for 1885 and 1886 given at pp. 1,036-7 of our Second Report show the same marked superiority over the rest of England that was shown in 1884. The percentage of failure for the London board pupil-teachers and for the rest of England is also given. In 1885 it was for London pupil-teachers 5.5 per cent, for the rest of England 35.7 per cent, and in 1886 it was for the London pupil-teachers 1.10 (mis-printed 110), and for the rest of England 35.3 per cent. The following table gives the results of the Scholarship Examination, July 1887.
[click on the image for a larger version]
The results of the yearly examinations of the pupil-teachers show the same marked superiority of the centre teaching as the scholarship examination. The evidence of Mr. Martin, sub-inspector of the Marylebone division, may be referred to on this point. (Vol. 3, Appendix A, Table XVII.)
The great success of the central classes for the instruction of the pupil-teachers of the London School Board, has led the managers of the Church of England schools in Marylebone to form an association for the collective teaching of their pupil-teachers in nearly all the subjects of yearly examination. They have not, however, relieved the pupil-teachers of any of their work in school.
In the whole of England there are nearly 28,000 pupil-teachers; of these, last year 2,765 passed "well", and earned the £3 grant; 11,224 passed "fairly", and earned the £2 grant; the remainder passed below "fairly", being percentages of about 10 per cent well, about 40 per cent fairly, and 50 per cent below fairly. Of the London Board pupil-teachers in 1886 (Second Report, p. 1,036), 25.7 per cent passed "well", 57.3 per cent passed "fairly", and 17 per cent passed below "fairly".
It is sometimes alleged that this method of training may give the pupil-teachers a fuller measure of knowledge, but that it diminishes their interest in the school and their power of teaching. As to this we may refer to page 1,036 of our Second Report, where it will be found, that of the London Board pupil-teachers 70 per cent were qualified at the end of their apprenticeship under Article 52, that is to say, they were specially recognised by the inspector on the ground of their practical skill as teachers, and were consequently recognised as provisionally certificated teachers competent to take charge of small schools. The remaining 30 per cent were qualified under Article 50, to take posts as assistant teachers. Moreover, one of the subjects in which the pupil-teacher has to pass every year, according to Schedule V. of the Code, is " teaching," the examination in which is practical in the school, and failure in this part of the work would be noted in the yearly report. It is the very rarest thing to find any remark on any one of the 2,000 pupil-teachers of the London School Board for a defect in this respect. The reports of Her Majesty's Inspectors are published by the School Board in the half-yearly reports of the School Management Committee which were before us.
The subjects of instruction at the centres, are the subjects in which the pupil-teachers are examined according to the Code. The science, however, is taught on a fixed plan so as to secure some appreciation by the students of scientific principles, and some general knowledge of the laws of nature, rather than with the primary object of securing a pass which will count for marks at the scholarship examination,
A very striking result of the work of the centres has been to secure a growing esprit de corps and sense of professional self-respect among the pupil-teachers. Formerly they were isolated, and though they might under a conscientious and able head-teacher get some stimulating effects from his or her teaching, yet they missed the sympathy of numbers. At the centres they re-act on one another, and become
[page 275]
proud of their progress and of the honour of their centre. They have also clubs and games which do much for the formation of character. Since the day centres have been at work, there has been a marked improvement in the quality of the candidates. In our Second Report, p. 1,036, will be found a table showing the proportion of pupil-teachers, under the School Board for London, who have previously been at secondary schools. The Board has lowered the salaries of pupil-teachers since all these advantages were afforded them, but this has not checked the supply, on the contrary, there is a growing facility in securing them; though in the case of boys the difficulty still continues, which has been felt and noticed in the reports of Her Majesty's Inspectors for more than 20 years, that the competition of employment in which lads can rapidly earn good wages stands in the way of getting boy pupil-teachers. (Sharpe, Report of Education Department, 1863-4, pp. 144-222). It is believed, however, that year by year under the present system a better class of pupil-teachers will be secured - more intellectual, of more responsibility and professional zeal, and better trained for their work.
The question has been raised whether the central system of teaching the pupil- teachers as organised by the London School Board is not too expensive for general imitation. On this point we refer to an appendix to this chapter by our colleague, Mr. Lyulph Stanley.
In Huddersfield there has been a marked improvement in the pupil-teachers, partly owing to the fact of the more careful selection of candidates, and to the establishment of a Seventh Standard School, from which some of the pupil-teachers are drawn, and where they have been carefully taught. The board has also a system of central teaching for the extra subjects, e.g., French, drawing, singing, English literature, and science, but not for the ordinary subjects of examination. They also group all the pupil-teachers in one school, instead of letting those in the separate departments be entirely taught by their own head-teacher. The girls are excused one half day a week from school-work. Mr. Tait attributes much of the success of the Huddersfield board pupil-teachers in the scholarship examinations to the fact that for the last three years they have had collective instruction in the extra subjects.
In Birmingham the pupil-teachers are excused from attendance at their school one half day a week. They are instructed in classes in the mornings and afternoons, and on Saturday mornings. They also attend twice a week in the evenings for two and a half hours each time, and, in all, have 10 hours a week instruction.
The Rev. J. Gilmore, chairman of the Sheffield School Board, stated that, on the whole, personally, he was not quite satisfied with the centre system of teaching at Sheffield. He gave figures, showing that they did badly at the scholarship examination, but he attributed the failure mainly to a bad initial selection. To remedy this defect, he has since selected candidates who had passed the Seventh Standard, and he stated that with a careful selection of candidates, and with the changes they hope to make in the central system, it will be satisfactory in future, so far as the pupil-teachers are concerned. The system now in existence in Sheffield does not appear to be as thoroughly organised as that in Liverpool, Birmingham, or London.
A return from the Glasgow School Board, dated 30th November 1887, published in our Appendix, page 8, No. 8, shows that the pupil-teachers of that board, who have been under collective instruction, but have not been excused from teaching during the full time permitted by the Code, have done better, both at the scholarship and at the yearly examinations than other pupil-teachers. This evidence shows that the statement of Dr. Morrison as to the inferiority of the pupil- teachers of the Glasgow School Board, resulting from their being taught at centres, is incorrect.
In concluding our examination of the pupil-teacher system, we strongly recommend that, wherever it is practicable, a central system of instruction of the pupil-teachers should be introduced, such as has been described in various towns.
In country districts encouragement should be given to group the pupil-teachers from neighbouring schools as far as possible for instruction. This might certainly be done, at any rate, on Saturday mornings; and more time should be secured for study, and less, especially in the earlier years, should be spent in teaching in school.
As to the training of the pupil-teachers in the art of teaching, for which we ought mainly to rely on the teachers under whom they serve in school, greater care will
[page 276]
have to be exercised by inspectors and by managers to secure that this important part of their education is not neglected.
We think that the apprenticeship of pupil-teachers might be limited to schools where an experienced head teacher is certified by Her Majesty's Inspector to be fit to take charge of pupil-teachers, and this should not be until, at any rate, the head-teacher had got his or her parchment; and that if in the opinion of Her Majesty's Inspector the head teacher has neglected the teaching and training of the pupil-teacher, he should be liable to be disqualified for having charge of pupil-teachers.
The pupil-teacher should not, during the first year at least, be reckoned on the staff, and should be used in the school as a learner to be associated with the head-teacher rather than as a cheap assistant. The proper use and education of the pupil-teacher should have much weight in determining the merit of the school; and unpromising pupil-teachers should be removed from the profession not later than the close of the third year of their apprenticeship.
Many complaints have been made to us by witnesses, and in the answers to our circulars, of the length of time which now elapses before the Education Department communicates to the managers the result of the yearly examination of the pupil- teachers. This is owing to the fact that a part of the examination is conducted at the school at the time of the yearly inspection. We think that the managers and pupil-teachers ought to know the results of the pupil-teachers' yearly examination within a reasonable time, and that, if necessary, the inspector should satisfy himself as to the matters not tested at the collective examination, at a special visit to the school.
APPENDIX BY THE HON. E. LYULPH STANLEY ON THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE CENTRAL INSTRUCTION OF PUPIL-TEACHERS UNDER THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON
There are nearly 2,000 pupil-teachers employed by the London School Board. These would have been reckoned while working full time in the schools under the former system of the Board as supplying staff for 60,000 children at 30 each, now only half of them are reckoned, and they are reckoned at 40 each, making a diminution of staff of 20,000. These have to be replaced by adult assistants, reckoned at 60 each, which makes an additional staff of 333 assistants necessary, three-fourths of whom are women. If these were all trained and certificated, and receiving the average salaries of teachers under the present scale of the board, their salaries would amount to more than £30,000. On the other hand, the improved condition of the pupil-teachers has enabled the board to make a material reduction of salaries during the first two years amounting on 2,000 pupil-teachers to about £7,000 a year. Again, the board, as part of its plan, requires the pupil-teachers to sit for the scholarship in the year following the expiration of the indenture, and retains them in the meantime as ex-pupil-teachers, the number of whom will amount, when the scheme is in full operation, to at least 450. These take the place of certificated assistants, who would otherwise be employed; thus making an economy of nearly £60 a head, or £27,000 a year, so that the net financial loss in adult staff will be about £3,000 a year, without considering the saving resulting from the reduced salary of pupil-teachers, for which is secured a far more efficient and better taught pupil-teacher, and who, it is hoped, will provide a far better class of trained teachers when those who are now pupil-teachers come out of college. As to the cost of instruction of the pupil-teachers in the centres, it was estimated for the year 1886-7 at £11,300, or about £3,000 more than would have been paid under the old system to the head-teachers, but in that estimate credit was taken for only £2,000 grants from South Kensington. £2,700 has been paid. Moreover, under the centre system, the grants on the pupil-teachers who pass yearly are much higher than they were formerly; these grants, however, are paid to the credit of the schools, and, therefore, do not appear in the accounts of the pupil-teacher centres. There is an additional charge for interest and sinking fund on the permanent pupil-teachers' schools erected which will not reach £2,0O0 a year, even when those in course of erection are opened. Thus an additional cost of £3,000 for an adult staff, and of £4,300 in teaching and for interest and sinking fund on the pupil-teachers' schools has enabled the board materially to relieve the pressure on the pupil-teachers, and very greatly to improve their training and education. Against the cost must be set the £7,000 a year by which the salaries of the pupil-teachers have been reduced. We have, therefore, an estimate of a net cost of £300 a year, which, distributed over 320,000 children in average attendance, amounts to about a farthing per head, and in reality the cost of the system will
[page 277]
disappear, as many pupil-teachers enter the service of the board for a shortened period of apprenticeship of three or even of two years, and thus count for 40 on the staff for two-thirds of their pupil-teacher life.
CHAPTER 4
EX-PUPIL-TEACHERS AND ACTING TEACHERS
State of Students on entering into Training Colleges
We have already dealt with the pupil-teachers, and shown how far that initial stage in the career of the teacher answers the purpose of suitably preparing young persons for their future profession. There is a large body of testimony from the witnesses that they do not see how to dispense with pupil-teachers as a means of recruiting the body of adult teachers. At the same time the overwhelming mass of the evidence is that these young people are unsatisfactory as teachers, and ill-taught and ill-trained as scholars. The central system of instruction, if coupled with a considerable relaxation as to the hours of work in school, may remedy these defects, and preserve whatever advantages there are in determining the mind while young to the choice of the teaching profession, and securing familiarity with practical school work at an early and impressionable age. But at present the great mass of testimony is that the training colleges are unable to do all that they should for their students, on account of the unprepared and crude state in which they receive them. This initial difficulty should be fully recognised, as while there is a great deal of evidence of the valuable results of college training, and of the general marked superiority of the trained over the untrained teachers, yet there is also much evidence to show that even in the training colleges we do not always get that liberal and intellectual teaching which we have a right to expect. But it may well be that if the students on admission were better taught, more receptive, and with a more awakened intelligence, the work done in the colleges would be of a much higher quality than it is now; and this preliminary fact of the general low state of education of the candidates for admission should be borne in mind, in justice to those who are responsible for their education in the colleges. The following table, taken from the yearly reports of the Education Department for the last nine years, shows the numbers passing high enough to entitle them to Queen's scholarships, and those passing third class or failing.
TABLE
CANDIDATES FOR ADMISSION TO TRAINING COLLEGES
[click on the image for a larger version]
[page 278]
In the last three years, distinguishing between pupil-teachers and non-pupil teachers -
In the same three years less than a fifth of all the candidates passed well or in the first class.
Turning from statistical tables to the remarks of inspectors, we have the observations in the Blue Book of 1886-7 of two new inspectors of training colleges, Mr. Oakley and Mr. Fitch, who have recently succeeded Mr. Sharpe and Canon Warburton in the inspection of male and female training colleges.
Taking the male candidates first, we find that Mr. Oakley (p. 408) quotes his colleagues on the subject of arithmetic, and while finding much neatness and accuracy in plain sums, says, "These reports show that arithmetic is well taught as regards mechanical and accurate work, but greater attention should be paid to proof of rules and to the reason of processes."
On School Management, Mr. Oakley, after quoting from his colleagues' reports (p. 410), says, "The general inference to be drawn from these reports is, that though two out of the three revisers consider the papers, on the whole, fair, there is great room for improvement in this important subject, and that at a large number of schools the pupil-teachers have had little instruction or assistance in it."
The defenders of the pupil-teacher system mainly base their case in support of that system on the early familiarity acquired with school management, and for the sake of this familiarity they are willing somewhat to sacrifice the general education and intellectual development of the pupil-teacher; Mr. Mansford, for instance, says "I do not think that very much could be done in a year or two to teach a man how to teach, and, therefore, if they came up well instructed but bad teachers, I should say that it would be more fatal to their success as elementary teachers than if they came up poorly instructed and good teachers." In view of this contention, it is a matter for serious reflection to find that the weight of the evidence shows that the bulk of the pupil-teachers finish their career both poorly instructed and bad teachers.
Mr. Oakley, summing up the opinions of his colleagues on grammar and com- position, says (p. 411), "These extracts seem to show clearly that there continues to [be] a great absence of culture and general intelligence on the part of a considerable number of candidates."
"With regard to the reports on geography and history", he says, "I think the reports on geography and history (from which I have given extracts) show some improvement, and are not discouraging. We must not forget that it is very difficult for a pupil-teacher to write a good paper on history, which would require wider reading than it is reasonable to expect " (p. 412). It is instructive to compare this somewhat hopeful summary with the detailed observations on which it is based, as showing how merely mechanical is that which is accepted as not discouraging.
Of Euclid, algebra, and mensuration, Mr. Oakley says (p, 413), "These reports on the progress made in the very elementary mathematical work required are far from '" satisfactory; very few candidates can work the easiest geometrical deduction. It is extremely desirable that greater attention be paid to this important branch of the syllabus."
Latin and French are the luxuries of pupil-teachers. It is only under exceptional circumstances that they have an opportunity of learning them, and what is done does not appear from the examiners' reports to be worth much.
Turning now to the female training colleges, and to the report on them by Mr. Fitch, Mr. Fitch observes (p. 432), "It is a disappointing fact that notwithstanding the previous preparation [of pupil-teachership] nearly one-fourth of those who had enjoyed it, and who had presumably passed the inspector's examination at the end of each of the years of their apprenticeship, proved unequal to the demands of the very simple examination for admission to training colleges."
Mr. Fitch understates the case, for he has omitted to notice that among those whom he has reckoned as passing, 306 passed in the third class, which is too low to qualify for admission to a training college.
He goes on to observe: "Of the total number of 1,969 female candidates who succeeded in passing the admission examination at Midsummer, 1885 [this number
[page 279]
should be 1,663, deducting the 306 who did not pass, in the sense of qualifying them for Queen's scholarships] only 940 found entrance as first year students into colleges at the beginning of the year 1886. The rest for the most part became assistant teachers, and will after serving in that capacity for a year, probably present themselves as untrained candidates for certificates." With these we shall have to deal hereafter, and also with the provisionally certificated teachers, many of whom are authorised by the Department to take charge of small village schools, though they may have failed in the scholarship examination.
It might be thought that a sifting, by which only 940 out of 1,663 successful candidates are admitted to college, should secure the pick of them, especially as the colleges, though not bound to accept students in order of merit, seem at present very largely to be guided by their place on the scholarship list, where denominational considerations do not close the door to intending students. How far do the 56 per cent of the candidates who, having passed the examination, enter college, satisfy the college authorities and Her Majesty's Inspectors of their fitness to enter upon a course of training?
Mr. Fitch begins by pointing out that the smaller and more remote colleges, not having the pick of the students to choose from, are forced to fill their ranks with students passing low, and that, therefore, to judge the work of a college exclusively by the results of the certificate examination, irrespective of the qualifications at entrance, would be unfair. The college authorities complain that often the certificates as to health are untrustworthy, and there is no doubt that sickly students have been admitted whose subsequent break-down has helped to swell the cry of over-pressure.
"More frequent subjects of complaint on the part of the training college authorities" (says Mr. Fitch, p. 432), "relate to the deficient preparation of the candidates in the art of reading, and in the knowledge of even the elementary principles of teaching. It is feared that many masters and mistresses think the ability to read evinced by the power to pass the Seventh Standard is sufficient, and accordingly give to their pupil- teachers little or no practice in elocution during the four years of their apprenticeship.
"The revised syllabus of pupil-teacher work, which came into operation in 1883, prescribed for the first time a definite progression on the part of pupil-teachers in the knowledge and experience of teaching during their second and succeeding years of apprenticeship. Although some improvement has thus taken place, the full effect of the new regulations is not yet visible, and the colleges have great reason to complain of the ineffective preparation of the candidates in this respect. In schools in which the staff is weak, the pupil-teacher is often told to teach, but he is not trained or taught to teach, and the amount of guidance he receives from the head teacher is often very small. He is considered too exclusively in the light of a cheap assistant, and not sufficiently as an apprentice who has to learn the art and mystery of a craft. It is too common for a head teacher to entrust the whole work of a class to a pupil-teacher in the first or second year, and to give the youngest class to the youngest teacher. Collective and object lessons are required of pupil-teachers in their third and fourth year, before they have listened to any model lessons from their masters or mistresses, or have received any directions as to the right way of preparing them. The efforts now being made by the richer school managers, notably by the School Boards of London and Liverpool to reduce the hours of work, and to provide with a shorter period of actual teaching a larger amount of effective supervision in study, are most valuable, and will doubtless be largely imitated by managers whenever circumstances will allow." (Fitch, Education Report, 1886-7, p. 434.)
Mr. Fitch goes on to describe the attainments of the candidates at the scholarship examination as reported on by his colleagues.
Mr. Blandford reports some improvement in school management, but the marks assigned are comparatively low.
Mr. Byrne says, "In the papers committed to me, I observe that more attention might be paid to instructing pupil-teachers in the drawing up of notes of lessons, which is the subject of the first and most important question. Far too many of the answers betray an ignorance of the proper form in which notes should be drawn up, of the right mode of stating the facts, and of dealing with -them for the purpose of instruction. They are rather disjointed jottings down of thoughts that occur to the writer in regard to matter and method, than a workmanlike statement of the notes of a lesson." Mr. Cornish, Mr. M. Owen, Mr. Steele, and Mr. Synge are also quoted, the only quotation at all favourable is from Mr. Synge, who says, "The only question on which conspicuous ignorance was shown was that which required a statement of the reason of certain processes in arithmetic. Those who attempted
[page 280]
to answer the question seemed to think that a statement of the method or trick by which they arrived at the result, was an explanation of the reason of the process, and at all events sufficient for a class of children."
We have a somewhat more favourable report upon English grammar and composition; Mr. Curry, Mr. French, and Mr. Holt White, are all quoted as noticing either improvement, or at any rate, fair success. Mr. Howard, too, notices an improvement, though he complains of the bad effects of certain text books.
In geography and history the inspectors generally seem to find what can be got from industry, but not what is the result of intelligence. In map drawing the work is in many cases fair, and in history the facts of the text book have been learnt; when we hope to go farther we seem to be disappointed.
In arithmetic, too, neatness and accuracy are commended, but intelligence seems absent.
In domestic economy the same criticism seems to apply.
Generally it cannot be said that either Mr. Oakley or Mr. Fitch gives a bright account of the abilities or education of the students on their entering the training colleges.
If we turn to the Blue Book of 1885-86, and look at the last reports of Mr. Sharpe and Canon Warburton, we find Mr. Sharpe noting an advance in the quality of the candidates for admission; but we need to measure the previous level of attainments before we can say that the advance implies any real amount of knowledge. He says (page 403), "In the last scholarship list there was a perceptible rise in the quality of the knowledge of the highest pupil-teachers from board schools. It was to be expected that the better class, who were naturally eager to learn, and had formed habits of study, would profit by the variety of able teachers selected for special subjects. The subjects worst prepared at entrance are the Elements of English Grammar, Constitutional History, and Algebra. In the first and third of these the failure undoubtedly arose from want of practice, in the second from want of a good text book. But greater variety is to be found in their knowledge of the art of teaching. Some have evidently been overworked drudges in ill-staffed schools, others have evidently taught before experienced and kindly teachers."
And at page 404, Mr. Sharpe says, "I have noticed that there is some improvement in the attainments of the candidates for admission, but I am assured that there is scarcely any in their teaching skill, though most of them have been apprenticed for four years as pupil teachers, and that model and criticism lessons are almost unknown to students before admission." Mr. Sharpe goes on to quote a scheme of the Nottingham school board for securing a valuable course of such lessons, which, says he, "if generally adopted, would tend greatly to correct the defect which is really the weakest point of the pupil-teacher system."
Canon Warburton, in his report for 1885, lets the various inspectors speak for themselves. The general result is the same - careful drill and want of intelligence; these are generally noticed as subjects for commendation and for regret. On the important subject of school management, Mr. Stewart says, "The quality of the answers is for the most part poor, and reveals a lack of systematic training and practical experience. The answers given by those who had been pupil-teachers were somewhat better than those written by candidates who had not been pupil-teachers. When pupil-teachers receive a regular course of training in school management, and carry into every-day practice the principles of teaching as contained in some text-book, better results may be expected, but not till then " (page 438j Blue Book, 1885-86).
Turning now to the answers sent to the Commission by the principals of training colleges. Question 15 was "Have you in the last ten years noticed any improvement or falling off in the students admitted to your college, or in their preparedness", and Question 21, "Have you any other suggestions to make respecting training colleges? "
In answer to these questions, seven male principals think that there has been improvement, seven think that things are much the same, and three think that there has been a falling off.
In answer to Question 21 it is suggested by Canon Daniel that there should be greater strictness in the examination of pupil-teachers and candidates for admission into training colleges.
The late principal of Chelsea, Canon Cromwell, in answer to Q. 15, says, "In my opinion they are not so well grounded as formerly in the necessary subjects of education; hence we cannot rely on the foundation of their knowledge."
[page 281]
The principal of Peterborough says, in answer to Q. 15, "It appears to me that there is a falling off in the preparedness, due, I suppose, to the modern craze for doing so 'many' things." On the other hand Bangor, Carmarthen, Culham, Hammersmith, and Westminster all report a decided improvement, York a slight improvement. The principal of Winchester, while on the whole reporting improvement, makes the following remarks: "They are of a slightly better class, with a better tone. Their mathematics are somewhat improved. Instruction seems to be very rarely given to pupil-teachers in reading, school management, writing, or music. On inquiry a short time since, I found that out of 56 students only 13 had any instruction or practice in writing during their apprenticeship, and most of them had only had this for a few weeks before the scholarship examination." In the female training colleges there is a distinct preponderance of opinion that the quality and preparedness of candidates have fallen off. Of 25 colleges four make no answer. Four say there has been improvement, namely, Lincoln, Liverpool, Southlands, Stockwell, but all these speak with reserve as to the amount. Eight colleges - Bristol, Cheltenham, Chichester, Derby, Home and Colonial, Norwich, Ripon, Whitelands - consider, on the whole, that the gains and losses compensate, or that things are much as they were. Nine colleges speak of a falling off; these are Bishop Stortford, Darlington, Durham, Oxford, Salisbury, Swansea, Truro, Wandsworth, Warrington, and many of these make serious complaint.
On the whole the evidence is that things are much as they were 10 years ago in the male colleges, but that in the female colleges there is a distinct falling off.
We now turn to the evidence given us orally by witnesses, of whom we had a large number of very important ones, on the question of training colleges.
Mr. Sharpe from 1875 to 1885, Inspector of Male Training Colleges, in his report for 1876, summed up the performances of a candidate for admission at that time:
He was reminded that in the Education Report, 1876, pp. 685-6, he said, "I will first state briefly as a summary of the foregoing remarks what the young man of 18 years of age after an apprenticeship of five years can do. The average candidate can work the ordinary rules of arithmetic, but not problems involving rules; he can write out a proposition of Euclid by memory, but cannot apply it intelligently; he knows just enough algebra to be confused; he can parse an English sentence fairly, and has a fair knowledge of the bare facts of geography and history; he has a slight smattering of a French or Latin vocabulary; he knows the ordinary forms of school keeping. It must be allowed that a certain number are more advanced, but many pupil-teachers do not reach even this very moderate standard, Can we justly charge the certificated teachers with neglect of their apprentices? I have good reason for believing that a considerable percentage of pupil-teachers are neglected, but, on the other hand, I find that a still larger percentage receive more than the stipulated minimum of instruction. In two colleges under my own and the principal's eye, by means of slips of paper filled up by the students without signature and immediately destroyed, it was found that in each case 25 per cent of the students claimed to have received from their teachers less than the legal stipulated minimum."
But since then he states there has been a considerable rise; in 1883 he reported:
"It must be a subject for regret that the attainments of the candidates for admission to training colleges should be so low, but, on the other hand, it is a subject for congratulation that at the close of their training the general progress is so great", and he says, "Yes, as a rule, that is the average condition." His remarks in 1885 as to the practical absence of improvement in the teaching skill of candidates for admission have been quoted.
Canon Warburton, in his evidence, says of the candidates for admission Canon to training colleges, that the school management papers which they write in the course Warburton. of the admission examination are deplorably bad. He says that the relation between the head teacher and the pupil-teacher was of great value, and on being asked, "Must not a considerable deduction be made from that when it is seen how often the pupil-teacher comes out of apprenticeship with a very small amount of practical knowledge of school keeping", he says, "Yes, but I think that in,the abstract the relation is a very valuable one, and that without its producing great technical results the pupil-teacher is the better for it as a boy or girl." He also stated that the raw material delivered to the training colleges has been of a very wretched quality, and "perhaps that is the main drawback. They (the colleges)
[page 282]
have to spend hours and hours in teaching many of the students to read." If we are materially to raise the work of our colleges we must materially raise the quality of the pupil-teachers who come to the colleges. And some better system of encouraging the learning element rather than the teaching element of the pupil-teachers lies at the roots of any useful proposals.
Canon Warburton, speaking of the want of education of the pupil-teacher, says - "The odd thing is that they seem to know nothing about teaching. They get lower marks for the school management paper than those who come in by open competition. The teachers to whom they were apprenticed have evidently seldom taken the trouble to give them any hint at all about the theory of education, the different systems, and the different ways of teaching subjects, and so on. That takes one rather by surprise. The authorities (of the colleges) say that they are easier to manage than those who have not been pupil-teachers, and they know more of discipline and order. They all admit that." He thinks that the candidates have shared in the general improvement in education. "Anyhow, they are not worse in that respect than they used to be."
He re-affirms the ignorance of the pupil-teachers of school methods, and says he thinks it is one of the things in which the pupil-teachership breaks down, because there is not time for the head teachers to teach this effectively.
Canon Daniel, while finding that the candidates for admission at Battersea are relatively well prepared, points out that a very large number of students in training must have been imperfectly taught. He states that during the last 10 years the quality and the state of preparedness of his students on entrance has been gradually improving. This is not quite consistent with his answer to the circular sent to the training colleges. But that answer was directed to the one point of masters presenting their pupil-teachers for South Kensington examinations, irrespective of any systematic course of scientific training, for the sake of the grants, and at the expense of their regular orderly instruction.
He frequently hears complaints that schoolmasters do not sufficiently instruct their pupil-teachers in the craft of teaching, and to the following question, "That is to say, that the master rather uses the pupil-teacher as a relief to himself in the teaching of the school than as an apprentice whom he has to form in the art of teaching?" He replied, "Yes, he does not sufficiently train him." Canon Daniel thinks the course of instruction in the training colleges might be improved by striking out some of the more elementary subjects, but that would necessitate better preparation at entry. He states of the pupil-teachers who seek to enter college, that there is a want of thoroughness in their knowledge, and he repeats that they have not been sufficiently taught and trained in the principles of teaching; they are often used as mere instruments instead of being supervised. "There must be a solid basis of education before you begin to specialise and teach men how to teach. We should be mere charlatans if we spent our time in teaching men how to teach subjects they did not know."
Dr. Graham, of Hammersmith Training College, says - "We should like to see students beginning a course of training in a far better position to take advantage of the training." He would like a three years course of training, beginning at 16 or 17; the student during the first year to be under preparatory instruction, during the second to do the work now done in two years, and the third year to be mainly teaching in the practising schools, and he thinks that this training would give the student more fully, and at an age when he is really more susceptible and more capable of learning, what he now gets as a pupil teacher, and he would be a better teacher. Dr. Graham does not think that practical skill can be acquired during apprenticeship. Pupil-teachers have not at that age the knowledge which would enable them to appreciate the teaching. He would be glad, as a general practice, to have the preparatory year of training from 17 to 18. But there are many difficulties, especially with the schools that rely on pupil-teachers as part of the effective teaching staff.
Canon Cromwell says a very large number of those who seek to enter a training college are certainly unfit for the tuition they would get there. Not many from health, principally from want of due preparation. The pupil-teachers who come to St. Mark's have not learnt to study for themselves, to concentrate their attention, to read for themselves, and to reason accurately. The general education of the pupil-teacher is very much neglected; one of the great desiderata is the increasing of the mental self-reliance of the pupil-teacher and his power of individual thought. He finds the teaching in the college handicapped by the bad state of
[page 283]
preparation of the students, although at Chelsea they have rather the pick of the candidates. The standard of acquirements at the scholarship examinations might be raised. At the end of pupil-teachership, the pupil-teacher does not come out with any great stock of wise convictions about the way in which his business should be done. In school methods he follows a haphazard plan. Nevertheless, Canon Cromwell has a very strong opinion of the great advantages of the pupil-teacher course in preparing young people to be teachers; but the general education of the pupil-teacher requires to be raised. He should at least be able to explain himself decently well in a simple piece of composition. He should also know the elements of English and Algebra better than he does at present. He is not well-grounded in what he professes to know, and the result is that in the training colleges the authorities have to begin afresh almost every one of the subjects which the student profess to understand. He adds that some pupil-teachers may be unprepared, because they have missed their vocation, but a certain number have not been fully instructed by their masters.
Mr. Mansford of the Westminster Training College states that the instruction in the college is adapted to the students, but he could not say that they are well trained: he thinks the lower half are very imperfectly trained. He thinks the pupil-teacher system highly advantageous as a preparation for the college work. He states that it is difficult to say that the faults of the students, when they enter college, are mainly faults of training and not of intelligence. In many cases it is undoubtedly the fact that they have been neglected, but not in all cases. The teaching side of the pupil-teacher has in many cases been developed at the expense of the learning side.
Miss Manley, of Stockwell, finds great intellectual defects in the students on entrance; she attributes these defects to a want of proper system in their previous training.
Such being the accumulation of testimony as to the unsatisfactory and uneducated state of the students when they enter into training, the great weight of evidence is that the result of two years training is to do them a great deal of good, and that the professional training of the teacher is an essential condition of an efficient national system of education.
Before considering in what respects the existing system of training colleges may need reform or supplementing, we may review the other kinds of adult teachers recognised.
Beginning at the bottom of the scale, there is in mixed girls' and infant schools a woman over 18 years of age, and approved by the inspector, who is employed during the whole of the school hours in the general instruction of the scholars and in teaching needlework. She is accepted as equivalent to a pupil-teacher, and consequently counts on the staff for 40 children in average attendance; there were 4,659 teachers of this class employed according to the return of the Education Department, for 1886-7. She does not seem as a rule to have favourably impressed those who have seen her at work. If her services are to be continued, the least that can be required of her is that within a reasonable time, say one year of her professional recognition, she should qualify by passing the scholarship examination. It cannot be desirable that from year to year she should go on as one of the staff, dependent on the indulgence of the inspector or the unwillingness of a new inspector to put a slight on the judgment of his predecessor. It has been suggested that in many cases the age considerably exceeds 18, and that under this article infirm old women are put in charge of classes in country schools.
We next come to the ex-pupil-teacher, who is treated officially by the Department as the typical assistant teacher, that being his or her official designation; certificated teachers, whether head or assistant, being classified alike as "certificated teachers".
At present a pupil-teacher who passes the fourth year's examination, or the scholarship examination, even as low as the third class, may be recognised as an assistant teacher, and count on the school staff for 60.
The testimony is strong from many witnesses that the yearly examination of pupil-teachers is a most unsatisfactory test of efficiency. Failure to pass that examination is practically unheard of. And yet these same young persons fail at the scholarship examination to the extent of about a fourth of those who sit, those who sit being about four-fifth.s of the pupil-teachers completing their apprenticeship; those who do not sit being presumably the less qualified.
Although failure at the scholarship would exclude anyone else from becoming an assistant teacher, yet an ex-pupil-teacher who fails may fall back on the previous
[page 284]
qualification of having passed the fourth year's examination satisfactorily; and, if qualified under Article 52, that is to say, if specially recommended by the inspectors on the ground of practical skill as a teacher, may, up to the age of 25, take sole charge of a school not exceeding 60 in average attendance. A pupil-teacher may pass satisfactorily, even though the pass be below "fair". The Education Department reports to us that in 1886, 425 persons who failed at the scholarship examination that year were accepted as assistants on account of their having passed the fourth year's examination as pupil-teachers; of these 63 were qualified under Article 52 as provisionally certificated teachers.
We note among the resolutions passed at a ruridecanal chapter in Somersetshire, September 1886, and recorded, page 34, No. LXXIII among other memorials and suggestions furnished to us, "That acting certificates for the employment as teachers of ex-pupil-teachers, direct from their apprenticeship, should gradually cease, and that in future all teachers should be subjected to some direct training in order that their instruction should become more 'thoughtful'."
The Durham Diocesan Board of Education, among their suggestions to us, recommended (No. 8) that some steps be taken to limit the influx of teachers into the profession, who have not served an apprenticeship and passed through a training college.
These assistant teachers or ex-pupil-teachers are a very important part of the staff of schools. They are tending to supplant the pupil-teacher, and by the Government report for 1886-7 there were 5,336 males and 12,103 females, a total of 17,439, counting as available for the instruction of 1,046,340 children, or nearly a third of all the children under instruction.
These ex-pupil-teachers vary very much in quality and efficiency. If they have been well trained in large schools under good head teachers, and with ample opportunities for study, they may have some good qualities as teachers; but, as a rule, they are those pupil-teachers who either never sat for the scholarship, or failed or passed too low to get into college. The evidence of the Clerk to the Hull school board, of the Birmingham school board, of Mr. Charles Smith, head master of St. Thomas, Charterhouse, who has had very large classes for their instruction, and of Mr. Scotson, shows that the ex-pupil-teachers employed are largely of very poor quality, intellectually, and as teachers, but they are cheap, ranging generally from a minimum of £30 or £35 for women, to £55 or £60 as a usual maximum for men, and they are less trouble than pupil-teachers.
No doubt even if it were determined ultimately to have none but trained certificated teachers, it would be many years before we could dispense with the services of the ex-pupil teachers; the only thing to be done is to make them as good as possible. We therefore recommend - First, that all ex-pupil-teachers should be required to sit for the scholarship examination the July following the expiration of their indentures, and should only be recognised as assistants provisionally, pending the result of the scholarship examination being known, and should they fail to pass high enough to entitle them to enter college, they should be disqualified at the ensuing Christmas from counting on the staff. Secondly, while many of these ex-pupil-teachers, especially women, may render useful service for two or three years without their intending permanently to follow up the profession of teacher (in many cases the expectation of marriage prevents women from giving up two years of their life to training) they should, if they fail to go to college, not be recognised beyond the age of 23, unless they pass the first year's certificate examination, and, having passed that, they should be required after not more than [two] years to pass the second year's certificate examination. Moreover their recognition should be provisional, and renewed from year to year on the report of Her Majesty's Inspector of the way they had taught their class during the school year. And, lastly, they should in no case be recognised except as assistants.
Such restrictions as these, coupled with an improved system of education of pupil-teachers, would gradually improve the quality of the ex-pupil-teachers, and do much for the advancement of education. They should, however, not count on the staff of schools for more than 50 children.
The next class of teacher is the acting teacher who passes the certificate examination. Several witnesses have proposed the abolition of this class of teacher, and the requirement of training as a condition of recognition as a certificated teacher. But such a step as this would be too severe. Several of the most interesting, able, and thoughtful teachers who came before us have not been trained, and while we recognise
[page 285]
that as a general rule the trained teachers are greatly superior to the untrained, we do not think it wise to close all other avenues to the profession. Besides, the number of training colleges is at present quite insufficient to accommodate all those who would require admission if no untrained teachers wore recognised.
At the same time we think the conditions of admission might be made more stringent for untrained teachers, and there is reason to believe that if these conditions were gradually raised the acting teachers would meet them. Thus, in consequence of the Code of 1883 disqualifying teachers passing in the first year's papers from taking pupil-teachers, the great mass of the acting teachers from that time have taken the second year's papers. It would be desirable, however, having regard to the fact that teachers who are engaged in school during the day have considerable difficulties in carrying on their own studies, that all acting teachers should, be required to take the first year's papers not earlier than the Christmas year after they pass the scholarship examination, and the second year's papers not less than two years after passing the first year's examination, and further that no person be eligible for a head teachership who has not passed the second year's examination lot lower than the second division, and that acting teachers be not eligible for headships till they have got their parchments. With these restrictions the acting teachers might be left free to become certificated teachers; and, probably, the extension of facilities for training would, with the improvement of the education of pupil-teachers and the consequent attraction of a superior class of candidates into the profession, so increase the number of trained teachers without any absolute exclusion, that the interest of education would not suffer.
CHAPTER 5
TRAINING COLLEGES
We now pass to the training colleges, and the questions which present themselves are - Is the present management of them satisfactory? Are their relations with the State on a sound basis? Should there be any extension of the system either on the present lines or through day training colleges? Should the new training colleges be connected with places of higher education? Should they be managed by school boards, county boards, or any other representative public bodies? Is the strictly denominational and private character of the existing training colleges satisfactory, in view of the changed conditions of national education?
The present management of the training colleges is voluntary and mainly denominational. The burden of the cost falls principally on the nation and on the students, a very small part of the yearly cost is defrayed by the subscribers.
Of the original cost of the buildings about 30 per cent was contributed by the State and the remainder was subscribed; the exact figures are £118,627 granted by the Committee of Council and £278,842 subscribed, but since their foundation considerable additional sums have been subscribed for their enlargement and improvement. Of the yearly certified expenditure, amounting in 1886 to £166,447, £121,821, or more than 73 per cent, was met by grants from the Committee of Council on Education, £27,440, or about 16½ per cent, was paid by the students, £16,148, or less than 10 per cent, was from subscriptions, donations, and collections in churches and chapels.
The Code provides, Art. 116, 117 - A training college is an institution for boarding, lodging, and instructing students who are preparing to become certificated teachers in elementary schools. It is required to include either on its premises, or within a convenient distance, a practising school, in which the students may learn the practical exercise of their profession. No grant is made to a training college unless the Department is satisfied with the premises, management, and staff. Art. 21 provides - The authorities of each college settle their own terms of admission. The grant to colleges is subject to two limits by Art. 131. It must not exceed, (a) 75 per cent of the expenditure of the college for the year, approved by the Department, and certified in such a manner as the Department may require, (b) £50 for each male and £35 for each female Queen's scholar in residence for continuous training throughout the year for which it is being paid.
[page 286]
The principal is usually a clergyman. The accommodation in 1886 was distributed in the following proportions -
[click on the image for a larger version]
In the year ending August 1886 there were in the various classes of public elementary schools the following numbers in average attendance -
| | per cent |
Church of England | 1,626,231 | 47.3 |
British, &c. schools | 252,461 | 7.3 |
Board schools | 1,251,307 | 36.4 |
Wesleyan schools | 129,618 | 3.8 |
Roman Catholic schools | 178,738 | 5.2 |
Total | 3,438,425 | |
Thus, it appears that the proportion of accommodation in Church of England, Roman Catholic, and Wesleyan training colleges is greatly in excess of the proportion of children in the schools of the same denominations. On the other hand, while 47.3 per cent of the children in public elementary schools are in board schools. British, or other undenominational schools, there is only 19.8 per cent of the accommodation in British and undenominational training colleges.
The authorities of the Church of England, Roman Catholic, and Wesleyan training colleges state that their accommodation is only intended for members of their own churches; and though, in a few cases, others have been admitted, yet there is no conscience clause, and all are required to conform to the religious observances, and to accept the distinctive religious teaching characteristic of the various bodies.
It is alleged first that there would be a breach of faith if the Government should require as a condition of State aid the admission on equal terms of members of other communions into these colleges, and, secondly, that it would interfere with college discipline and break up the domestic character of the colleges, should they be thrown open.
As to the assertion that any modification of the conditions on which parliamentary grants should in future be given would be a breach of faith, such a contention would an effect convert the annual parliamentary vote into a charge on the consolidated fund; and the claim to a vested interest in the parliamentary grant without its being equitable for Parliament to modify its conditions, comes too late in the day in this question of elementary education, even if, on other grounds, there were anything to be said for such a proposition. For, in 1870, all schools, though previously in receipt of parliamentary grants, and though largely founded in exclusive connexion with particular denominations, were required to accept a time-table conscience clause as a condition of the continuance of annual grants; moreover, the denominational inspection which had previously been secured to them was swept away, and they became subject to inspectors, chosen irrespective of their religious opinions, and without consultation with the various religious bodies; whereas, previously, inspectors of Church of England schools were all clergymen, chosen with the concurrence of the Archbishops of Canterbury and of York, who could withdraw their approval of the inspectors. In the case of Roman Catholic schools the inspectors were Roman Catholics, and were appointed after consultation with representatives of that church.
The history of the growth of denominational training colleges is the history of a successful opposition led by the National Society, and by most of the bishops, to the establishment of an Undenominational State Training College, as proposed in 1839; as a consequence of the vehemence of that opposition, the Government gave way, and aided in the foundation and maintenance of the training colleges as they now exist. But these denominational colleges were the natural complement of a denominational system, and when Parliament established the school board system in 1870. it
[page 287]
followed naturally that the question of denominational training colleges would be open to re-consideration. And, indeed, apart from any question of denominational restrictions or their abolition, the terms on which grants were made to training colleges were materially altered by Mr. Lowe's code in 1862.
In reference to this supposed moral claim to a continued parliamentary grant, equal in its proportion to the total expenditure to that now paid, we may note that, in 1851, the Reverend H. Moseley returned (Education Report, 1851-52, p. 189) for the Church of England training colleges for males, a total income of £19,243, of which £1,976 was from Government grants, or about 10 per cent; at the same time the students paid £5,791, or about 30 per cent, and voluntary contributions amounted to more than £10,000, or upwards of 50 per cent.
In the official letter of October 22, 1851, signed R. W. Lingen, addressed to the Reverend Henry Moseley, and published pp. 213-14 of the Education Report of 1851-52, we find the following passage, "Their lordships distinctly and expressly lay it down as a rule and principle for your guidance in carrying out your instructions that they require the voluntary character of these institutions to be maintained. This character is in some danger, if, in addition to the grants now made, each separate item of expenditure is made the subject of a fresh application. The present constitution of the training schools is wholly inconsistent with assuming the charge of them upon the public funds, and it is not their Lordships' desire to encourage any such anticipation."
In 1857 the present Bishop of London reported of the male Church of England training colleges, that of a total income of £37,490, £13,815 was paid by the subscribers, or 37 per cent, £20,614 was derived from Government grants, or 55 per cent. (Education Report, 1857-58, p. 719).
The Reverend F. C. Cook, inspector of female Church of England training colleges, reported in 1857 that the Government grants amounted to £11,488, fees paid by students to £6,050, and subscriptions, donations, &c. to £5,532, or about 50 per cent from Government, about 26 per cent from the students, and about 24 per cent from subscriptions, donations, &c.
He says (Education Report, 1857-58, p. 763), "These returns corroborate the opinions which I expressed last year. It is evident, upon the whoJe, the institutions are prosperous. Doubtless some difficulty is felt, and always must be felt, in keeping up the annual subscriptions, but the amount now raised ought not to be diminished. It is a small contribution considering that these institutions belong to the dioceses in which they stand, and are entirely managed by local committees. They are the property of the Church, whose principles are inculcated in the minds of all the students, and whose daughters will be educated to a great extent by mistresses trained in them."*
As to the second allegation, that the presence of young people of various denominations is incompatible with college life; we do not find that this is the case in the training colleges of the British and Foreign Society. And if we look at other institutions where students reside, of the same age as the students at training colleges, we find that no difficulty is experienced in the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge in consequence of the presence of members of various denominations in the same colleges. And among women, the colleges recently founded at Girton and Newnham are conducted on the most comprehensive principles; and Holloway College, where the Archbishop of Canterbury has accepted the post of governor, was, by the constitution of the founder, to be carefully protected from identification with any one religious body. It cannot, therefore, be considered that the existing system prevailing in training colleges is essential to the moral training and formation of character in the students. Indeed, one of the most successful training colleges of those connected with the Church of England, the Home and Colonial, has not only admitted students who are avowedly Nonconformists, but gives to those residing in London great liberty of spending their Sunday at home, and the authorities of the college are satisfied that this liberty works well.
The advocates of enforced uniformity in college life as necessary for the moral training of teachers should be in favour of the complete abolition of the acting teacher who at the age when other ex-pupil teachers go to college is allowed to go forth with perfect freedom and teach as an assistant, it may be far from home and lost in the crowded population of a large town.
*Most of the existing training colleges had been founded by 1851, and the great mass of them by 1857.
[page 288]
There is no reason to believe that the students generally prefer the rigid denominational system of our training colleges. The British and Foreign colleges find a large competition for admission, and are largely filled by students who pass very high in the scholarship list, and many of them are members of the Church of England.
Canon Warburton, for several years inspector of the female training colleges gave as his evidence that the present supply of female trained teachers is quite inadequate, that there is need for more female colleges, and that they should be undenominational. He notes the exclusion from the Church training colleges of those who are not Churchwomen, and states that this brings about a conformity which is not at all desirable in order to get into the Church colleges. Similarly Miss Trevor gave evidence that at Chichester there had been Nonconformist students who after submitting to the Church discipline of the college, resumed their nonconformity on leaving college.
If the existing denominational training colleges are to be maintained as they are, and are to be largely subsidised by the State, they should bear a reasonable proportion to the denominational schools for which they were established, and the national work of training teachers should not continue to be the monopoly of irresponsible and private managers who are uncontrolled in their admission or rejection of students. The best plan for supplementing the existing colleges would be the establishment and management of colleges under local educational authorities subject to the supervision of the Education Department.
Most of the official witnesses who came before us were on the whole satisfied with the educational work done by the colleges, and we agree with them that the greatest cause of their shortcomings is to be found in the wretched state of preparation of the students at entrance, but we think with Mr. Matthew Arnold that the education in the colleges themselves is not always what it might be.
The two years, most of which should be spent in professional training are largely devoted to imparting what can only be fairly described as elementary knowledge.
Again in many cases the practising schools are not what they should be in equipment and efficiency, and are by no means model schools where the students may be shown the newest and most perfect school methods. In many colleges the appliances for teaching science are inadequate, in some the teaching itself is defective.
The principals are sometimes persons who take little part in the teaching, and have not been prepared for their work by wide experience and marked success in practical teaching. The staff are often elementary teachers, sometimes appointed immediately on the completion of their two years course of training, and, consequently, the teachers are often wanting in wide knowledge of the subjects taught, though they may have much aptitude in imparting knacks and short methods which may enable their students to pass examinations, and put their pupils through them. We need for the training of our elementary teachers that those who educate them shall have a wide knowledge of the subjects which they teach, and shall kindle intellectual enthusiasm and stimulate power of thought rather than aim merely of securing passes at an examination. No doubt, to secure truly educated rather than crammed teachers, a three years' course would be better than a two years' course. But as we are in favour of largely increasing the proportion of trained to untrained teachers, we shrink from recommending the addition of a third year at College, which would greatly add to the cost of training, and diminish the supply of teachers whom the existing colleges could turn out. We think, however, that facilities might be given for those promising students who are willing to give another year to study, to be gathered in some central place of training, probably in connection with the universities or other colleges for advanced teaching.
Canon Warburton, while bearing a high testimony to the good moral influence exercised over the students in the training colleges, states "I have always felt and expressed the feeling in successive reports that the turning them [the students] out professionally well qualified to conduct schools and teach, is the weak point of the institutions. Their technical instruction, so to speak is not satisfactory. They are not turned out so good teachers as one would hope." And in 1885 he summed up his last report on the female training colleges as follows: (Ed. Report, 1886-6, p. 442), "On taking a parting review of the whole subject of our voluntary State-aided system of training of elementary schoolmistresses, my predominant feeling is one of admiration for the zeal and energy with which the work is being carried on, mingled with a certain sense of disappointment with the intellectual
[page 289]
acquirements and technical skill obtained, as the result of so much forethought, self-denial, watchfulness, and ungrudging labour on the part of all concerned in the work of the colleges. It would seem as if innate capability - the personal factor so to speak - was, after all, so much more important an element in the teachers' efficiency and success than the best of good training; it turns out to have been so much more difficult than one might have hoped to eradicate bad intellectual habits, to give larger and more liberal views, to emancipate the judgment, to cultivate the imagination, and create a longing for the discovery and attainment of truth in the case of young persons who have not, as a rule, been favourably circumstanced with reference to early training and associations. I hope to live to see a closer approximation of our training college system with the liberal culture of the universities, so that all that is best and highest in modern education may be brought within the reach of those to whom the teaching of the great mass of the children of this and coming generations will be entrusted. I have reason to believe that there would be no unwillingness to co-operate on the part of the authorities of Oxford or of Cambridge."
We are glad to give our hearty assent to the principles laid down by Canon Warburton in the above suggestions; we fully recognise that the training colleges are entitled to demand that the candidates for admission shall come to them with a more thorough education and with a greater intellectual alertness; but we think that the colleges themselves need, not a more extensive curriculum, but a more thorough and intellectual study of the matters included in the curriculum; lecturers, who shall combine a wide knowledge of their subject, with the technical ability in handling classes which is already largely studied both in the training colleges and in the elementary schools; and we think that, without ignoring the fact that the colleges exist for the purpose of training teachers and must therefore be professional in their aims and methods, it would be well if some of the narrowness of the seminary and uniformity in the type of students were corrected by contact with places of general education.
We do not recommend that the grants to the existing training colleges be abolished, nor do we think it would be wise, provided that other opportunities of liberal training are afforded to students who intend to be teachers, to force upon the managers of the present training colleges changes in their domestic arrangements which they are not willing to accept. We think, however, that no student admitted to a training college should be expelled by the authorities without being entitled to an appeal to the Education Department, which should have full power to deal with the case as may seem equitable to it. We hope that when the existing training colleges cease to enjoy their present monopoly of public aid, many of them may voluntarily widen their terms of admission, and the conditions under which students are trained by them. Their success will then depend on the efficiency of their teaching, and on their popularity with students, and with others.
We had a great deal of evidence in support of the establishment of a system of day-training colleges side by side with the existing training colleges.
The Birmingham School Board presented a memorial quoted which asks "that the system of non-residential colleges, which is permitted by the Scotch Code, " should be introduced into England, and that Government grants in aid of such institutions should be given on an equally liberal scale, and further that school boards be empowered to establish and maintain such day (or non-residential) training colleges." Mr. McCarthy states "that the Birmingham School Board were unanimous, including the vice-principal of the Saltley Training College, in supporting the memorial. It has also been supported by many bodies outside of Birmingham, including the School Boards of Leeds and Nottingham." Mr. McCarthy, who presented the memorial of the Birmingham School Board, submitted an alternative and slightly different plan of his own.
He submitted that if all teachers are to be trained as at present, whether in boarding or day colleges up to the age of 20 at least, the cost of education will be heavy, and the existing scheme contemplates no change in the pupil- teacher system. He suggests, therefore, the establishment of 12 or 13 day training colleges, to hold about 250 students each, to be established in the large towns, to be under the management of the school boards, and to be wholly supported by the State. These colleges are to be mixed, and to admit students at the age of 16, on examination. The college course is to last three years, during two of which the students will be studying at the college, and during one year they are to be half time teachers in some school in the neighbourhood. They are then to be for two years probationer teachers
[page 290]
in some school within the inspector's district, and at the end of the five years they are to pass a certificate examination, in which professional subjects will have great weight. He contemplates that the students at 16 will be largely drawn from the secondary schools, though he would not exclude ordinary pupil-teachers.
Mr. McCarthy recommends his scheme as being in practical working operation in the town of Worcester, Mass., U.S.A., and he also urges that it would be a less costly method of training teachers than the present system. He considers that a day training college has the great advantage of not removing women from their homes while carrying on their education. Many of the authorities of the existing training colleges consider that this severance from the home is one of the great advantages of the training college, as enabling the authorities to form the character and improve the culture of the students. But it must be remembered that in England the present training colleges have largely to deal with students who come from homes of a humble type, and where intellectual influences are not very strong, and that Mr. McCarthy looks forward under his scheme to drawing teachers from families where education and refinement exist to a considerable extent; and in Birmingham the school board has already succeeded in recruiting its pupil-teachers largely from the middle-class, partly through the supply being mainly drawn from the grammar schools, partly through the care taken by the board in ascertaining the character of the home before accepting candidates.
Professor Bodington, principal of the Yorkshire College at Leeds, supported a scheme for the training of ex-pupil-teachers as day students at the colleges now coming into existence in various parts of England. He proposes that the professional training of the students should be conducted by the college, which would appoint a master of method, and by arrangement with the school board and other managers would use some of the board and voluntary schools as practising schools. He contemplates the training of a comparatively small number of students, 30 to 40, in connexion with his own college.
We have strong evidence from Wales urging the expediency of utilising, for the training of teachers, the colleges recently established at Aberystwyth, Bangor, and Cardiff; and Mr. Williams, the Chairman of the Cardiff School Board, and also a member of the Council of the Cardiff College, stated that the authorities of that college were prepared to make arrangements for supplying the professional as well as the general education of the students, and he contemplated the co-operation of the school board with the college.
Dr. Morrison, the principal of the Glasgow Free Church Training College, gave much valuable evidence as to the working of the university teaching in connexion with the professional preparation of a training college, and as to the effect of permitting students in training to make their own arrangements, under due supervision, for boarding and lodging.
We are of opinion that it is desirable to give expansion to our present system of training, by permitting students to lodge at home, or in lodging houses of approved character and respectability, to utilise the colleges and other places of higher instruction, which are willing to aid in the training of teachers, and to encourage the formation of educational faculties in such colleges either in conjunction with or apart from the local school board.
We think that the training of teachers should not begin so early as to interfere with their previous education, and that, as a rule, the present age of training should not be lowered.
At the same time we think that an experiment, such as the one indicated in the evidence of the Rev. E. F. M. McCarthy, might be tried; especially as the general lines of his proposal are very similar to those indicated in the thoughtful evidence of Dr. Graham, principal of Hammersmith Training College. He has established a preparatory class in his college, of students between 17 and 18, to fit ill-taught pupil-teachers for the college course. He sketches his idea of a course of training. He would admit young men between the ages of 16 and 18 into the training colleges for the first year without examination, at the end of that year he would let them begin a two years' course of training on condition of their passing an examination at the end of that [the first] year; and during the second year which would correspond to the present first year he would make them do practically the work which is now done during the two years, because it could be done then; the third year would be more particularly devoted to the practical work of teaching in the practising schools. To a certain extent this is similar to what is carried on in Prussia.
[page 291]
We see no objection to the existence of more than one method of training being recognised by the Education Department, provided that the essentials of thorough education, and sound technical preparation in the principles of the art of teaching, are secured, and while we should prefer for all the wider intellectual range of thought which may be expected from contact with a university, we are of opinion that the existing system may be continued side by side with the new schemes to which we have referred.
In reference to the question of boarding or day training colleges, we are of opinion that so long as the pupil-teachers are drawn from uneducated homes, and come to college so badly prepared as they now are, the undivided influence of a good boarding-college will probably be of advantage to them, and in any case boarding arrangements will be necessary for some of the students who attend colleges at a distance from their home. But in proportion as the colleges are brought within reach of the homes of the students, and these are drawn from families of wider education, we consider that the preservation and extension of the home influence, side by side with that of the training college, will be a great advantage.
As to the government of the new training colleges, we think, without defining too minutely how they should be administered, that their government should be both educational and of a local representative character. We doubt whether the school board alone, or the local college alone, would be the best body; perhaps a council representative both of the higher education and of the school boards in large towns; and in counties where there are no large towns, a delegation of the county rating authority might be constituted, working in conjunction with representatives of the Education Department.
The introduction of these changes would, we believe, make it easy by degrees to substitute trained for untrained teachers in our schools, and would greatly improve the quality of the trained teachers themselves.
CHAPTER 6
RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION
The declared object of the formation of the Committee of Council on Education in 1839 was to promote the religious welfare as well as the intellectual education of the children attending elementary schools. In the instructions to inspectors issued in August 1840, when the Marquis of Lansdowne was Lord President, the inspectors were informed that "their Lordships are strongly of opinion that no plan of education ought to be encouraged in which intellectual instruction is not subordinate to the regulation of the thoughts and habits of the children by the doctrines and precepts of revealed religion." (Minutes, 1839-40, pp. 22 - 24.) In this policy the leaders of both the great Parliamentary parties were agreed; and for many years successive Codes provided that -
"Every school aided from the grant must be either -
(a) A school in connexion with some recognised religious denomination; or
(b) A school in which, besides secular instruction, the Scriptures are read daily from the authorised version." (Article 8, Code, 1870.)
This Article appeared for the last time in the Code of 1870. Section 97 of the Education Act of that year enacted that after March 31st, 1871, the conditions to be fulfilled in order to obtain an annual Parliamentary grant "shall not require that the school shall be in connexion with a religious denomination, or that religious instruction shall be given in the school." The Act of 1870 affirmed the principle that it is no part of the duty of the State to secure religious instruction for children attending public elementary schools.
The Ven. Archdeacon Norris, who was one of Her Majesty's inspectors from 1849 to 1864, informed us that the instructions which were put before him in 1849 required him to examine the children attending Church of England schools not only in the Holy Scriptures, but in the Church Catechism very carefully, to inquire further what were their habits in respect of private prayer and in respect of attendance at divine worship. "All this", said the witness "I was to report to my Lords of the Committee of Council on Education." These instructions, under the agreement between the Education Department and the heads of the Church of
[page 292]
England, were drawn up by the Archbishops. In the instructions of 1862, when the Revised Code came into operation, the same view was taken of the primary importance of the moral and religious character of a school, and unless the religious knowledge of the children and their discipline and behaviour were satisfactory, the inspector might refuse to examine the school, or, if he did not resort to this extreme measure, he might recommend the cutting down of the grant. But it was enacted by the Act of 1,870, section 7, that it should no longer be any part of the duties of Her Majesty's inspector to inquire into any instruction on religious subjects given in schools receiving grants from Parliament, or to examine any scholar in such schools in any religious subject or book.
The Act leaves perfect freedom to the managers of denominational schools to give the most definite religious instruction before or after, or before and after, the ordinary secular work of the school. In giving this instruction they can use the catechisms and formularies of the church with which the schools are connected; but, at the wish of the parent, any child may be withdrawn from it. School boards are also left at liberty to provide religious instruction for children attending schools under their management; but, as in denominational schools, this instruction is to be given before or after - or before and after - the secular work of the school, and any children may be withdrawn from it at the wish of their parents.
A further restriction is imposed on the religious instruction given in board schools. Section 14, commonly known as the Cowper-Temple clause, prevents the introduction into a board school of any catechism or formulary which would identify the school with any particular religious denomination.
Some of the witnesses whom we examined expressed their belief that the Act of 1870 had, in various ways, tended to lessen the importance of religious teaching in the estimate of managers, teachers, and children, and to impair its efficiency. But it is clear from the evidence submitted to us that while the overwhelming majority of the school boards of the country have made large provision for the "undenominational" instruction of the children attending their schools, the Act has done nothing to lessen the power of the managers of voluntary schools to use them for the maintenance and extension of the influence of the churches with which they are associated. We have been specially impressed with the remarkable vigour with which the schools of the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church are being worked in the interests of those two great ecclesiastical organisations.
On a review of the whole of the evidence submitted to us we have come to the conclusion that those who believe that the inculcation of religious truth in some definite doctrinal form should constitute a portion of the daily teaching of every child attending school, have no occasion to regard the results of the legislation of 1870 with dissatisfaction. To the majority of those who hold this position the day school is virtually part of the equipment of the Church, and its primary purpose is to instruct the children in religious truth and to train them in the discharge of religious duty. They believe that neither the instruction nor the training can be effectual unless it rests on definite religious doctrine, and is made part of the ordinary work of the school. Whatever apprehension they may have felt when the Act of 1870 was passed, experience has proved that their fears were illusory. The schools of the Church of England and of the Roman Catholic Church are rendering to those great ecclesiastical organisations a larger service than they ever rendered before.
(1) Since 1870 the number of children receiving definite religious instruction and training has enormously increased. In 1870 the Church of England had 6,382 schools, with accommodation for 1,365,080 children; in 1886 it had 11,864 schools, with accommodation for 2,548,673: in 1870 the average attendance was 844,334, in 1886 it had risen to 1,634,354. In 1870 the Roman Catholic Church had 350 schools, with accommodation for 101,556 children; in 1886 it had 892 schools, with accommodation for 310,233: in 1870 the average attendance was 66,066, in 1886 it had risen to 180,701. We are unable to make a similar comparison for the schools of the Wesleyan Methodists; in the returns of 1870 they were not distinguished from British schools which claim to be undenominational.
(2) The time which is appropriated to religious instruction and observances in schools connected with the Church of England has not diminished. And though, according to the evidence of the Rev. D. J. Waller, the time given to these purposes in Wesleyan schools has "certainly diminished", the witness thought that religious teaching for 30 or 40 minutes daily ought to give very satisfactory results, and
[page 293]
he informed us that, taking the Wesleyan schools as a whole, about 45 minutes are spent in religions teaching and religious observances.
(3) In Church of England schools and in Roman Catholic schools the introduction of the system of diocesan inspection appears to have made the religious instruction more systematic and more thorough.
(4) The evidence submitted to us shows that very few children are withdrawn from religious instruction under clause 7 of the Act of 1870.
Those who believe in the great value of definite religious instruction in day schools may, therefore, congratulate themselves that, as compared with 1870, the number of children in denominational schools has greatly increased, and that the denominational instruction has been made more effective.
Our evidence shows that there are many who think that "undenominational" religious instruction is neither desirable nor possible, but it also shows that there are many who believe that children in public elementary schools should be instructed in the contents of the Bible - in its biographies, its parables, its miracles, its moral precepts, and the large outlines of its religious teaching - and that instruction of this kind may be given without any bias in favour of any definite ecclesiastical or doctrinal system. They believe that such instruction is acceptable to the majority of the parents, and that it is the ministers of religion, rather than the parents, who desire that the religious instruction given in day schools should be more definite. They also believe that the knowledge which the children receive from instruction of this kind is, in itself, of great value; that it exerts a powerful influence on character and conduct; and that it is of the highest importance as a preparation for the work of the Sunday school and the Churches.
While those who hold this theory of the kind of religious instruction that ought to be given in schools which are aided by Parliament, and at which children of parents associated with churches differing widely from each other in polity and creed are compelled to attend, may regret that the accommodation in board schools does not provide for a much larger proportion of the children of the country, they will regard with satisfaction many of the facts which appear in our evidence.*
(1) An enormous majority of the school boards of England and a large majority of the school boards of Wales have provided in their schools for daily prayers, for the singing of hymns, and for the "undenominational" instruction of the children in the Bible.
(2) The time appropriated to religious observances and instruction is adequate; and the school boards are solicitous that it should not be encroached upon by the secular work of their schools.
(3) Most of the larger boards and many of the smaller boards have adopted schemes of religious instruction in order to make the teaching systematic.
(4) Many of the boards have provided for the regular examination of the children in religious knowledge and the teachers are aware that importance is attached by the boards to the reports of the examiners.
(5) The evidence submitted to us shows that in the judgment of those who value religious instruction of this kind the knowledge acquired by the children is satisfactory.
In our opinion it would be a grave mistake, from the point of view of those who attach the greatest importance to the religious instruction given in day schools, if any attempt were made to disturb the settlement of 1870 by compelling all schools receiving aid from the Parliamentary grant to provide religious instruction. Any such attempt would be certain to provoke angry controversy and resolute resistance, and might end in diminishing rather than increasing the amount of the religious teaching now given in public elementary schools.
We are confirmed in this opinion by the evidence which was submitted to us by witnesses representing several Nonconformist denominations. The Rev. Dr. Bruce, of Huddersfield, chairman of the Congregational Union of England and Wales for 1888, would be satisfied to exclude religious teaching altogether from public elementary schools, and to leave all the religious teaching to the Sunday school, the parents,
*Of 3,470,509 children in average attendance at elementary schools receiving aid from the Parliamentary grant, 1,944,622 are in attendance at schools connected with the Church of England, with the Wesleyan Methodists, or with the Roman Catholic Church; and these schools obtain from the grant £1,621,486. The number of children in average attendance at board schools is 1,272,151; and these schools obtain from the grant £1,115,631. British undenominational and other schools, in which the religious instruction varies considerably, have 253,696 children in average attendance; and receive £218,588 from the Parliamentary grant.
[page 294]
and the clergy. The Rev. John Atkinson, president of the Primitive Methodist Connexion, is also prepared to exclude religious teaching from public elementary schools; he does not object altogether to the reading of the Scriptures, though he "can see difficulties in the way even of admitting that". The Rev. Charles Williams, president of the Baptist Union of England and Wales (1886-87), stated that he himself and those whom he represented objected to receiving aid from the State for religious instruction; that the Baptists had declined to receive grants for their day schools before 1870, because the grants were made conditional on the giving of religious teaching; but that in 1870, he and his friends at Accrington established a school which is practically a secular school, because there is no formal religious instruction given to the children, though in cases of discipline the teachers are perfectly free to urge religious sanctions with a view to secure the practice of virtue. The Rev. Dr. Crosskey, of Birmingham, is in favour of a system of secular instruction under universal school boards.
The grounds on which these witnesses rest their objection to the provision of religious instruction in public elementary schools deriving part of their support either from a Parliamentary grant, or from rates, or from both, are of various kinds. "It seems to us", said the Rev. C. Williams, "to be contrary to the very essence of the Gospel for that Gospel to become in any way subject to the control of the State or for its propagation to depend to the least extent upon the aid of the State." The Rev. Dr. Crosskey said "Religion cannot be taught in a school like grammar and arithmetic; the children associating it with their ordinary lessons will never feel its power; the Bible suffers by being made a class book like a grammar, and the giving of information about the Bible is confounded with religious teaching. I quote from many questions, one lately asked in a religious examination: What was the special mission of the following prophets, Ahijah, Shemaiah, Micaiah? For young children to be induced to think that this is religious teaching seems to me to destroy within them the sense of what religion is." "The children receiving their religion as a task lesson have their religious impressions injured; they are punished if they do not do their proper lessons in it, and the associations with the work are all as harsh and hard as those connected with their ordinary lessons. I have myself seen children standing apart to be caned for lack of attention during Bible work. To connect children with a living church is the great thing wanted for their religious life; and they will feel less disposed to connect themselves with a church, which is really what will protect them and redeem them, when religion is made a task lesson in school than when it is relegated to the Church itself." The witness thinks that "the teachers of religion should be religious people"; that religious teaching is a matter which belongs to the Church and not to the State, directly or indirectly; that "it is most effectively given in connexion with a living Christian church"; that the churches abdicate one of the most important of their functions in declining the responsibility for teaching religion to the children of the people; and that they permit it to be done "in a far less effective way than they could do it themselves". Dr. Crosskey is not of opinion that the qualifications and training of an efficient teacher of secular subjects are identical with those which are necessary for the teaching of religion. "I believe", he said, "that the skill which is needed for religious teaching is of a special and peculiar kind; it is largely determined by the religious character of the man and his various natural aptitudes in connexion with the depth of his religious faith."
We do not understand the Nonconformist witnesses to maintain that the teachers, either under school boards or under denominational managers, are persons without religious faith; but they contend that it is impossible for boards composed of members belonging to different churches to take, account of religious qualifications in the appointment of their teachers; and that even in the appointment of teachers by denominational managers, though membership of the churches with which the schools are connected will be required, general professional qualifications are likely to take precedence of special aptitude for giving religious instruction. We are told that there was a time when a considerable number of earnest religious men and women regarded teaching as mainly a religious work; but the Ven. Archdeacon Norris doubts "whether distinctly religious men and distinctly religious women are so desirous to be teachers now as they were under the old system." And in our judgment teaching, under the present conditions of English elementary
[page 295]
education, is likely to be regarded less and less as a religious "vocation" and more and more as one of the ordinary professions.
Dr. Crosskey pressed for secular schools under universal school boards, and made the following suggestion with regard to the religious teaching: "Under universal school boards the denominations would hold their schools for their own purposes, and before and after school hours would have an opportunity to arrange for definite religious instruction by religious teachers; it would be separated from the ordinary lesson work, and would be hampered by no restriction; religious men could give their whole faith in an undiluted form, and impress it upon the children's minds; and the school boards could offer rooms for a similar purpose before or after school hours." The attempt made by the Religious Education Society to carry out this scheme in Birmingham did not succeed; about the causes of its failure there are differences of opinion, which it is unnecessary to discuss. It appears, however, from the Parliamentary Returns of 1884, that about 40 of the smaller boards have at various times made arrangements of the kind that Dr. Crosskey desires; and in the answers we received to our Circular D addressed to the head teachers of voluntary and board schools, we are informed that out of 3,161 departments in which religious instruction is given daily, there are 1,062 or 33 per cent in which the religious instruction is given by "other persons as well as the teachers";* and those who believe that religious instruction might be given by "other persons" exclusively, might find some support for their contention in these figures. But we think it probable that the persons "other than the teacher" who give religious instruction in these 1,062 departments visit the schools only occasionally - rarely, perhaps, more than once or twice in the week.
We think it unnecessary, however, to discuss whether it would be possible now or desirable at any time for Parliament to determine that all schools should be secular. The witnesses to whose evidence we are now directing attention believe that the religious instruction and education of the children might safely be left to other agencies than the day school; but while they are all anxious that elementary schools receiving Parliamentary aid should be under the management of the representatives of the ratepayers, and should not be exclusively connected with particular churches, they are willing that the school board of every district should determine for itself whether or not it will make provision for religious teaching; and the Rev. C. Williams of Accrington informed us that he believed that the system of "unsectarian" teaching adopted by most of the great school boards had been generally accepted by his friends as a working compromise.
But the evidence of these witnesses indicates how strongly several Nonconformist communities would resent the proposal to make religious instruction compulsory.
Before closing this chapter we turn to the evidence which we received with regard to the relations between public elementary schools and Sunday schools.
When the Act of 1870 was passed there was a general impression that as the result of any very large extension of the provision for elementary education during the week, the attendance of children at Sunday schools was likely to diminish; and it was the belief of some of the witnesses whom we examined that a very large proportion of the children attending public elementary schools do not attend Sunday schools. The Rev. J. Gilmore stated that "all practical men know that the attendance of children in Sunday schools is not what it should be." The Rev. Dr. Aston said that "as a matter of fact, very many children who attend the day schools do not attend the Sunday schools", and that these are "the most neglected children, and the children of the worst parents." The Rev. R. B. Burges gave it as his opinion that the attendance at Sunday schools is falling off; and stated that a few years ago he collected returns from the Sunday schools in Birmingham connected with all religious denominations, and it was shown that there were 26,000 children on the books of public elementary schools in the borough who were not on the books of any Sunday school.
The accuracy and completeness of this estimate was, however, contested by another witness from Birmingham - the Rev. Dr. Crosskey - who expressed his belief, founded on inquiries made some years ago, that the percentage of children attending the board
*In the summary there is a slight discrepancy between the figures given in two different columns. The number of departments in which religions instruction is "given daily" is 3,161; but the number in which the religious instruction is given "by teacher" is 3,220. The explanation may be that in 3,220 departments religious instruction is given - but not given daily. This slight discrepancy does not affect the argument in the text.
[page 296]
schools of Birmingham who also attend Sunday schools is very large; but this witness could give us no information with regard to the attendance at Sunday schools of the children attending voluntary schools in Birmingham. Evidence as to the large proportion of the children attending public elementary schools that also attend Sunday schools was given by witnesses from other parts of England. The Ven. Archdeacon Stamer, rector of Stoke-upon-Trent, said, "by far the larger proportion" of the day school children are in Sunday schools. According to the Rev. J. Nunn, "a very large number" of the children of Manchester and Lancashire generally attend Sunday schools. In Accrington, according to the Rev. C. Williams, "with the exception of the children of a few infidels (and they", he said, "are very few indeed among us), every child attends some Sunday school." In Huddersfield "the children almost invariably attend Sunday schools." "With very few exceptions" all the children that attend the board schools go to some Sunday school; and in reply to the question "do you fancy that the religious instruction of that particular class for whom an industrial school is needed, is provided for in any way at all?" the witness answered, "some of these, as a matter of fact, do go to Sunday schools". Mr. J. Bradbury, master of the Abney British School, Mossley, said that "the whole of the children" attending his school also attend the Sunday school. Mr. Mark Wilks, while of opinion that the Sunday school system is not so successful in London as in Lancashire and Yorkshire, said that not only is there a very large number of children in the London Sunday schools, but that in some parts of London there is a special effort to draw into Sunday schools children of the destitute class; and Mr. Powell, a visitor under the London board, said that in his district children who attend the day schools badly, attend the Sunday schools well, and that the very parents on whom he has to bring the force of the law in order to compel them to send their children to day schools, boast that they send their children to Sunday school regularly.
On this subject we also received evidence from the official representatives of three Sunday school associations - Mr. E. Towers, one of the honorary secretaries of the Sunday School Union; Mr. John Palmer, a representative of the Church of England Sunday School Institute; and the Rev. C. H. Kelly, secretary of the Wesleyan Methodist Sunday School Union.
Mr. Towers informed us that his colleague in the secretariat of the Sunday School Union had prepared statistics showing that the total number of scholars on the rolls of the Sunday schools in England and Wales is 5,200,000. "The Church of England Sunday schools have 2,222,000; the Wesleyan Methodists, 825,000 in round numbers; the Congregationalists, 686,000; the Baptists, 426,000; the Primitive Methodists, 369,000; the Methodist Free Church, 186,000; the Calvinistic Methodists (principally in Wales), 176,000. Then we have thirty denominations that go from 81,000 to 68,000, and 36,000 and so on. The total is, as I have said, 5,200,000." The average attendance throughout England is from 66 to 70 per cent, of the number on the registers. The witness believed that though in some parts of England a certain proportion of children and young people go to Sunday schools who are socially above the class that generally attend public elementary schools, the overwhelming majority of those who attend Sunday schools, especially in the provinces, are of the class for which the public elementary schools are provided. Mr. Palmer also stated that the great bulk of the children attending Church of England schools belong to the class who use elementary schools. He also said that "parents send their children to Sunday schools whether they are themselves connected with religious denominations or not"; that he had known cases in which parents living irreligious and immoral lives took pains to send their children to Sunday schools; and that "there is a very strong feeling existing among parents, of the lower classes particularly, that their children should receive some sort of religious instruction; they neither know nor care to know in many instances about religion themselves; but they have an idea (it may be a mere matter of sentiment) that their children should receive religious instruction." The Rev. C. H. Kelly, speaking for Wesleyan schools, said "the vast majority of our scholars come from the artisan and working class population."
Mr. Towers stated that about one-fifth of the children attending Sunday schools generally are under seven years of age, and that therefore there are in round numbers 4,000,000 Sunday school children who are over seven.
[page 297]
We believe that these remarkable figures confirm the evidence of those witnesses who assured us that the great majority of the children in attendance at public elementary schools are also in attendance at Sunday schools. For an analysis and discussion of the figures we refer to a memorandum prepared and submitted to us by our colleague, Dr. Dale, and appended to this chapter.
Both Mr, Palmer, of the Church of England Sunday School Institute, and Mr. Towers, of the Sunday School Union, gave us interesting information of the methods adopted by these institutions for increasing the efficiency of Sunday schools. They issue magazines and manuals specially prepared for Sunday school teachers; notes of lessons graded for different classes; and all kinds of "Sunday school material". The Bible lessons of the Sunday School Union are laid out for seven years so as to cover the "children's Sunday school age", which the Union considers should be at least seven years. Both the Institute and the Union send out specially qualified persons to different parts of England to give normal lessons and to instruct teachers in the art of teaching. They also hold examinations for teachers. They inspect schools when requested to do so. Mr. Towers informed us that in many parts of the kingdom the teachers of schools connected with a particular congregation meet every week in a "preparation class" conducted by their minister to prepare their lessons for the following Sunday; in some cases the teachers of the schools connected with several congregations meet weekly for the same purpose. The Sunday School Union has done very much to encourage the formation of these classes in ail parts of the kingdom. The Wesleyan Methodist Sunday School Union carries on work of the same kind.
We gathered from these witnesses that the great extension of day school education since 1870 had, in various ways, favourably affected Sunday schools. Sunday school teachers are relieved of the drudgery of teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic. "The intellect of the scholars has been sharpened." There has been an "outward improvement in their character" as far as their morals, their order, and their discipline are concerned. Mr. Kelly laid emphasis on the improvements in organisation and in methods of teaching which had been introduced of late years from the day school into the Sunday school.
Mr. Kelly attaches very great value to the religious teaching given in day schools. He said: "Scripture facts are memorised better and practical moral duties are taught in the day schools by which the morals of the children are, we think, improved." He also believes that the religious teaching in day schools contributes to the formation of religious faith and the deepening of religious earnestness. He said "we can trace a considerable number of church members whose religious life has been nurtured greatly by the day schoolmasters". Mr. Palmer thinks that the religious teaching in the day school "has had a good effect in impressing scholars with the importance of religious teaching, by making it part of the regular teaching of the school". He added, "it is also important to us because it can be given on five days of the week, whereas we, as Sunday school teachers, can only devote some three hours on Sunday to it." He thinks that of late years there has been a general improvement in the religious knowledge of children attending Sunday schools; they come to the schools better grounded in the facts of the Bible, and therefore better prepared for further instruction, and this improvement has taken place in children attending all public elementary schools; the children attending church day schools during the week know more about the Prayer Book; but in Scriptural knowledge he cannot distinguish between the progress of children brought up in board schools and those brought up in voluntary schools. With regard to the higher ends of religious instruction, the witness said, "I think the work of the day school consists principally in the imparting of secular knowledge, and the special work of the Sunday school is to apply that knowledge to the heart and conscience." He values the foundations of religious knowledge which are laid in the day schools; "but", added, "without wishing to minimise the amount of good effected by the day school instruction, I think the application of religious truth is more effectively carried out in the Sunday school." On being further pressed as to whether he meant that no religious teaching is given in day schools which directly applies religious knowledge and truth to actual life, the witness replied: "I did not mean that no such instruction was given, but rather that it is better and more completely done in the Sunday school."
[page 298]
Mr. Palmer also thinks that a good Sunday school teacher will in some cases be quite as competent and in some cases more successful in giving a Sunday school lesson than a "trained teacher belonging to a day school".
Mr. Towers, while recognising the intellectual and moral improvement in the children which has resulted from the extension of elementary education during recent years, does not think that "the day school teaching in public elementary schools has had the slightest influence upon them religiously". He would not exclude the Bible from public elementary schools, but he attaches no importance to the religious teaching that is given in them; he thinks that "it may do as much harm as good". He doubts even whether the mere knowledge of Scripture that is given in day schools is likely to be retained. "I have seen", said the witness, "a pupil-teacher teaching the history of Joseph with a cane in his hands, and caning the children for not giving the proper answers; that knowledge will be there all right a week or a month hence, but twelve months hence they would not remember a word of it." As a rule he did not think that the children's knowledge of Holy Scripture had improved, owing to the instruction in elementary schools. The witness attributed the superior religious influence of Sunday schools to the fact that a great many motives may lead men and women to enter the teaching profession, apart from a desire to benefit the children religiously; but this, in the overwhelming majority of cases, is the supreme motive with those who teach in Sunday schools.
We do not think that it lies within the scope of our Commission to offer any judgment on the conflict of opinion between these witnesses in respect to the value of the religious instruction given in our public elementary schools as a means of creating personal faith in the hearts of the children, and encouraging religious earnestness. On that question differences of opinion with regard to facts are rooted in deeper differences of conviction in relation to the central mysteries of the spiritual life of man. But, as throughout the whole course of our inquiry, we have had occasion to observe that the religious teaching and influence of the day school is a subject which is regarded by large numbers of persons with, perhaps, a keener and intenser interest than its relation to the enlargement and discipline of the intellect, we have thought it our duty to give a summary of this evidence.
We believe that all who care for the religious and moral welfare of the people must regard, with deep satisfaction, the extraordinary success of the Sunday schools of all churches in securing so large an attendance of scholars, notwithstanding the recent development of public elementary education. Without the aid of a compulsory law there is a larger number of scholars in the Sunday schools of England and Wales than in the public elementary schools; and the immense majority of the scholars in both descriptions of schools belong to the same class of the community. We think that great honour is due to the institutions which were represented before us for the energy with which they are endeavouring to improve the quality of Sunday school instruction. But we were especially impressed with those parts of the evidence of the Rev. C. H. Kelly and Mr. Towers, which show how large a proportion of the scholars in the Sunday schools with which they are connected are above the age at which children leave the elementary schools. The intellectual benefit which these young people secure by continuing their education for so many years alter leaving the day school is considerable. They are likely not only to preserve a large amount of the knowledge that they have acquired, but to augment it. To the moral advantage which they must derive from coming into contact every week with intelligent and kindly Christian men and women, who are not only their teachers, but their friends, we attach a still higher value. And whatever differences may exist with regard to the religious power of the religious instruction given in day schools, there is none concerning the great service which has been rendered by the religious instruction given in Sunday schools to the moral and religious life of the nation.
MEMORANDUM ON THE ATTENDANCE AT SUNDAY SCHOOLS OF CHILDREN ATTENDING PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS. PREPARED BY R. W. DALE, LL.D
The figures submitted to the Commission by Mr. E. Towers, Mr. Palmer, and the Rev. C. H. Kelly, showing the number of scholars attending Sunday schools in England and Wales, are so remarkable as to justify and demand an analysis of
[page 299]
their real significance. Those submitted by the Rev. C. H. Kelly with regard to Wesleyan Sunday schools, which are considerably in excess of the figures for Wesleyan Sunday schools given by Mr. Towers, are drawn from complete and trustworthy returns. They are from later returns than those represented in the evidence of Mr. Towers. Those submitted by Mr. Palmer, with regard to the Church of England Sunday School Institute, are, I believe, founded on returns from a majority of the schools connected with the Church of England, supplemented by an estimate for the remainder made by the officers of the Institute. The figures for other denominations have been in part compiled and in part estimated by Mr. Fountain Hartley, Mr. E. Towers' colleague in the Secretariat of the Sunday School Union. The figures cannot have the authority which belongs to the official tables, giving the number of children on the registers of our public elementary schools; but I believe that in compiling them Mr. Hartley was extremely anxious not to make his estimates excessive; and if they are substantially accurate they throw very interesting light on a question which has frequently occupied the Commission, the extent to which children attending public elementary schools also attend Sunday schools.
The following is a copy of the table used by Mr. Towers in giving his evidence:
[click on the image for a larger version]
In dealing with the figures submitted by these three witnesses, it is necessary to remember, first, that the proportion of Sunday school scholars under 7 is much less than the proportion of day scholars under that age. In public elementary schools the scholars under 7 are about one third of the total number; in Sunday schools, according to Mr. Towers, the proportion is only about one fifth. It is also necessary to remember that there are large numbers of young people in Sunday schools over 14, the age at which education in public elementary schools generally ceases. For the proportion of the scholars in Sunday schools between those two ages we have to rely on the estimates of the witnesses; and their estimates can be taken as only approximately exact.
Mr. Palmer estimated that of the 2,200,000 scholars in Church of England schools about 70 per cent are between 7 and 14, or 1,540,000.
The Rev. C. H. Kelly informed us that since 1874 there had been a very large increase of scholars over 15 in Wesleyan Sunday schools, and thought that of the whole number of scholars - 879,112 - about one fourth, or 25 per cent, are over 13. Mr. Kelly has furnished me with the elaborate official tables for 1886 on which his evidence was based. These tables summarise exact returns received by the Wesleyan Sunday School Union from the officers of the Wesleyan districts throughout Great Britain. From the total of 879,112 scholars it is necessary to deduct 7,036 for scholars in Scotland (including Shetland), leaving 872,076 for England and Wales. The tables show that of these, 203,917 are under 7, 475,534 between 7 and 15, and 192,625 above 15. The returns do not enable me to give the precise number of scholars between 7 and 14, but 30,000 is a fair estimate for those between 14 and 15; and deducting 30,000 from 475,534 - the number between 7 and 16 - the remainder - 445,534 - is a close approximation to those between 7 and 14.
In the schools connected with his own Union, and numbering 1,200,000 scholars on the register, Mr. Towers thought that one fifth were over 15, one fifth between 13 and
[page 300]
15, and one fifth in the infant classes: this would show that 40 per cent are between 7 and 13, and about 50 per cent are between 7 and 14. Deducting from 1,200,000, 25,000* for scholars in Scotch Sunday schools affiliated to the London Union, there are 1,175,000 in England and Wales: 50 per cent, of these amount to 587,500.
There remain about 1,000,000 scholars in schools of other denominations to make up the total of 5,200,000 Sunday school scholars in England and Wales; taking for these the mean percentage of 60, as representing the proportion of children between 7 and 14, these denominations have 600,000 scholars between these ages. This percentage would probably be much too high for the Calvinistic Methodist schools in Wales, which number 176,981, and for the schools of the Friends, which number 26,352, which consist very largely of adults; but it would be too low for all the other schools, numbering together about 800,000.
We have, therefore, the following totals of scholars between 7 and 14 in the various descriptions of Protestant Sunday schools:
Church of England | 1,540,000 |
Wesleyan | 445,500 |
In connexion with the Sunday School Union | 587,500 |
Other Protestant denominations | 600,000 |
| 3,173,000 |
We received no evidence as to the number of scholars in Catholic Sunday schools; but I believe that in addition to what is described as "catechism" on the Sunday afternoon, and in addition to ordinary Sunday schools, the Catholic Church provides for its children and young people by means of religious confraternities and associations of various kinds. It may be assumed that for the religious instruction on Sunday of children attending Catholic day schools the Catholic Church makes adequate provision. There are, no doubt, some non-Catholic children who attend Catholic day schools, but there are also Catholic children who attend non-Catholic day schools, and these may be set off against each other. In comparing, therefore, the number of children between 7 and 14 on the registers of public elementary schools with the children of the same age - 3,173,000 - attending Protestant Sunday schools, the number attending Catholic day schools need not be counted. The total number of children between 7 and 14 on the registers of public elementary schools in England and Wales is 3,101,237; of these 157,067 are in Catholic schools; and the number in non-Catholic schools is 2,944,170. There are, therefore, 228,830 more children between 7 and 14 in the Protestant Sunday schools than in all the public elementary schools of England and Wales, excluding those which are connected with the Catholic Church.
This excess is explained by the fact that, in some parts of England, a considerable number of children attend Sunday schools who do not attend public elementary schools; how many we have no materials to determine. But after deducting any reasonable estimate of the number of such children from the total number of scholars between 7 and 14 attending Sunday schools, the number of Sunday school scholars who belong to the class for which public elementary schools are provided will remain so large as to show that the immense majority of the children on the registers of public elementary schools are also on the registers of Sunday schools. That the number of these children who do not attend Sunday schools is considerable, I do not doubt; but I believe that it has been greatly exaggerated. In London the Sunday schools seem less successful than in other parts of the kingdom in reaching the children of the great masses of the working people.
The evidence of the representatives of the three Sunday school organisations is extremely interesting as showing the large number of young people over 14 who remain under Sunday school instruction. In the Wesleyan schools, according to the official tables, there are 192,625 over 15, and, adding 30,000 for those between 14 and 15, there are 222,625 over 14. Accepting the age percentages of the witnesses for schools of other descriptions, the percentage of scholars over 14 in Church of England schools is 10 per cent - 220,000 scholars; in schools connected with the Sunday School Union 30 per cent - in round numbers, 350,000 scholars; in the
*Mr. Towers informs me that at the time the table was compiled the precise number to be deducted was 25,192.
[page 301]
remaining Protestant denominations, 20 per cent - 200,000. On these estimates there are, in round numbers, 992,000 scholars in Protestant Sunday schools above the age of 14.
CHAPTER 7
MORAL TRAINING
Article 109(b) of the Code provides that in awarding the merit grant He Majesty's inspectors are to take into account the organisation and discipline of a school; and it declares that "to meet the requirements respecting discipline, the managers and teachers will be expected to satisfy the inspector that all reasonable care is taken, in the ordinary management of the school, to bring up the children in habits of punctuality, of good manners and language, of cleanliness and neatness, and also to impress upon the children the importance of cheerful obedience to duty, of consideration and respect for others, and of honour and truthfulness in word and act." This clause was introduced into the Code in 1876, when our colleague, Lord Harrowby, then Lord Sandon, was Vice-president of the Council; it disappeared from the Code in 1882, but was introduced into a note to the instructions to inspectors for that year; the clause was restored to the Code of 1883.
This article in the Code may be variously interpreted. If it means that in awarding the merit grant it is the duty of the inspector to form a judgment of his own as to whether the children have acquired the excellent moral habits which the article enumerates, it is, in our judgment, impossible for him at the annual examination to form any trustworthy judgment on the question. The "cleanliness and neatness" of the children on that day give no assurance that they are habitually cleanly and neat. That he detects no copying is no sure proof that in their ordinary conduct they are governed by a sense of honour, and are truthful in word and act. On that day the school may be orderly and the discipline excellent, and yet the children may not be generally characterised by cheerful obedience to duty. It is very unlikely that in his presence the very worst children will use bad language; children whose manners are ordinarily rough and coarse will, in his presence, be quiet and subdued; and children will be respectful to him and to their teachers in his presence, who elsewhere show no "consideration or respect for others". In "visits without notice" more may be learnt than on the day of inspection; but these visits cannot be frequent, and we believe that in many of them the whole time is occupied with inquiries of a formal kind. A witness has described these visits in the following words: "The inspector counts the number of children, examines the registers, to see that the registration is correct, and examines as well, to see that the routine is being carried out in accordance with the signed time-table."
Mr. W. Williams, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector for Wales, gave us the fullest information as to the manner in which inspectors carry out Article 109 of the Code.
56,687. Can you tell the Commission how you carry out this instruction to inspectors which requires that the inspectors should satisfy themselves about the moral condition of the schools? - We call the attention of the managers to that fact, and if we find the discipline satisfactory and the premises clean, and see the conduct of the children respectful, we conclude that it is attended to.
56,688. You do not make any special inquiry into that subject, but only take the general view, the appearance of the school on the day of inspection? - Not always; in fact sometimes the managers are not present at all at the inspection.
56,689. You are aware, no doubt, of this note. [Here the Commissioner read the extract of the Code, which we have already quoted, requiring the managers and teachers to satisfy the inspector as to the moral training.] How do the managers satisfy you on this subject? - They satisfy us mainly by training up the children in good behaviour, and we test that by the children's conduct during the examination, and by their deportment during our visits, and by the condition of the premises, inside and outside, and especially on visits without notice.
56,690. That is to say, that you think this is sufficiently met if on one given day in the year the managers satisfy you by your observation that these things are attended to; that is the only way in which you test it? - That is the only
[page 302]
way in which we test it. I do not say that it is a perfectly satisfactory test, but it goes a long way. In spending four or five hours in a school, if the discipline or conduct of the children is not satisfactory, it is almost sure to show itself.
In addition to forming a judgment on what he himself sees during his visits whether annual or without notice, the inspector may learn from the managers and teachers what methods they have adopted for training the children in good moral habits, and what, in their opinion, has been their success. Nearly all the evidence that we have received both from managers and teachers is to the effect that on this subject of moral training it is not the practice of Her Majesty's inspectors to make any inquiries. It is alleged that the strain upon the inspectors in conducting the examination into the general work of the school leaves them little or no time for making these inquiries.
In our judgment the moral instruction and training of the children in our elementary schools is of paramount importance, and we believe that it is on the managers and teachers that the responsibility rests, and that unless they recognise its gravity the moral influence of the schools will be ineffective. But inspectors may remind them of this responsibility, and urge them to discharge it.
It ought not to be assumed by managers that the moral training is satisfactory because an adequate time is secured for religious teaching and religious observances. Religious teaching may be successful in giving to children a considerable knowledge of Christian doctrine and of the contents of the Bible; it may even be successful in creating devoutness of heart and the desire to live a religious life; and yet may fail in developing and instructing the conscience. It does not follow that because either a man or a child means right he will do right, or even know what it is right to do. Both men and children do many wrong things without knowing them to be wrong, and omit many grave duties through want of thought and want of knowledge. We, therefore, attach great value to definite and systematic instruction in moral duties.
Several years ago the Bristol Board passed the following regulations: "(1) That whenever the Scripture lesson supplies a suitable opportunity of teaching the evils of drunkenness by warnings, cautions, admonitions, and examples, the teachers should avail themselves of it. (2) That reading and copy-books, so far as possible, be rendered helpful in this direction. (3) That picture cards and diagrams and wall-papers bearing on the subject be part of the furniture of the schools." We were also informed that kindness to animals has been made the subject of similar regulations. "The teachers are from time to time questioned as to how they are carrying out these regulations. The Board also expect their teachers to take every opportunity afforded by the daily Scripture lesson to inculcate lessons of the highest morality." This is excellent as far as it goes; but there are other grave vices against which children need to be warned, as well as drunkenness; and other virtues of which they need to be reminded, as well as kindness to animals. It might be well to make more definite and systematic provision for teaching with regard to conduct than that which is contained in their general direction that the teachers are to "take every opportunity afforded by the daily Scripture lesson to inculcate lessons of the highest morality". And instead of expecting the teachers to take every opportunity that may be afforded by the daily Scripture lesson of inculcating the highest morality, it might be well so to arrange the lessons that the opportunity should regularly recur.
Another board in its regulations for religious and moral teaching directs its managers and teachers "to establish and maintain by all possible means a high moral tone in the schools under their charge", recites the article of the Code, which we have already quoted, and calls special attention to it. (Wiltshire, Swindon. School Board Schools (Religious Teaching), Parliamentary Return, 1884, p. 164.)
In Birmingham the teachers under the board use a handbook, containing notes of lessons on moral subjects, specially prepared for public elementary schools. The book contains outlines of lessons on duty, honesty, truthfulness, candour, honour, obedience to parents, love of home, industry, perseverance, patience, government of temper, kindness or consideration for others, courtesy and good manners, forgiveness, punctuality, order or method, painstaking and accuracy, contentment, unselfishness and self-denial, benevolence and humanity, gratitude, cheerfulness, thrift, temperance, cleanliness, modesty, courage, prudence, justice, loyalty and patriotism, support of the
[page 303]
law, and several other subjects - 40 in all. The lessons are given within the hours for secular instruction.
But we believe that the most admirable system of moral instruction will have no good effect unless the teachers themselves are upright, just, and generous men and women, unselfish, patient, gentle, and affectionate in all their relations to the children; and it is with exceptional pleasure that we recall the deep impression which has been made upon us by the high moral qualities of most of the teachers whom we have examined.
The witnesses who appeared before us are, on the whole, satisfied with the moral results of our present educational system. In the judgment of the Rev. T. W. Sharpe and Canon Warburton, two of Her Majesty's Inspectors, the children generally, as far as they have the means of judging, leave the schools well-principled and conscientious, and Mr. Sharpe thinks the training is as efficient in this respect as in former years. The Rev. Prebendary Deane is of opinion that the Church schools in country parishes have raised the moral tone of the people.
Most of the teachers whom we examined assured us that the moral tone of their schools had not deteriorated, but had been maintained, and even improved, in recent years; but some of them thought that this was not to be attributed to our present system, by which they generally meant the present system of examination and payment by results, but to other causes. The evidence of the teachers as to the moral influence of the schools on the children in after life, and on the neighbourhood in which the schools are situated, was also generally favourable. Mrs. Burgwin, head mistress of Orange Street School, under the London School Board, considers that the school has been a centre of humanising influence in one of the worst parts of London, and she gave a striking sketch of the change for the better that has taken place in the neighbourhood within her own experience. Mr. W. Muscott, principal teacher of the Garsington Church of England mixed school, in the diocese of Oxford, is dissatisfied with the intellectual results of school life, but not with the moral results. Mrs. S. Knowler, mistress of a small Church of England school at Dibden, in Hampshire, is of opinion that the school exerts as good an influence on the character of children as it did 20 years ago. Mr. Horsfield, head master of St. Saviour's Church of England School, Everton, near Liverpool, with an average attendance of 340, stated that, as far as he knew, the boys, after they have left school, are good citizens and lead good lives. Mr. Conway, master of the Holy Cross (Catholic) School for Boys, Liverpool, is of opinion that the moral results of the school are good, and are extremely valuable in the very poor neighbourhood in which the school is situated; the effect of the teaching is seen in the after life of the children. Miss C. Fox, mistress of the Infant School of St. Patrick's, Manchester (Catholic), thinks that "generally the children turn out very well".
The witnesses who represented the Wesleyan Sunday School Union, and the Sunday School Union (which includes various Evangelical Nonconformist denominations), while differing as to the value of the religious instruction given in public elementary schools, whether board or voluntary, agreed in their testimony that the moral influence on the children of both descriptions of schools is excellent.
One of the witnesses, the Rev. W. J. B. Richards, D.D., a Catholic Diocesan Inspector, expressed very strong views as to the unsatisfactory nature of the moral influence exerted on the children by board schools, and expressed his belief that they will furnish a larger proportion of the criminal classes than the children educated in schools of other descriptions. The witness, however, on being asked whether he knew the proportions in which the various denominations furnished their contingents to industrial schools, said that he feared the Roman Catholics figured rather badly. This kind of attack on the moral influence of the board schools, as compared with that of denominational schools, is not infrequent; in the evidence which we have received there is nothing to confirm its truth; and we close this review of our evidence with an extract from the evidence of Mr. Herbert Birley, member of the Manchester and Salford School Boards.
In reply to a question on this subject he said, "We have no direct evidence, but I have a letter here from the rector of one of the parishes in Manchester, who has recently had a board school placed in his parish, about a year and a half ago.
[page 304]
He says: 'Probably nowhere could the influence of the religious and moral teaching upon the character of children be so readily tested as in a parish like ours, because the school here is the only civilising influence. Their parents are very poor and generally very ignorant. There are no well-to-do residents to set good examples, and children are often left to follow their own sweet will, so that any change in their habits must be due in a great measure to the influence of the school. Since the opening of our schools in 1885 I have noticed a remarkable change; children whom I had noticed previously as dirty and disobedient we now find as a rule clean, obedient, and respectful. Our Sunday school is far more orderly and does its work with a great deal less friction than formerly. The change is most remarkable, and I have no doubt extends in other moral directions. My opinion is that the influence of a well-conducted day school is very great.'"
CHAPTER 8
THE CURRICULUM AND STAFF IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
At present the curriculum in our elementary schools varies largely according to the will of the managers. In strictness all the instruction that is compulsory to secure the recognition of a school as efficient, and to entitle it to State aid, is that the children should be taught reading, writing, and arithmetic, according to the standards of the Code, and that the girls should be taught needlework.
This, the obligatory minimum curriculum of a public elementary school, is far below what can be considered as the proper range of an elementary education. By the Education Report of 1886-7, there were 2,411 departments, with 117,540 scholars in average attendance, in which no class subject was taken, and in addition there were 1,705 departments, with 141,173 children in average attendance, where the necessary class subject English had been taken, but the grant had been refused. There are about 250,000 children in schools where only one class subjected is attempted.
But though the compulsory programme of instruction in our elementary schools is thus meagre, the Education Department has for years induced managers to take up a more liberal scheme of instruction by the offer of special grants, and the principal progress in this respect was made by the Code of 1876, which introduced the payment of 2s a head on the attendance for each of two class subjects to be taught throughout the school. Managers rapidly took advantage of the opportunity offered to them, and the injurious effects of the Code of 1862, which made tie payment of the full grant dependent on the successful teaching of only a part of the former usual curriculum, were largely corrected.
The schools which fail to present their scholars for examination in the class subjects are mainly small village mixed schools, and even the number of these is diminishing both absolutely and relatively year by year.
Thus in 1883 the numbers not examined in class subjects were 158,441 out of 2,146,773 scholars in average attendance, or 7.38 per cent.
In 1884 the numbers were 124,398 out of 2,313,356, or 5.36 per cent.
In 1885 the numbers were 1 19,293 out of 2,420,560, or 4.93 per cent.
In 1886 the numbers were 117,540 out of 2,464,571, or 4.77 per cent.
When we bear in mind the poor quality of many of the teachers in the small schools, and also the fact that in some instances the inspectors discourage the teaching of class subjects in rural schools, we must conclude that it has been shown by experience that the wider curriculum, which has been almost universally adopted voluntarily, is well within the range of all schools if the managers will provide a proper staff.
We may notice that the great majority of the inspectors and others interested in education state that not only can class subjects be advantageously taught, but that the teaching of them reacts favourably upon the teaching of reading, writing, and arithmetic. Thus far the policy of the Education Department has been to require a very low obligatory minimum of teaching in our elementary schools, but by affixing money payments to extra subjects of instruction to induce the teachers and managers to extend the curriculum. Setting aside for the moment the method by which State
[page 305]
aid is distributed and which is popularly known as payment by results, we will now consider what is the proper curriculum that may reasonably be required of an elementary school.
Here we would state at the outset, that we cannot expect a uniform curriculum in all schools. The large town school, properly divided into classes, and where a sufficient staff of assistants is working under a competent and well-paid head teacher, may reasonably be expected to teach more than the small village school where the teacher, aided perhaps by a monitor or two, has to go from class to class, and often leave the scholars to work by themselves while the teacher is engaged with another section of the school.
Before discussing what should be the curriculum prescribed by the State as a minimum for all schools, we must deal with that important and characteristic element in English education, the infant schools. Though a curriculum in the strictest sense is not as applicable to them as to the senior departments, yet there are certain principles to be observed and aims to be followed in these schools which should be defined by the State through the Education Department.
We have already, in our chapter on school supply, spoken of the importance and value of infant schools, and specially of the advantage of supplying ample accommodation for and encouraging the attendance of children below five years of age. As about a third of the children in the public elementary schools of the country (1,472,878 out of 4,505,825 children) are in infant schools and classes, the importance of proper methods of education and of good organisation in these departments can hardly be exaggerated, especially as the due progress of the child in the senior departments must largely depend on the intelligent and harmonious development of the faculties and the healthy formation of character in the infant school.
We desire to pay a tribute to the great improvement that has taken place in infant schools since the introduction of Mr. Mundella's Code, and we are of opinion that the principles laid down in that Code, and in the instructions to inspectors, have had an admirable effect upon the education given to infants.
We think, however, that while the classification of an infant school must inevitably, to a large extent, follow the ages of the children, it is undesirable to prescribe, as is done in Art. 106 (a) ii., that the scholars must be taught suitably to their age. These words have led some inspectors to insist unduly upon age classification, though we believe they were intended to have a different effect. We think that the classification should be suitable to the intelligence, attainments, and physical development of the children, and that words suggesting any other classification should be removed from the Code.
We agree that the children in an infant school should all be taught in such a way that when they reach the age of seven or eight they should be fitted to pass out from the infant school and to receive the systematised course of instruction of the senior school, though even in the senior school we should be glad to see the methods of instruction of the lower classes, which contain, as a rule, children up to about nine years of age, of a transitional character, largely retaining some of the special methods of the infant school and forming a transition class, though under the direction of the teacher of the senior department. In towns with large schools, junior departments may often be a convenient way of organising these intermediate classes.
We are pleased to note the introduction into the Code of simple lessons on objects and on the phenomena of nature and of common life, and of appropriate and varied occupations, as a necessary part of the teaching of an infant school. The introduction of these matters, in addition to suitable instruction in the elementary subjects, the abolition of a schedule of passes for the infants from seven to eight who are taught the work of the 1st Standard, and the freedom of classification conceded by the requirement that scholars over seven years of age must, as a rule, be examined in the 1st Standard, have all done much for the improvement of infant schools.
But we are of opinion that still further liberty might be conceded, and that the truest ideal of infant school teaching requires that, at any rate for the younger infants up to five years old, and, perhaps, for many of the infants up to six years of age, direct literary instruction should be almost entirely dispensed with. We think that with these very young children the work of the infant school should be mainly formative, and should guide the spontaneous activity of the child's nature. The varied and systematised occupations, so well known in connexion with Froebel, are of the greatest value, but we should be sorry to see these insisted upon in such a way as should lead teachers to suppose that Kindergarten is a definite subject of instruction, and not a method and spirit which should not be laid aside even in the higher departments
[page 306]
of a school. We also deprecate the idea that infant schools should be mere places of orderly and systematised recreation. Children from the earliest age can take in ideas and develop much reflecting and generalising power through the concrete, especially in their conceptions of form and of number. They can also learn dexterity, accuracy, and method, and can greatly strengthen their observing faculties through the Kindergarten occupations, and through good object lessons and other means of training. But all these things require specially trained, intelligent, and sympathetic teachers, and we insist on the fact that if an infant school is to be intelligently and effectively conducted on the lines which we are suggesting, the training of infant teachers is, at the least, as important as that of the teachers of senior schools, and should have special relation to the work which they are about to undertake.
We observe with pleasure the great extension of singing by note in infant schools. In 1886-87 549,000 infants in average attendance had learnt to sing by note, against 445,000 who had only learnt to sing by ear. We attach very great importance to the teaching of singing; the children should learn both action songs and other songs, as imparting brightness and variety to the course in an infant school.
In passing from the Code to the instructions to inspectors we note with pleasure the statement, paragraph 5, "managers are at liberty to classify the scholars for the purpose of instruction in any way they think best". We should be glad to see these words transferred from the instructions to the Code. We think the instructions generally in reference to infant schools very satisfactory, but, in view of the action of some inspectors, we think the fact that the teaching of needlework to boys is optional should be more strongly emphasized.
We wish here to call attention to the time table of the infant department of the Grey stoke Place board school. City of London, approved by the Rev. T. W. Sharpe, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector for London, (Vol. I., page 540). In this time table direct literary teaching does not appear below the first two classes out of the four classes into which the school is divided.
We think it important that it should be generally made known to inspectors, some of whom are not in full sympathy with the postponement of direct literary instruction till the higher classes of an infant school, that they should not interfere directly or indirectly to press upon the teacher methods and subjects of instruction which she does not think suited to the age or mental development of the children; and that if the children are duly prepared by seven years of age for the senior school, the methods employed in the earlier classes should be deemed satisfactory.
Before leaving the subject of the curriculum and methods of infant schools we wish to refer to the valuable report lately issued by the school board for London on subjects and modes of instruction, copies of which were furnished by the school board to the Commissioners. Without pledging ourselves in detail to all the recommendations, we would testify to the great value of the report, and refer specially to the summing-up on pages 4 and 5 on the methods and objects which should be employed and pursued in infant schools.
For the small village school of not more than 60 or 70 in average attendance, we think that the curriculum for the scholars above the infant classes should include a thorough knowledge of reading, writing, and arithmetic. The children should acquire such a knowledge of their language as will enable them by the time they leave school to express themselves correctly both in speaking and in writing. They should also have acquired some familiarity with and appreciation of good composition, largely through the recitation of poetry. They should have a general knowledge of the history of their country, which might be acquired mainly through reading books. In the earlier classes the reading books should contain interesting biographies of great men and tales of heroism and noble life; in the higher classes they should read and know some popular history of their country, and especially be taught something of its present state, its relation to its colonies and dependencies, and its mode of Government, especially in those local institutions with which they are most nearly concerned. They should also have a general knowledge of geography, acquired partly through reading books of travels, partly by the constant use of maps and globes, and by illustrations drawn from the neighbourhood of the school and the county in which they live, and this general knowledge should be developed and brought into relation with the history of England and of its colonies and dependencies.
A suitable course of simple lessons in the most elementary notions of science should be given, illustrated by experiments and practical work; these would interest the children, would give variety and freshness to the school course, and would greatly stimulate their observing and reasoning faculties. Singing by note might well be a
[page 307]
part of the curriculum in all schools. If properly taught it takes no longer than singing by ear. The boys in such a school should be well grounded in drawing, especially of a geometrical and industrial character, and the girls should be taught needlework. Suitable physical exercises and games should be constantly used, both for the boys and girls, and a well-chosen school, library should aid at home the love of knowledge and the mental activity which should be awakened by the school.
Such a course, even in a small school, would probably necessitate the presence of more than one teacher. But where the head teacher is really competent and well-trained, and no others should be tolerated, there will probably be found monitors or unindentured pupil teachers, who after the age of 13 will stay on, at any rate for two or three years, and whose services might be recognised in very small rural schools, and in them alone.
The evidence of Mr. Matthew Arnold shows that the difficulties of small schools and of large classes are not found insuperable on the Continent, where teachers are able single-handed to teach effectively a much larger number of subjects than are attempted in this country and with larger numbers allotted, at least in Germany, to the individual teacher. We think, however, that in these small schools the present sub-division of classes according to the existing standards is excessive, and that a division of the scholars, exclusive of the infants, into three classes, the work of each of which might represent on an average a two years' course of study, would be more satisfactory. A curriculum suited to village schools might be so framed that fuller and more accurate knowledge of the work required from the class might be expected from those working in it for a second year.
If a curriculum, such as we have described, were laid down for a village school, we should not generally be in favour of any wide departure from it by the taking up of extra subjects. At the same time where the managers are willing further to strengthen the staff, and where from the rural character of the district there are few opportunities of frequenting larger schools we think that, with the approval of the inspector, other subjects might be encouraged for the children in the highest class of the school, especially if the parents are willing to permit the hours of study to be somewhat lengthened for these elder children. Then such instruction as cookery for girls, some use of tools for boys or some teaching of the principles of agriculture, or a little mathematics, or mensuration and field surveying might be found of great advantage to the sons of farmers or of those other residents in villages who are willing to keep their children at school till 14 or 14½, and yet cannot send them to a town for their education. Where a school gives such further instruction with the approval of the inspector, some further grant might be made towards the extra cost, but this approval should be conditional on the ordinary work of the school being thoroughly well done.
In all cases it should be clearly understood that though the Government inspection is limited to the curriculum required or approved by the Education Department, yet that the right of managers to teach any other subjects they may think fit, on their own responsibility, is not interfered with. The Code is the limit of Government interference, not a limitation of the right of managers to introduce subjects of instruction.
Having described the course of teaching which we think applicable to the smaller village schools, we proceed to consider the suitable curriculum for larger schools, where the departments are subdivided.
We agree with the present requirement of the Code that where there are 20 or more children below seven years of age, they must be taught as a separate class, with a separate teacher; we think that a class of 40 infants should not only be under an adult teacher, but the teacher should be one of tested competency, and not merely approved by the inspector.
Where the elder children are more than 60 in average attendance, we are of opinion that the curriculum already described might be enforced with more fullness and thoroughness of knowledge, and where the children in a senior department exceed a hundred, a further plan of studies of a somewhat more detailed character might well be laid down.
Where a department is large enough to employ two assistant teachers, and where consequently the highest class, corresponding to the 5th, 6th, and 7th Standards, has a teacher to itself, specific subjects may be taken up and taught with advantage, and these, though not insisted upon, might well be encouraged. This principle is recognised in the present instructions to inspectors, sections 45, 46, where it is laid down that it is not desirable as a general rule that specific subjects should be attempted where the staff of the school is small, or the scholars in Standards 5-7 do not form a class large enough to justify the withdrawal of the principal teacher from the teaching
[page 308]
of the rest of the school; but in large schools, and those which are in favourable circumstances, the scholars of Standard 5 and upwards may be encouraged to attempt one or more specific subjects which the managers may deem most appropriate to the industrial and other needs of the district.
Programmes of instruction suited to the various classes of schools we have indicated should be drawn up by the Department, and schemes of progressive teaching should be set forth in lieu of the present standards, and with much greater fullness of detail. At the same time we think that there should be a certain freedom of choice and possible alternative courses which managers and teachers should be permitted to follow after consultation with the inspector.
But in addition to the schools we have described, which would cover nearly all the ground of elementary instruction, the school provision would not be complete without the more systematic supply of what have been described to us as higher elementary schools. These have been established in many towns, mostly by the school boards, hut in some cases by voluntary managers. They are not uniform in type, as sometimes they include all standards, and sometimes they are limited to children in the higher standards. They also usually keep on their scholars for a year or two after passing the 7th Standard, and give a mainly scientific education in connexion with the South Kensington examinations.
These schools are an important and necessary element for the completion of the popular schools of the country. They enable the scholars, whose parents are willing to keep them at school till 14½ or 15, to get more thorough teaching than they could possibly get in the ordinary schools, where the highest class is probably made up of children in more than one year of school progress. Appliances, too, for the teaching of drawing and of science, and to some extent school workshops, can better be supplied in connexion with a few central schools than at the ordinary local schools.
A detailed account of some of these schools will be found in our chapter on technical instruction, to which and to the evidence we refer for a statement of the kind of work done in them.
We are of opinion that in any school district where the population, within a radius of two miles, amounts to 10,000, there should be such a higher elementary school, or a higher department attached to an ordinary elementary school, with a curriculum suited to children up to 14 or 15 years of age. In more populous districts these schools should be increased. In districts where from the sparseness of the population such schools or departments cannot easily be established, children should be encouraged to continue their education beyond the ordinary school curriculum by the payment of grants on the report of Her Majesty's inspector that the best arrangements have been made for their efficient instruction, having regard to the difficulties and circumstances of the case, and that they have received such instruction; such an extension of education would be of great value, not only to those who are preparing for the various industries of life, but it would also secure a better class of scholars, who in the rural schools might furnish paid monitors or pupil teachers in aid of the head teacher.
We may note that at present the curriculum of our English schools assumes either less ability in the scholars, or less teaching skill and readiness to promote education in the teachers and managers than the Scotch Code. Thus specific subjects are taught in Scotland from the 4th Standard upwards. In England now only from the 5th; and yet it will be found that the amount of work required in the various stages is no more in England than in Scotland if the two schedules be compared. Indeed some of the Scotch subjects include more matter; thus, in mathematics the Scotch Code includes algebra and Euclid, whereas in England the two subjects are divided, and if we look to the extent to which these subjects are taught in the two countries we find that in Scotland, out of 381,000 children above seven years of age in average attendance, nearly 100,000 passes in specific subjects were recorded. In England, out of 2,464,000 above seven years of age, 56,341 specific passes were recorded. Had the same number of passes proportionally been obtained in England as in Scotland there would have been 640,000 passes instead of 66,341.
Again, of 2,445,562 children in England examined in the Standards in 1885-86, 393,289 were examined in Standard V and upwards, or 16 per cent. In Scotland, of 373,838 children examined in Standards, 78,682 were examined in Standard V and upwards, or 21 per cent.
It may be noted, that as in England children over seven in infant schools are not recorded as passing, and as the children in Scotland who have passed the 6th Standard,
[page 309]
and who numbered at the least more than 6,000, are also not enumerated, the disproportion in the higher standards in favour of Scotland is still greater.
It is obvious that a liberal curriculum implies, if it is to be really taught, a staff of teachers efficient in quality and sufficient in number. We have already dealt with pupil teachers and with training colleges, and with the qualifications that should be required of teachers. But apart from the qualifications of teachers, the sub-division of the school into classes makes it necessary that there should be more teachers in proportion to the scholars taught than is now the case according to the minimum of the Code.
This has been so thoroughly recognised by managers that we find the schools of the country generally have a staff 49 per cent in excess of the Code minimum, and this liberal staffing is common to all descriptions of schools, though the proportions of excess vary somewhat between one class and another. There was a very general agreement also among the witnesses who came before us that the Code requirements as to staff might be materially increased. We, therefore, have no hesitation in making a recommendation which, in nearly every case, will simply bring the Code requirements nearer to the practice of school managers.
We do not propose anything so sweeping as was suggested by some witnesses. Thus, the Rev. T. W. Sharpe said the number of a class should never exceed 40, and for the highest class in the school and for the lowest class of infants you ought not to have more than 25 to one teacher. Mr. Matthew Arnold said that with a sound system of elementary teaching a competent teacher might have a class of 50 scholars on the roll. This would be equal to not quite 45 in average attendance. Canon Daniel, Miss Manley, and others complained of the excessive size of the classes in London and the consequent exhaustion and breakdown of the teachers. Mr. Wild would be contented with classes of 50 in average attendance for an adult teacher. Mr. Grove would give 25 children to a pupil teacher, 40 to an ex-pupil teacher, and 60 to a certificated teacher. Miss Whittenbury, an infant schoolmistress with a school of 500-600 children, would be content to give each certificated assistant an average of 60 children, if the head teacher were not counted on the staff.
Miss Castle, speaking of a small mixed rural school of less than 60, said assistance is absolutely necessary, but would prefer her own monitors to an assistant. Miss Castle's monitors had passed the 7th Standard, and are, therefore, substantially junior pupil-teachers. Mr. Scotson would count an ex-pupil teacher for 40, a certificated assistant for 60, and leave the head teacher free. Evidence might be multiplied as to the need for largely reducing the number of scholars assigned to a teacher by the Code; and it is also generally admitted that the smaller the school the larger proportionally must be the staff. We are of opinion that though in large schools, with thoroughly efficient trained assistants, classes of 60 in average attendance may be satisfactorily taught, yet that classes of 50 would be far better, and that it would be more easy to educate as well as to instruct them. The smallest schools would be the better for some help afforded to the head teacher, if that help were only a paid monitor.
We recommend that henceforward a head teacher count for 40 instead of 60, that a certificated assistant count for 60 instead of 80, and an ex-pupil teacher for 50, a pupil-teacher in the third or fourth year for 30, in the second year for 20, and that candidates and first year pupil-teachers be not reckoned on the staff. As we are of opinion that the junior pupil-teachers should be largely relieved from school work for the purposes of study, we think that wherever pupil teachers are employed they should be employed in pairs, so that the senior one may mainly be used to help in school work.
If the existing staff were reckoned on the basis we have suggested, it would, in fact, supposing it to be rateably distributed, be about sufficient for the children in average attendance, and we may, therefore, suppose that the only schools in which the proposed computation would make a serious difference are those which are glaringly understaffed.
Closely connected with the question of the staff of schools is the question of special teachers, such as those referred to in Art. 98 of the Code, and of local inspectors.
We are of opinion that even if the teachers were far better qualified for their work than many of them now are, there would still be subjects, such as drawing, science, cookery, in which the services of a special instructor would be of great value, and we think that the managers of schools would be greatly aided in their management if
[page 310]
they had the services of persons of scholastic experience to inspect their schools, report on the teaching, and help them to strengthen the weak places and remedy defects by anticipation, which if uncorrected might result in an unfavourable report from Her Majesty's inspector. We think that the services of such experts would be especially valuable to the managers of voluntary schools, who, as a rule, are more isolated and have less the advantage of comparing one school with another than school boards. We therefore recommend that among the various ways of aiding schools from the Government grant, help be given, not to exceed half of the salary of any such organising teachers or inspectors as may be appointed by a school board or a combination of school boards, or of voluntary managers, subject to such regulations as the Education Department may frame from time to time.
Before leaving the question of the curriculum in our elementary schools we should note one or two considerations which apply to exceptional cases.
We must first notice the certified efficient schools which are still recognised by the Department as part of the available school supply of the country.
The Annual Report of the Education Department for 1886-7, p. 259, gives 352 schools, containing 376 departments which were examined for certificates of efficiency under the Elementary Education Act, 1876, sect. 48, for the year ending August 31, 1886.
These schools had 30,597 accommodation, 13,678 scholars in average attendance, and 16,375 scholars present at the inspection. Of these departments 331 were found to be efficient, 24 conditionally efficient, and 21 not efficient.
In reference to the standard by which the inspectors are required to test these schools with a view to determining their efficiency, the department issued a circular dated 8th February 1877, which will be found in the Blue Book for 1876-7, page 249, in which it is stated "As regards the standard of instruction fixed by the rules, my Lords are aware that it is a very low one, and that it can be accepted only as a starting point for future improvement. They have taken it with very slight modifications from the test of efficiency prescribed by the instructions issued to the inspectors who, under the Act of 1870, carried out the enquiry into the general school provision of the country. It is obvious that as the object of the recognition of the new class of schools in question is to secure for children who do not attend public elementary schools, such instruction in the first four standards of the Code as will qualify them to attain standards of proficiency under the Act of 1876, enabling them to go to work, it will be the duty of the managers so to raise the character of the teaching in their schools as at least to keep pace with the standards of proficiency required in successive years by that Act as a condition of employment. My Lords must therefore expressly reserve to themselves the power to require a higher standard of instruction from time to time from those schools which are to be continued in the list of certified efficient schools."*
The standard of instruction will be found on page 251 - (b). As regards the elder children 50 per cent of the number of scholars above seven years of age in average attendance during the previous year will be individually examined in reading, writing, and elementary arithmetic; those from seven to eight in Standard I of the Code of 1870, those from eight to ten in Standard I of the Code of 1877, and those above ten in Standard II, or a higher standard of the same Code (1877).
One half of the children examined ought to pass in two subjects.
One half of the children above ten ought to pass in two subjects.
One half of the children so passing ought to pass in arithmetic.
In reference to this circular, which still remains in force, we may remark that in ordinary schools the number presented for examination slightly exceeds the average attendance. Thus the passing of half the children examined in two subjects in a certified efficient school is equal to one-sixth of the children presented passing in an ordinary school, or a percentage of passes of less than 17 per cent. For example, of 100 children in average attendance in a certified efficient school, 50 only have to be examined; only 25 of these need to pass in two subjects; these will make 50 "passes". In an ordinary school of 100 there are more than 300 passes possible, since the number examined is slightly in excess of the average attendance. When we bear in mind that 85 or 86 per cent is now the average throughout the country, this standard would seem ludicrous if it were not shameful. But moreover the recognition of the old 1st Standard, formerly applicable to children between six and seven, and the
*Note. No higher standard has been applied since then.
[page 311]
requirement of no standard higher than the second, makes the whole of this test of efficiency perfectly worthless.
It may be said that very few children are affected by this circular, and by these schools, and that most of the certified efficient schools do much better than the minimum of the circular. But we are of opinion that no hamlet, however obscure and small, should he liable to the injustice of having a school such as is contemplated as possible by this circular, and that the time has come when the certified efficient schools should no longer be included in the recognised school supply of the country unless they conform in every respect to the requirements imposed upon public elementary schools, and satisfy the inspector, year by year, after a searching examination, that they come up to the standard of a good school.
In the greater part of Wales the language interposes many difficulties in the way of teaching according to a Code which is drawn up for English speaking children.
We think, in addition to agreeing with the recommendations of our colleagues as to the use to be made of the Welsh language in teaching, that the peculiarities and difficulties of the Welsh-speaking population should be continually borne in mind in conducting the Government examination, and in any modifications of the regulations which may be hereafter made by the central educational authority.
The deaf-mutes and blind are an exceptional class for whom special provision should be made, but as another Commission has been appointed to consider their case we make no recommendation in reference to them.
In districts where half-time employment prevails largely, special modifications of the curriculum should be introduced either by spreading the progress of the scholars over a longer period or by some simplification of the programme. The difficulties of half-timers will be largely met by educating them in separate departments, as has been done to a considerable extent at Bradford, and by furnishing such schools with a specially strong staff of teachers.
We are also of opinion that the circumstances of evening schools make special schemes of instruction necessary for them.
There is a question closely connected with the curriculum, and that is the due notification of any changes in it in ample time for schools to make the necessary preparations. We think the Code should every year be published and in the hands of persons interested in education for the full time that it is required to be laid before Parliament, and that no serious changes in school teaching and organisation should be required without the interposition of a reasonable time for preparation.
All extensions of the curriculum should be introduced gradually, and schools taking them up for first time should have great indulgence shown them for a year or two as to the higher stages.
CHAPTER 9
TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION*
We understand by "technical instruction" instruction in the principles and practice of domestic, commercial, agricultural, and industrial work. This instruction is given partly in schools and partly in workshops and elsewhere, and we have to consider what portion of such technical instruction can be properly and efficiently given in our elementary schools.
Such education is now largely given in our girls' schools; probably fully four hours a week are given on an average to needlework. Upwards of £44,000 was paid for its teaching in infant schools, and in the senior schools it was taken as a class subject in 6,809 departments, having an average attendance of 681,080 girls, while in 10,493
*It will he observed that there are several passages in this chapter identical with passages in the report of our colleagues.
In explanation of this we must state that this chapter is, with a few alterations, based upon the draft submitted in the first instance to the Commission by our Chairman and closely corresponds with it. That draft was, however, as will appear from the minutes of the decisions of the Commission of 29th November 1887, set aside in favour of a draft proposed by Canon Gregory.
In the latter were afterwards incorporated several detached passages, in which we concur, taken from the original chapter proposed by our Chairman, and we are of opinion that they are more in place in their original context than in the chapter adopted by the majority of our colleagues, which is in many respects animated by a different spirit; we, therefore, prefer to present these passages a second time rather than mutilate the chapter, to the unity and completeness of which they are essential.
[page 312]
departments, having an average of 454,197 girls, it was paid for at 1s under Article 109 (c) of the Code. As 1,143,782 girls were in average attendance in senior departments of schools inspected during the year 1885-6, it follows that nearly all the departments in our public elementary schools satisfied the inspectors in reference to needlework instruction, and that nearly 60 per cent of all the girls in average attendance were taught according to the Schedule, and took needlework as a class subject. In addition to this, cookery is being taught in an increasing number of girls' schools. Domestic economy, which till the last few years was an obligatory specific subject in girls' schools, if specific subjects were taken at all, still holds a high place among these subjects. Drawing, which is the foundation of nearly all technical instruction, is almost entirely banished from girls' schools as a subject of examination, and the recent requirement that, if drawing is to be examined, cookery must also be taught, will probably complete the almost total exclusion from girls' schools of drawing as a subject of examination.
In boys' schools drawing has had its place in the school curriculum seriously disturbed by the recent removal of its examination and payment, first from the Science and Art Department to the Education Department, and then back again. By the former Department with which its oversight now lies, a graduated syllabus of instruction from the lowest to the highest standard has recently been put forth, which there is reason to think may lead to drawing being more systematically and satisfactorily taught, and to its gradual introduction into all those boys' schools, which are under trained teachers, or teachers that have in some other way obtained a certificate for teaching drawing. But we regret that the examination is not at present conducted in such a way as to secure that due attention is given to good methods of teaching drawing, nor is any estimate made by a competent examiner of the success and ability of the various teachers. The Commissioners on Technical Education recommended that it should be part of the necessary curriculum of all aided schools, and should be incorporated with the writing. The returns furnished in reply to our inquiries by our representatives abroad, show that in the countries of the continent, drawing is, as a rule, an essential part of the instruction given both to boys and girls in the primary schools.
Beyond drawing, with very few exceptions, nothing has been done in our elementary schools in the direction of technical instruction, so far as it consists of the training of the hand and eye. Some small attempt has been made in the Manchester Board School, held in the former Lancastrian School, to teach boys the use of tools, but neither the present nor the past chairman of that board could give us much information as to how the experiment was answering. Mr. Birley seemed to desire something very like a half-time system in which not merely handiness should be acquired, but the rudiments of a definite trade. At the same time he considers that not much can be done in the matter of handicraft, because the children are so young when they leave school. The London School Board has had some instruction given in the use of tools in the Beethoven Street school, Queen's Park Estate, Kensal New Town, which will be noticed later. This instruction was given to the sixth and seventh standard boys by the school-keeper, who is a carpenter, in a small shed or workshop put up in the playground. The auditor surcharged the board with the expenditure, though it is hard to say why; since, though the instruction was not paid for under the Code, there is nothing by law to limit the discretion of managers in giving other secular instruction, and in former days the Department used to encourage this kind of teaching by direct grants.
In reference to this instruction at the Beethoven Street School, Mr. Tate, the head master, reports of the second year's work,|| "Since I had the pleasure of submitting a report on the work of this class in June 1886, the interest in this subject, both inside and outside the schooL has increased at a rapid rate. The class which continues to be managed in the same way as last year has met 78 times, and 769 attendances have been made by the scholars, so that on the average about 10 boys have been present each lesson, or 20 boys have on the average received instruction in manual work each week. These boys have been selected entirely from the Seventh Standard, and the privilege has been confined to this, the highest standard, in the hope that the boys may be encouraged to remain at school after they have passed the Sixth Standard. Only one boy in this class has made late attendances during the year, and he has an occupation for a part of the day as a newspaper boy, and he has only
||London School Board, School Management Report for year ending March 1887.
[page 313]
been late twice. The boys, after some preliminary practice in making various joints have been engaged in making specimens of the following articles, which are or may be used in the board schools. Each article is the work of one boy or of two working together. In the latter case a duller boy has been paired with one more expert.
Needlework Class - box having a tray and a lid.
Kindergarten Class - box having a tray and a lid.
Kindergarten Class - box for coloured beads, with six divisions.
Double pen trays, long enough to take 12-inch rulers.
Time-table frames, 17 in. by 12 in., with wooden back.
The operations of gluing, staining, sizing, and varnishing have each been performed by the boys.
The school-keeper, who teaches the carpentry to the class, has attended since January the lectures at the City and Guilds of London Technical Institute, South Kensington, on Saturday mornings, so that he may benefit by the methods pursued there of explaining and illustrating processes, and learn the course of work which the professor recommends. I have also joined the lectures, and I find them of the greatest value."
In Birmingham a nearer approach to a technical school is established, of which more will be said hereafter, and in Sheffield much good work has been done at the central school, which is properly a higher elementary school.
Though technical training does not exist for boys to the extent that needlework and cookery supply technical training for girls, we had a great deal of evidence as to the educative effect of science teaching in our elementary schools, and, no doubt, science, especially mathematical, mechanical, and physical science, are not only the foundations but an essential part of much technical teaching, if it is to be worth anything. We have already recommended that lessons in common objects in the lower standards leading up to a knowledge of elementary science in the higher standards should be a part of the curriculum in all schools. Great pains will have to be taken in the training colleges to secure that all teachers henceforth are duly prepared for giving this instruction; but even when this has been done, and when our teachers have nearly all had a college training, we cannot, as a rule, expect the ordinary elementary master to be necessarily a good science teacher. He has so much to do, and his attention is so distracted from science, even if he made some progress in its study at college, that he cannot be depended on for clear, vivid, and simple lectures, and for neatness and certainty in the performance of experiments; and these are qualities especially necessary in one who expounds any experimental science to such boys as attend our elementary schools. Hence the practice has sprung up in some of the larger school boards of engaging the services of a skilled lecturer or science demonstrator, who teaches the subject in the various schools in presence of the class master, who, having heard the lesson, is able to recapitulate it, and see that the boys thoroughly understand what has been taught them.
At Birmingham this system has been at work since 1880, under the school board. The demonstrator, or one of his assistants, visits each boys' and girls' department once a fortnight. He visits four departments a day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon. The class teacher is present, and in the interval between the demonstrator's visits he repeats and enforces with further illustration the subjects taught, requires written answers to the examination questions, and submits the papers to the demonstrator. Two and a half hours a fortnight are given in the schools to science, the demonstrator's lesson taking three-quarters of an hour. The boys are taught mechanics, or elementary natural philosophy, the girls, domestic economy, considered as the application of chemistry and physiology to the explanation of the matters of home life. In a few departments a second specific subject is taken; with the boys, electricity and magnetism; with the girls, animal physiology. In all boys' and girls' schools this scientific teaching is given to all above the Fourth Standard. The total cost of the staff of demonstrators and assistants, &c. is £985 12s. The efficiency of the teaching is testified to by Professor Poynting, professor of physics at Mason's College, Birmingham, whose report Dr. Crosskey quotes as follows: After mentioning that he has examined for four years, and after giving detailed comments on the kind of work done, he says: "My experience, I think, fully justifies the opinion that the science teaching is most valuable, the training
[page 314]
of the boys giving results which I should never have supposed possible before I began to examine." The total number of children under instruction under the Birmingham School Board is 2,700 boys in mechanics, and 550 in magnetism and electricity, 2,200 girls in domestic economy, and 100 in animal physiology; and the percentage of passes in the examinations by Her Majesty's Inspector is 88.5. Dr. Crosskey also states that the masters of the schools find that this instruction in science conduces to general intelligence, and improves the general work of the school, and believes that the foundation laid in the elementary school prepares the way for the advanced work done at the Midland Institute. This scientific instruction is found in Birmingham to be desirable, not merely as the foundation of technical training, but also as a part of general education, a subject with which we have already dealt.
The Birmingham School Board contend, in reference to this scientific teaching, that if it is to be properly appreciated and encouraged, the examination on behalf of the Government should be mainly oral, and not written, and other witnesses insist on the need of thorough competence on the part of the examiner. Dr. Crosskey would stimulate this teaching of science by payment, not so much for results, as towards the salary of the special demonstrator.
In Birmingham there is what is called the special Seventh Standard school. This is, to a certain extent, a technical school; none are admitted till they have passed the Sixth Standard, and it is laid out for a three years' course, one year in the Seventh Standard and two years working in connexion with South Kensington. The subjects taught are reading, writing, and arithmetic according to the Code; mathematics, plane geometry, and projection, machine construction and drawing, magnetism and electricity, theoretical and practical chemistry, freehand drawing, and the manipulation of wood-working tools. These subjects are not universally taught to all the scholars; they are divided into three divisions, machine construction, chemistry, and electricity. The hours of work during the week, 30, are divided as follows:
In the machine construction division, mathematics 12 hours; projection 5 hours; machine construction 4 hours: electricity 5 hours; freehand drawing 2 hours; workshop 2 hours.
In the chemistry division, mathematics 12 hours; projection 4 hours; theoretical chemistry 6 hours; practical chemistry 4 hours; freehand 2 hours; workshop 2 hours.
In the electricity division, mathematics 12 hours, projection 4 hours; theoretical chemistry 5 hours; electricity 5 hours; freehand 2 hours; workshop 2 hours.
In the second year the scholars spend three hours in the workshop, 1½ hours during the school time and 1½ hours in the evening. The object of the workshop instruction is to teach the meaning, nature, and use of workshop tools, and to give manipulative skill in their employment, together with information regarding the principles of tools and the properties of the materials used. The schoolroom is connected with the workshop, and a practical mechanic is employed, who is engaged to give workshop instruction, and who supplies the head master with specimens of work, which are explained by the latter in the drawing room. The head master explains the connexion of the parts one with another, teaches the scholars to make a drawing to scale, and shows the required views of the model under examination. The scholar goes to the workshop and makes an article from the drawing to scale; this completed, he measures it, and makes a second drawing of it, still working to scale. It should be noted that the time table given only applies to those who have passed the Seventh Standard. Boys working in the Seventh Standard are required, in consequence of an agreement with the Department, to give 20 hours a week to the three R's. This restriction is said to hamper the free and efficient working of the school.
Mr. Hance, the clerk to the school board for Liverpool, also gave evidence in reference to the teaching of science by a circulating demonstrator. This plan was introduced by the Liverpool board as early as 1876. It was first suggested by Col. Donelly, of the Science and Art Department, and its main outlines were settled under his and Professor Huxley's advice. The subjects chosen were elementary physics for boys, and domestic economy for girls. The results appear to be less thorough in Liverpool than in Birmingham, for last year out of 1,214 boys presented
[page 315]
in mechanics 68 per cent passed, of 906 girls presented in domestic economy 63 per cent passed. The Liverpool board, like the Birmingham board, lay great stress on the importance of the examination being oral, and they consider that, with the wider use of oral examination, we might return to the Fourth Standard for the beginning of specific subjects. Dr. Olive Lodge, Professor of Physics in the Liverpool University College, gives a very favourable report on the attainments of the boys whom he examined.
We observe that Mr. Hance, the Clerk of the Liverpool School Board, while in favour of introducing manual employments in the nature of specific subjects into boys' schools, is hardly prepared to call what he wants by so ambitious a name as technical training.
The School Board for London has more recently adopted the same plan of circulating demonstrators for science, though not on so large a scale, having regard to the number of children in their schools. A demonstrator was appointed about three years ago to work in the East End of London; he had under his supervision and instruction upwards of 2,000 boys studying mechanics. The work proved so successful that the board has appointed three more demonstrators. The Chairman of the London School Board gives evidence strongly in favour of the plan; and Mr. Wilks, for several years chairman of the school management committee of the London School Board, supports strongly the same opinion, with this reservation, that he considers this scientific instruction, when given only in the upper standards, to be incomplete, as lacking continuousness, and not growing sufficiently out of what has gone before.
The last report of Mr. Grieve, science demonstrator to the School Board for London, is published in the yearly report of the School Management Committee for the year ending March 1887, page 31. He gives the following questions set by one of Her Majesty's Inspectors on paper to the Fifth Standard, that is to boys ranging, as a rule, between 11 and 12:
Question 1. Impenetrability and elasticity do not apply to atoms. Explain this, and give illustrations.
Question 2. In what bodies may you say that molecular attraction is balanced by the repulsive force of heat?
Question 3. There is a force which keeps solid bodies from falling to powder, and another force which is the cause of their breaking into particles. What are these forces?
Question 4. A nail driven into a piece of wood is not a case of penetrability. Explain this.
Question 5. Compressibility is due to the approach of the molecules. It is a proof of porosity. Explain the words in italics.
Question 6. What do you understand by (1) molecular attraction; (2) chemical affinity?
Question 7. There are two kinds of forces to be found. Explain this, and give examples.
The demonstrator comments on the disappointment resulting from such a style of examination on paper to boys of the age mentioned, and suggests that Standard V should be examined orally. He quotes from the Code, "That instruction in the science subjects shall be given mainly by experiment and illustration. If these subjects are taught to children by definition and verbal description instead of making them exercise their own powers of observation, they will be worthless as means of education", and he adds, "I have therefore felt it my duty to call attention to this matter lest, after all, the teaching of the subject might in the end develop into a cram". At the present time (March 1887) he says, there are 2,201 boys under instruction in the 20 schools, 1,168 from the Tower Hamlets division, and 1,033 from the Hackney division. Pieces of apparatus similar to that used in the experiments continue to be made by the boys attending the classes. At Teesdale Street, Hackney, one of the managers has shown great interest in the subject by offering money prizes to the boys who should make the best model of pieces of apparatus used in the demonstration, and a great desire has been expressed in several other schools for the establishment of workshops where boys showing an aptitude for the use of tools might have the opportunity of constructing pieces of apparatus for themselves.
[page 316]
In Leeds the board has a science demonstrator and an assistant, who teach at their central higher grade school and at 15 other schools.
But in spite of these scattered efforts, on the whole it appears that hardly anything is done in this country in the way of workshop instruction for boys, and little in linear drawing, still less in that scientific education which is the foundation and most essential part of such technical instruction as can be given in the school.
There are a few higher grade elementary schools where a considerable number of boys stay on beyond the Seventh Standard. The three principal ones brought under our notice were the Deansgate Central School of the Manchester School Board, concerning which the evidence of Mr. Scotson, the head-master, is full of interest, and which is also dealt with in the evidence of Mr. Nunn, the present, and Mr. Herbert Birley, the late, chairman of the Manchester School Board; St. Thomas', Charterhouse, Church of England School, whose head-master, Mr. Charles Smith, gave evidence; and the Sheffield Central School, referred to in the evidence of the Rev. J. Gilmore, chairman of the Sheffield School Board. These and similar schools keep boys after they have passed the Seventh Standard and instruct them in science, earning grants from the Science and Art Department, and there is a tendency to increase their number; but they are not as yet at all an important element in our national system of education, though many years ago they were recognised as needed, and were established in some few cases, as will be found in the Rev. D. J. Stewart's evidence, where reference is made to a school established at Bishop Wearmouth, and noticed by him in his report of 1854, with the following curriculum:
"Subjects of instruction: reading, writing, English grammar, history, geography; the elements of geology, arithmetic (pure and commercial), the principles of book- keeping, geometry, mechanics, and mechanism, the elements of chemistry and vocal music," and in addition to that there was a higher course, for which a higher fee was charged.
Some persons think that the principles of agriculture might well be taught in our rural schools. Sometimes something is done by means of school gardens to interest the boys; and among the specific subjects recognised in the Code are the principles of agriculture. Sir Patrick Keenan, the Resident Commissioner of Education for Ireland, informed us that farms are attached to 70 of the Irish primary schools, and that the number is likely to increase. We had, however, no evidence except from Sir Patrick Keenan to show how far the teaching of this subject by the schoolmaster could be made a fitting preparation for practical agriculture.
Meantime we have much evidence to show that on the continent great efforts are being made to give a more extended elementary education, and to lead up through the elementary schools to technical instruction. Sir Philip Magnus, one of the members of the Commission on technical education, described not only what was done in higher elementary schools, but also in ordinary elementary schools abroad. There is so much evidence in the report of that Commission on the activity of continental governments, and on their liberality in this direction, that we need not repeat at length what is already recorded. There is much condensed information on this subject in the evidence of Mr. H. S. Cunynghame, and there is no doubt that if their practice is to be any guide to us, they are all extensively engaged in developing this side of their national system.
We think it right, however, to call attention to the fact that if we except the system of Slöjd, in Sweden, and the manual instruction in some French schools, there is, according to the reports of our representatives abroad, no workshop instruction in any of the continental elementary schools, and the omission of its introduction in countries like Prussia, Saxony, and Switzerland, in which elementary education is so well understood and so advanced, would indicate that the results of its introduction into our own elementary schools ought to be carefully watched, for the present at any rate, and that it should not be allowed to thrust aside the older and well tried branches of technical instruction, and least of all, drawing. Workshop instruction will be given with the greatest advantage in the higher elementary schools where the scholars are trained first to make accurate drawings of the objects which they afterwards execute in the proper materials.
Some persons are opposed to all such expansion of elementary education, on the ground that there is a danger of our entering on the field of secondary education which has not as yet been recognised in this country as a matter of national concern and
[page 317]
obligation. It does not lie within the scope of this Commission to consider secondary education, except so far as it is directly connected with primary education. But we are naturally called upon to form an opinion as to what are the true limits of elementary education, and how far technical education falls within it.
No doubt the commencement of all knowledge is elementary, and even secondary schools must have elementary classes. The true distinction in our judgment between primary and secondary education is the probable age at which the systematic instruction of the scholar is likely to cease. For ordinary elementary schools, and for the great mass of the scholars, the curriculum should be one which can be completed by the time a scholar reaches the age of 14; though even in connexion with a strictly elementary school system, a somewhat higher type of instruction is needed in night schools or continuation schools, to enable those youths of 15 and 16, who are earning their living, to acquire, if they are willing, something more of culture and of thorough knowledge than was possible in the elementary day school. The law has made the age of 13 the ordinary age at which compulsory attendance at school ceases, and has fixed the limit of 14 as the ordinary higher limit of school attendance in the day school by fixing 14 as the normal lower limit of age for the night school, and by naming the age of 14 in the definition of "a child" in the Act of 1876. There are, however, a few scholars whose ordinary day school education might properly be extended for about one year more. Such are especially boys and girls who intend to be pupil-teachers, whose minimum age of apprenticeship must be 14 years completed, and who will often be 14½ or 15 years of age when the engagement commences, especially since the Department has introduced the alternative plan of dating indentures from the 1st January as well as from the school year. There are also many of the more well-to-do class who use the elementary schools, such as clerks, shopkeepers, farmers, foremen, overlookers, warehousemen, to say nothing of still poorer persons with promising children, who gladly make an effort to secure for their children an extra year's schooling, and who are entitled to ask that the educational system of the country shall, as far as possible, co-operate with their wise desire. Without discussing the question of higher elementary schools generally, there is no doubt that a school like the Birmingham Seventh Standard school, or the Sheffield Central School, if well conducted must be of the greatest value to the more intelligent artizans and to the trade and industry of the town and district, and similar technical schools for the lower ranks of the commercial classes would be as valuable as those for manufacturers. In the commercial technical school we should desire book-keeping, shorthand, French and German, business letter writing, precis writing, and a knowledge of commercial geography to be added to a literary knowledge of the English language. Such an education, continued up to the age of 15 in special schools, would naturally carry forward and complete the school life of the picked children in the elementary schools of our large commercial towns.
But in discussing the introduction of this special and technical instruction care must be taken not to introduce it too soon in school life, lest the general instruction should be interfered with. The Birmingham board have fixed the passing of the Sixth Standard as the lower limit for entrance into their special school. Manchester and Sheffield have not been as strictly exclusive, and in many towns, schools pass under the name of higher elementary merely because they charge a 9d fee, and consequently get scholars of a rather richer class than the average school population. Whether our existing school system and the ordinary curriculum of the Code is the wisest is a separate question, but whatever the ordinary course of instruction ought to be, it should be carried so far as to secure the thorough grounding of the scholar before he is encouraged to take up a more special course which might encroach on the time needed for this general education. It is, however, urged by many persons, that without giving anything like technical instruction to the lower classes of the schools we might early in school life accustom boys to the use of their hands, and introduce some work for them which should bear some relation to the needlework and cookery of the girls. It is said that much has been done in the infant schools by means of the kindergarten occupations to educate the hand and eye, and develop the whole nature of the child, and it is a pity that from seven years old the boys should lose all this and be limited from that time till they leave school to a merely literary education. If drawing, and especially drawing to scale, and from models, were made a necessary part of the school curriculum, as it is in the educated countries of the continent, this object would be obtained to some extent, and such drawing should be required in any alteration of our Code. The evidence of the witnesses who came before us,
[page 318]
so far as they spoke on the subject of drawing, was practically unanimous in its favour as one of the subjects in our elementary course.
But beyond drawing and elementary science there is a wish among many that some practical instruction in industries and the use of tools such as we have described should enter into the school curriculum. In the 10 counties to which our Circular A was sent to managers and to school boards, out of 3,759 voluntary managers who returned answers, 770 expressed a wish there should be some training in industry or the use of tools, and of 385 school boards in the same counties 122 were favourable. Nor would it be fair to conclude that those who did not express themselves favourable were hostile, for many might be unwilling to commit themselves on a subject they had not fully considered. In the case of the circulars sent to head teachers, 2,529 schools sent answers, and 711 head teachers, or 28 per cent, approved of teaching industries or the use of tools. It is evident from these returns that if it were thought desirable to recognise or encourage this kind of teaching, there are a great many among those actively engaged, either in managing, or in teaching our elementary schools, who are favourable to it. But there are several difficulties in the way. First of all, who is to teach - is it to be the teacher, or a mechanic? In most cases the teacher is unable to teach from not knowing how to handle tools, the mechanic from not knowing how to manage children.
In Sweden the system of Slöjd, which is being largely introduced, and which aims at developing handiness and accuracy through the use of tools, is taught by the teachers outside of the regular school hours as a voluntary subject, for which they are paid extra, and they learn it at a special training college. In France the manual instruction is given by a mechanic.
Whatever instruction of this kind is to be given in our schools, it would not be applicable to boys under 10 years of age; there would, therefore, be at least three years during which any manual activity to vary their instruction and relax the mental strain must be sought otherwise than by the use of tools. This object, however, might be attained by judicious systematized science teaching, in which the children should be associated in preparing specimens, helping to make models illustrating their geography lessons, and so forth. The evidence of Mr. Balchin, and the specimens of flowers neatly fastened on paper by the boys working in Standard III, and produced by him to the Commission, show how easily the subjects of the Code can be adapted to this education in handiness and dexterity. The value of awakening the interest and enlisting the activity of the boys in association with the work of the teacher is illustrated by the example quoted by Mr. Mark Wilks of the master, who, having some of the roughest and most neglected boys in London to deal with, taught them modelling, and showed them in clay and plaster how rivers carved out valleys.
All these methods, of immense value educationally, require many conditions which are not supplied by the average schools of today. They require suitable and roomy school premises, where some sort of mechanical work, if it be merely the preparation of clay geographical models, can be done. They require a staff numerically sufficient, so that the children may have individual attention and individual sympathy; and they require teachers with imagination, enthusiasm, and a liberal view of their profession, not mechanical drudges who, after four years' pupil teachership, become assistants, without, perhaps, having heard one really intellectual lesson in all their lives. And they require inspectors with time enough to see and appreciate intelligent methods of school teaching. And it would be necessary that on each district inspector's staff there should be at least one person largely imbued with the scientific spirit, and not exclusively educated in the classical and literary culture of our old universities.
Assuming that our elementary schools generally were able to give us such results of teaching as have been here indicated, technical schools taking the scholars after they had passed the Sixth Standard might with great advantage be founded in urban districts with a course calculated to last about three years. But it is certain that these technical schools should not be schools in which the pupils should be in any sense apprentices of the trade they intend hereafter to follow. The training in such a school should be mainly scientific and intellectual, though handiness should be encouraged, and the scholars should be instructed in the principles of the machines among which and with which they will work; but for real training in any trade there is no doubt that in England, with our highly organised industry, the workshop is the only proper school. It is important that these technical or scientific higher
[page 319]
elementary schools be conducted with the advice of practical men interested in the industrial prosperity of the country; and it would be unwise to lay down any very fixed and hard rules beforehand, as different localities have different needs; and, while we are in the experimental stage, it is well to work in many directions and by many methods. In any case, a large amount of drawing, practical work in the laboratory, the study of science through the concrete, and the continual reference backwards and forwards from the industrial application to the scientific principle, and vice versâ, will secure that the minds of the students are kept in close relation to the realities of the industrial life in which they are to engage.
Such a system of higher elementary or technical schools, as we have here sketched out, would be the development and completion of the ordinary primary school course. In the case of promising children from elementary schools, who are helped on by scholarships to higher schools, it might be desirable that they should leave the elementary school at 11 or 12, and adjust themselves early in life to the curriculum and methods of the secondary school. But the higher elementary school would satisfy the wants of an entirely different class from those who desire really secondary education. Secondary education is for those who will be under continuous instruction, at any rate, till 16 or 18, whether they go on afterwards to higher university education or not; whereas this higher elementary education is intended to teach more thoroughly those who mast begin to earn their living, and at any rate begin to learn their trade, at 14 or 15 years of age. It is therefore really for scholars in the last two or three years of elementary school life that provision is needed for developing elementary education by higher elementary schools, partly on the literary, but more especially on the scientific side. This object can best be attained by grouping elder scholars at a few centres, instead of leaving those who are most anxious to be well taught, to be neglected in a number of schools containing all the standards, and where their very ability and industry make it safe to neglect them for the more backward and the duller scholars. The establishment of such centres will aid the introduction of a practical and scientific spirit into the higher classes of our ordinary elementary boys' schools which, in urban districts have, perhaps, a tendency at present to too literary a character, and lead the children too exclusively to the contemplation of a clerk's life as the object of their youthful ambition.
We think it important to call attention to the evidence of numerous witnesses who appeared before us, as well as to the evidence given before the Technical Commission, all of which points to the much greater benefit which would be derived by our national industries from the existing widespread organisation of science and art classes and other technical classes in connection with the Science and Art Department and the City and Guilds of London Technical Institute, if a greater number of the young people who leave our elementary schools were better prepared to take advantage of them. Incapable as they often are of making or even understanding a simple mechanical drawing, ignorant of the laws of nature, not knowing the meaning of the simplest mathematical formula, our apprentices are in too many cases unable to profit by the opportunities for technical instruction which would otherwise be abundantly at their disposal, and this is an additional argument, if any such be required, for the more general introduction of drawing, and of sound, though elementary instruction in science into our elementary schools.
We believe that the Technical Education Act of 1887 for Scotland, will tend to the development of technical instruction in that portion of Great Britain, and it is difficult to conceive that similar powers to those which it confers will not at an early date be extended to the local authorities of England and Ireland, the tax-payers of which divisions of the Empire contribute to the fund out of which the grants to Scotch schools will be paid. As the provisions of the Scotch Act are not confined, and those of any English or Irish Bill are not likely to be limited, to elementary instruction with which alone we are authorised to deal, it is difficult for us to make suggestions as to the lines on which the latter should be drawn; but we hope that if it should become law, the term "elementary technical education" will be interpreted by the Education and Science and Art Departments in a sense sufficiently wide to cover elementary commercial, and agricultural, as well as industrial education, and so as not to exclude such general instruction as will tend to render the minds of the scholars readily receptive of the more directly technical instruction. On the other hand, it will be important to take care that the contributions of the State are not frittered away for the benefit of so-called science teachers in grants to disjointed technical classes. Security must be taken by the Department that a well considered scheme of
[page 320]
instruction, varying, of course, with the needs of the locality, shall be followed as a condition of Government aid.
It will, of course, be only just that the managers of voluntary schools should continue to be at liberty to avail themselves as readily as they now do of the grants to be made by the Science and Art Department for technical instruction. The experience of science and art classes shows that, once buildings are provided, and to the erection of these the grants of the Science and Art Department might be more liberal, the payments on passes and the fees of the students are almost, if not quite, sufficient to cover the cost of science schools, and this will probably be found to be the case, even to a greater degree as to technical subjects, since the latter will appeal more directly to the sympathies of the students.
CHAPTER 10
EVENING CLASSES AND CONTINUATION SCHOOLS
However great may be the excellence of our day school system, and however regularly children may attend, it is obvious that if all intellectual influences cease at the age of 13, or earlier, the scholars must soon forget much of what they have learnt.
We have had a great deal of evidence complaining of the evanescent character of the knowledge acquired in the day school. This is attributed by most of the witnesses to the character of the teaching which prevails under the existing system of payment by results, and to the early age at which scholars leave school. There is no doubt that the latter is the principal reason. Many children never go beyond the Fourth Standard, and a large number never reach that standard even at 12½ or 13 years of age. We think that in their wish to improve the curriculum, and the methods of instruction and examination, some of the witnesses have exaggerated the unsatisfactory character of the present teaching. For evidence on the other side showing the good effect of our present education, where the most is made of it, we quote the remarks of our colleague, Mr. Alderson, in his report for 1881 (Education Report, 1881-2, p. 184). He says, "Is the instruction given in our elementary schools under the present system durable or fleeting? Does it wear well? Much of it cannot be otherwise than evanescent, owing to the early withdrawal of children from school. It is not by its failure to reach defaulters that a system of instruction is to be judged, but by the effect produced on those who give it a fair trial, pass through all its stages, and have sucked out all the advantage it can yield. Scholars who have passed the Sixth Standard are in this position; it is a matter therefore of much interest and of much moment to learn how, when the curtain falls in school, they stand. Is their school-gained knowledge of an abiding sort? Have they retained it, and are they striving to retain it? By the kindness of the teachers in my district I have been enabled to trace a goodly number of them beyond the door of the elementary school. Here is the account of them; it will brighten the page of a tedious report. Out of 1,136 scholars who left school after passing in or above the Sixth Standard, 59 have passed on to higher grade schools, 7 by scholarships, and 52 by fee; 161 have obtained posts by examination, 8 failed in obtaining posts; 175 are keeping up their instruction by attendance at evening classes; 721 are returned as engaged in employment for which sound elementary instruction is indispensable. I hope that the significance of these facts will not be lost upon parents who are apt to remove their children from school the moment the law permits. The Sixth Standard is yearly becoming more and more a stepping stone to higher education, and an avenue to clerical employment in offices and shops. To leave school before passing it is to forfeit many good chances in life."
While giving their full weight to the above important remarks, we must note, first, that they relate to the Marylebone Division of London, a well-to-do district in which the children remain in school to a later age than in the poorer industrial districts, and, secondly, the ascertained fact that very few of the children in our schools pass the Sixth Standard. In 1886, 2,445,562 children were presented in the standards. Of these about 128,000 were presented in the Sixth and Seventh Standards. Had the
[page 321]
children generally gone through the complete elementary course, we might hope that between a fifth and a sixth should be presented above the Fifth Standard, or from 400,000 to 500,000 children; and even allowing for backwardness, change of school, and other impediments, it would be a moderate aspiration to look forward to a tenth of all the scholars reaching the Sixth Standard; that would give 244,000 scholars in that standard instead of 103,000. At present the great drop in the scholars takes place after the passing of the Fourth Standard. About 455,000 scholars were presented in that standard, and only 265,000 in the fifth. It is clear that even for those who pass the Sixth Standard it is necessary that their education should be continued, either by their taking up an employment which demands the exercise of the literary powers they have acquired, or by attendance at evening schools where they can build on the foundation laid in the day school. More than 15 per cent of the scholars reported on by Mr. Alderson were continuing their education in this way, and probably, if our elementary system were fully developed and made thoroughly efficient, we might hope to see some 25 per cent of our best scholars demanding the aid of these continuation schools.
The systematising of science and art classes, the expansion of mechanics' institutes and other places of education, such as the Polytechnic, the evening classes at the Finsbury College of the City and Guilds of London Institute, the Midland Institute in Birmingham, and other similar places of instruction, will supply the needs of this class of student, who may soon be equal to from 2½ to 3 per cent of the scholars in our senior departments, or about 70,000 pupils from our elementary schools, in addition to other students.
But besides these picked scholars there are and will be for many years the great mass of the ordinary boys and girls who leave school without having obtained the full benefit of a good elementary education, and for whom a humbler evening school is needed, which will aim, not so much at building up a higher edifice of knowledge, as at preserving the perishable and scanty accumulation from being swept away by the inroads of continuous and especially of unskilled labour. And along with these younger scholars there is another class whom we should be glad to see encouraged, and who are now absolutely discouraged by the regulations of the Department - the students who are more than 21 years of age. Those who have to do with evening schools will all agree that these scholars who wish to overtake the deficiencies of the past should be welcomed as much as any.
It is often difficult to secure for evening schools the services of those most fitted by training and education to act as teachers. We do not think it desirable that the head teacher of the day school should be required to undertake the charge of the evening school. This additional duty, though not forbidden, should be rather discouraged. In towns and populous places active young assistant teachers may well undertake this duty, and we desire to point out that successful work in the evening school can rarely be expected without the superintendence of a professional skilled teacher. Another source from which the evening school staff may possibly be recruited is the large number of trained teachers who have left the profession. At the same time we would still rely to a certain extent upon the aid of volunteers, which has been given liberally in the past, and will, we hope, continue to be given as freely in the future.
The question whether compulsion should be applied to attendance in evening schools has been raised by many witnesses, and their evidence is very conflicting. The chief, but by no means the only difficulty in the way of enforcing attendance at evening schools seems to be the impossibility of establishing an obligatory system of such schools throughout the country. On the whole, we are of opinion that attendance at evening schools should be voluntary, though we should not object to a limited amount of compulsion up to the age of 16 in the cases of those scholars who have not reached the Sixth Standard in the day school. We think that the general extension of evening schools, coupled with liberty of localities to adapt their curriculum to the wants of the district, and a greater amount of encouragement by grants not dependent on individual examination, will do more than compulsion to popularise and extend evening school instruction.
We would refer to the evidence of Miss Castle for a practical account of the work we wish to see encouraged, especially in our villages. We must note, however, that in those rural districts where the population is scattered many witnesses see serious objections to the attendance of girls at evening schools. Possibly, while the winter is the usual season for evening schools, and should continue so for boys, evening schools for girls might be held in the summer in these thinly peopled districts.
[page 322]
The importance of evening continuation schools in their bearing upon the physical and moral well-being of the people was strongly pressed upon us. We have carefully considered this aspect of the question, as we agree that the results of an educational system cannot be deemed satisfactory if the moral effects of school discipline are lost. or if the knowledge gained at school fails to create a desire for higher intellectual interests and nobler pleasures, which are a safeguard against degrading and vicious habits. One great defect in the present educational arrangements is that in the factory districts many scholars qualify by examination for total exemption before they can be admitted to full-time employment in the factory. This break in school life is a fruitful source of moral evil.
Evidence has been submitted to us with regard to grave moral perils surrounding working lads and girls in the evening hours, arising from the conditions and circumstances of their life, which evening school might obviate, whilst at the same time it might directly aid their healthy physical and mental growth. It was urged upon us that children of 14 years of age and upwards, who are engaged for 10 hours a day in a factory or workshop, have a natural desire for relaxation, and for a refreshing exercise of body and mind. At present, in large towns these young people find their play and excitement in the streets, where they are exposed to seductive temptations, and there are circumstances which aggravate the evils which arise therefrom. We are told of the decay of the apprenticeship system, and the consequent loss of the personal authority and care of the master over his apprentice, and also of the relaxation of parental control over children as soon as they begin to earn wages. It seems, therefore, necessary that some other form of influence and discipline should be provided, in an attractive form, in the evening school. We have also borne in mind that the present minute division of labour, and the consequent monotony and fatigue from unceasing work at one detail of manufacture, the overcrowding and ill-ventilation, in some cases, of workshops, and the pressure of a long day's work on weakly bodies, combine to stimulate excessively the desire for amusement, which must be considered in any system of evening schools, as if the desire be not satisfied in a reasonable and healthy way, it leads to improvident, frivolous, and even vicious habits which cause rapid deterioration in the physique and morale of the people.
The education given in the evening school should accordingly have regard to the whole nature and circumstances of those who attend them. We, therefore, recommend that in re-organising the evening school system the following points should be kept in view:
(1) The desire and need of young people for healthy physical exercises should be recognised. A system of calisthenics and musical drill would give healthful training to the body, would be likely to attract scholars, would provide the outlet to physical energies, which educators know to be necessary to adolescent youth, and would further impart moral discipline, and train the scholars in habits of order and obedience.
(2) The methods and subjects of instruction should be such as will awaken the interest of the pupils and give them pleasure in the pursuit of knowledge rather than cram them with information merely committed to memory. For this purpose the teaching should be mainly oral, and be given in connexion with real objects, and should in many cases have a direct bearing on the pupils' own lives and employments. By these means the faculty of observation will be cultivated and developed, and an increased interest will be aroused in the duties of life.
(3) The education, so far as it bears directly upon the daily work of the scholars, both in its intellectual and practical sides, should be, if only in an elementary sense, technical. One way in which the interest of the majority of scholars can be secured is by making clear the benefit they derive from learning. The dwarfing effects of an excessive division of labour will be lessened, and the intelligence and skill applied to manual work will both give the worker a greater pleasure in it and inspire a worthy ambition to excel. In addition to drawing, art hand-work has also been suggested as likely to prove most attractive to both boys and girls, who are greatly interested in what they do with their own hands. By these means scholars could be trained to dexterity of hand, accuracy of sight and touch, and to the perception and enjoyment of neat workmanship and of beautiful form.
(4) The course of reading should be such as to fill the minds and imaginations of the pupils with noble examples of duty, and music should be taught so as to elevate the taste and prepare the scholars to enjoy, in their home-life and
[page 323]
elsewhere, the pure pleasure which song can impart. It should also be remembered that some scholars attending evening schools desire, not so much the systematic continuation of their education as to supplement some special deficiency of which they are conscious. Thus, some will wish to improve their handwriting, others their knowledge of accounts; some their power of correct composition and grammatical expression, while lads intending to be mechanics want to learn drawing and practical geometry.
We are of opinion that the present Code is not adapted to the needs of evening schools, and we recommend that the conditions on which grants are made to such schools, while requiring serious and thorough teaching, should be entirely re-arranged on the principles we have suggested, so as to give the needed encouragement to those who would gladly conduct these schools.
Evening schools have been declining for many years, though there has been a certain revival during the year 1887. The number of scholars is, however, still very trifling compared with what the importance of their function demands. While we think that the State, through the Education Department, should help them as much as possible, and while the local machinery of school boards should also be much more directed to their improvement and extension, we are of opinion that this is a branch of education in which we must endeavour very largely to enlist voluntary activity and co-operation.
CHAPTER 11
GOVERNMENT INSPECTORS AND GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS
We pass from the schools and their teachers to their inspection on behalf of the Government, which contributes so large a part of their yearly income.
At present the inspectors, apart from two of them whose special duty it is to inspect the training colleges, are divided into four grades.
The country is mapped out into ten large districts, over each of which is set a chief inspector, who in addition to the general superintendence of his district, has also a special district in which he performs the ordinary duties of inspector. In two instances the chief inspectors (Rev. D. J. Stewart and Mr. S. N. Stokes), are ordinary inspectors under the supervision of another chief inspector.
Under the chief inspector there is a staff of ordinary inspectors, each of whom, as a rule, has a district which he inspects; there were in 1887, according to the Report of the Education Department, 103 of these ordinary inspectors.
Working under the district inspectors, and generally with them, are 35 sub-inspectors, a grade first created in 1882; these officers, promoted from the inspectors' assistants, do the same work as the inspectors in the inspection of schools, though subject to the review and supervision of the inspectors.
Under these again are the inspectors' assistants, of whom there are 152; these are appointed from the ranks of elementary teachers. They must be between the ages of 30 and 35 at the time of their appointment, and they have a commencing salary of £150, rising to £300 a year. They must have been head teachers who have passed in the first division at the certificate examination, and a preference is given to those who have taken a University degree.
The duties of the inspectors, sub-inspectors, and inspectors' assistants are to inspect and examine the schools, the final responsibility resting with the inspector who endorses the parchments of the teachers, writes the report, and awards the merit grant upon the school. In fact, inspectors often act largely upon the reports and information furnished them by their subordinates.
In addition to the work of inspecting schools, the yearly examinations of the pupil-teachers have to be conducted, and their papers looked over; much of this devolves on the inspectors' assistants. The scholarship papers and the examination papers for the teacher's certificate have to be marked. This is mainly done by the inspectors and sub-inspectors. The inspector is the person responsible for advising the department on all questions connected with his district, such as the need of further school provision, or any delicate question which may arise relating to teachers or to managers.
[page 324]
Hitherto, though the ranks of the inspectorate up to the grade of sub-inspector, are recruited from the elementary teachers, yet inspectors are appointed from without, and high University success has been looked to as a qualification rather than scholastic experience or intimate acquaintance with elementary schools.
It is a little difficult to separate the question of the government examination from the method of paying the government grant with which it has so long been associated. But it is well to consider the question "What form of inspection and examination will best secure the efficiency of the school?" apart from the question "How should the Government grant be awarded?"
We are of opinion that the examination of the work of the school, which should take place yearly, should be a searching one, and we think that every child present in the school on the day of examination should be liable to be examined.
The Code has drawn a distinction between class and individual examination. Many of the criticisms directed against individual examination apply to the value attached to the percentage of passes in the standard examinations. In our opinion class examination must include the examination, not necessarily of every individual, but of a very large proportion of the individuals in the class, if it is to be thorough and effective; and we believe that good head teachers of large schools in examining the work of their assistants would not be satisfied without examining every scholar in their respective classes.
We notice two faults found with the present examinations by inspectors, the one that they use written instead of oral examinations too low down in the school, and thereby, especially in regard to science teaching, fail to conduct a good examination, and indirectly hamper the teaching by forcing the teacher to work in anticipation of an unsuitable test. The second, that the inspectors are sometimes ignorant of the subjects in which they have to examine, and consequently cram the subject themselves and conduct the examination mechanically and unintelligently. We are of opinion thi.it both these faults need correction. We think that the examination, at least up to and including the present 4th Standard, should be mainly oral, and framed with a view to ascertaining what the children have been taught and how they have learnt it, rather than be an independent examination in the subject from the point of view of the examiner, which may be very different from that of the teacher. As to the want of familiarity with certain subjects on the part of inspectors, we think that this fault would be remedied if they were required to be familiar not only with the elementary knowledge taught in our schools, but also with the way in which that knowledge should be presented to the children, that is that they should be practically conversant with elementary school work.
We think that the inspector, after he has examined a school, should draw up a report, which should set forth in detail the progress of the school, class by class, in the various subjects. The obligation to make a report in detail is a great safeguard against a hasty or negligent examination.
But in addition to the work of examination, which we do not wish to undervalue, there is the work of inspection, to which we attach very great importance. The object of this is to ascertain the value of the work, and the possibility of improving it rather than to take stock of the results of instruction. Here comes in the duty of making allowance for all the circumstances which affect the work of the school.
In conducting the inspection the inspector will be a spectator and director rather than an active participator in the conduct of the school. He will hear the various teachers give their lessons in accordance with the method they have practised through the year, and he may ask them to recapitulate a particular part of the work, or may test in some other way the teacher's competence. He will observe the discipline and conduct of the scholars under the instruction of their ordinary teacher. He will see from the copy books and exercise books, from the notes of lessons, and from the log book, how the school has been managed from day to day, and from all the slight indications which he will gather from these various sources he will sum up his impression of the school as a whole, and of the various teachers in it.
In order to do this well, it is clear that he must be a man who thoroughly understands school keeping, and that he may have this skill he must either have been a teacher himself, and a successful one, or must have been long so familiar with schools as to have acquired professional aptitude.
But these professional qualifications are not all that are needed in an inspector. A pleasant manner and sympathy with children are essential if the children are to do justice to themselves, and if the school is to display itself freely and naturally to his observation. He must also have tact and judgment in dealing with school boards
[page 325]
and other managers, and he must be a man of wide and liberal education and cultivation, or he will not be able to check the tendency to cram which will always follow where a teacher knows but little of the subject he has to teach.
To secure such an inspector we are of opinion that no man should be appointed who has not had successful experience as a teacher, though not necessarily in elementary schools. On the contrary, we think that valuable inspectors might be drawn from the masters of secondary schools. But if so drawn they should, either in training colleges or in elementary schools, serve an apprenticeship in the methods and subjects which are most important in the elementary schools which they are to inspect. At the same time, we are of opinion that the career of the inspectorate should be open throughout to elementary teachers. Many of them are already cultivated men, and have taken University degrees, and we believe that if the career of the inspectorate were frankly thrown open to them a further inducement to men of wide education to become teachers in elementary schools would be held out.
But we think that the present commencing salary is too low to attract the best men to the post of inspector's assistant. We should be glad to see the commencing salary raised to 200/. a year, and the limits of age range from 25 to 40. But there is no reason why a successful schoolmaster or board inspector should not be at once made a sub-inspector if his experience and attainments fit him for the post.
Much has been said of visits without notice, and many witnesses attach great importance to these visits as means of improving the schools. We regard these visits as valuable, and wish to see them more frequent, and we feel with reference to the pupil-teachers and probationers that the inspectors would have a better chance of judging of their progress and efficiency if they could drop into the school and observe their work as they were going through the day's routine. We are inclined, however, to look to the local inspectors, who would be the servants of the managers, to improve the organisation of the school rather than to Her Majesty's Inspectors.
We cannot quite compare the duties of inspectors on the Continent with what is done under our own system. On the Continent the schools, as a rule, are State institutions, and there is one management and one inspection. In England, the managers, whether board or voluntary, are somewhat independent bodies, aided by the State, but not absolutely under it. In the case of inefficient teachers, the final sanction of removal rests with the managers, not with the Government, and, therefore, it is of special importance that the officer of the managers should have an intimate familiarity with the way in which the school is conducted. If there were a proper organisation of district boards of sufficient area and population, including in the word associations of voluntary school managers, all of which had their inspectors, and could remove inefficient teachers, strengthen the staff, and supply at once all needful material, the function of the State as to inspection might almost disappear, and as to examination even might be much reduced. It is the extreme isolation and want of technical knowledge of so many managers which gives such prominence in England to the need of State inspection and examination.
It is sometimes said that teachers chafe at inspection, and are jealous of the interference which results from the visits of an inspector, but we believe that where the inspector is himself an experienced teacher, understanding and sympathising with the difficulties that belong to school keeping, he will be found preeminently a helper rather than a mere critic, and that his wider knowledge and useful advice will make his visits thoroughly welcome.
Much has been said as to the importance of securing uniformity in the standard of examination throughout the country. Some witnesses say that it is not yet accomplished, on the other hand it has been urged that we ought not to expect uniformity of result under unequal and diverse conditions. We think that the quality of education to be secured to the children should be as far as possible equal, and that we ought not to be satisfied with a lower standard in the country than in the town, in small schools than in large schools. But we have already pointed out that we think the fullness of the curriculum might be varied with the size and capabilities of the school. And we think that the inability of country children, as such, to learn as easily as town children, has often been exaggerated. There are advantages and disadvantages on both sides, but we think the chief disadvantage of the country child is not his own want of power of learning, but the necessary smallness of the schools, and the low salaries of the teachers, which result in most of the ablest teachers seeking town appointments. But there are plenty of excellent schools, even small ones, in the country which prove that such schools, if well managed and well equipped, can do thoroughly good work.
[page 326]
We are of opinion that the recent organisation of the inspectorate, with a chief inspector in each district, has tended to secure uniformity of standard; and that the local conferences which are now held among inspectors of a chief inspector's district, where questions relating to the Code are submitted to them for discussion, are a valuable feature in the present administration of the Education Acts. We should be glad to see educational conferences held under the guidance of the inspector, or at any rate with his participation, where managers, school officers, teachers and others interested in education might discuss educational questions.
We think it would be a good thing if the chief inspector had no special district of his own in which he does the work of an ordinary inspector, or at any rate, that it should be so small that the mass of his time should be expended in visiting and inspecting throughout all the districts under his oversight.
We are of opinion that in promoting inspector's assistants, sub-inspectors, and inspectors, the Education Department should be guided by their opinion of the merit of their officers, and not by seniority. It is specially important that chief inspectors should be men in their full vigour and in full sympathy with the newest progress in educational work.
CHAPTER 12
THE PARLIAMENTARY GRANTS
The subject of the Parliamentary grant has been closely connected with the method of Government examination.
We have already described the duties of Government inspectors and the method of Government inspection and examination, and in what way we think that a suitable curriculum with due recognition of local diversities and of the possibilities of education in various classes of schools might best be provided, The present method of distributing the Government grant, popularly known as payment by results, has been criticised with more energy than almost any other part of our existing system; the teachers are very generally hostile to it, especially in its present method of application, where a part of the grant is the result of individual passes of scholars, and leads to an exaggerated importance being attached to a high percentage of passes as a test of the excellence of a school. But many teachers and others, among whom we may mention Mr. Matthew Arnold and Mr. Mark Wilks, are opposed to the system in principle, and would see State aid distributed on some entirely different method.
In reference to payment by results, we must notice that many of the attacks against our present system were directed against that part of it which applies to the standard subjects, and which makes the payment follow closely the percentage of success calculated on individual passes. There was also a great deal of objection made to the merit grant as unfairly ticketing schools, and leading to heart-burning and jealousy, and to undue striving after success by mechanical methods of teaching.
It is well to review briefly the evidence on this much debated and burning question. The Secretary of the Education Department, Mr. Cumin, said of the merit grant that he thought it an excellent idea, that upon the whole it had been successful, and he also approves of payment by results, though he would be willing to examine by sample, and not necessarily each child in the school.
Passing to the inspectors, the Rev. T. W. Sharpe says that the merit grant encourages the cultivation of intelligence; as to payment by results, he says, "It has had both good and bad effects, but I think that the good have greatly preponderated", and he says that its abandonment would lower the general standard. Canon Warburton thought that the system of payment by results had done a vast amount of good, and was absolutely necessary. He thought it would be rash to say whether the time is ripe for a little relaxation, he would be glad to be rid of the standards, but does not think the time for it has come. He admits that individual examination is possible without payment for individual results, but doubts if it would be done. He thought the merit grant worked well, but he said it had produced a great deal of rivalry, ambition, and emulation.
[page 327]
Mr. J. G. Fitch said that on the whole the present methods of testing results and assessing grants are the most satisfactory, but he would abolish the present examination for Standards 1 and 2. As to the merit grant, he is satisfied with the direction in which it is working, though it has not quite realised all the hopes entertained of it. In infant schools he would like more gradations of it.
Mr. Graves, inspector for West Somerset, said that the principle of the merit grant was good, and on the whole the grant had worked well, but there has been much heart-burning, and it would be better to have five degrees. As to payment on results, it must be retained in some form, but there might be an increase of the fixed grant.
Mr. Harrison, Her Majesty's Inspector at Liverpool, objects to the merit grant, as invidious to the teachers and a hateful task to the inspectors, but if it continues he would distribute it over the subjects; as to payment by results, he would abolish the payment on individual examination in Standards 1 and 2, but would keep it above those standards.
Mr. H. B. Oakley agrees with the principle of the merit grant, but teachers generally dislike it; he would therefore distribute the merit grant among the subjects; keeping the principle of payment by results, he would pay for the standard subjects like class subjects, and abolish the schedule of passes for Standards 1 and 2, retaining it above those standards. In infant schools he would have five instead of three grades of merit.
Among the inspectors more or less opposed to payment by results, Mr. Matthew Arnold said that the system is injurious to instruction, and has a bad effect on the teachers and on the children. He was here speaking especially of the standard examination; he would prefer a system of class examination "with a carefully prepared body of teachers, and with a carefully drawn up plan of instruction, but we have not that". But Mr. Matthew Arnold would give the grant according to the general inspection of the whole tone of the school, and the character of the teaching, though he objected to the word "tone", and said he would thoroughly examine the whole school. He also disapproved of the merit grant. Mr. Arnold, however, would prefer that the bulk of the charge for maintaining elementary schools should fall upon local management and be under local supervision.
The Rev. D. J, Stewart, also, is not favourable to payment by results; he thinks it lowers the quality and extent of the teaching. He proposes modifications in the merit grant, such as a "very good" and "very fair" stage between "excellent" and "good", and between "good" and "fair".
Mr. E. H. Brodie was inclined to give up the merit grant. If continued, he would break it up and distribute it among subjects. As to payment by results, he would keep it in principle, but give a rather larger grant on average attendance on condition the school was well equipped, well staffed, and generally well looked after.
Mr. McKenzie, sub-inspector, objects to the merit grant, and to payment by results; the latter, he says, lowers the standard of education.
Mr. Martin, sub-inspector for Marylebone, would pay varying sums according to the merit of the school after a thorough examination, but he would not call the varying sums a merit grant, for he objects to the terms excellent, &c., as misleading. He objects to pricing different subjects of instruction, and would pay one lump grant.
The Rev. F. Synge sees difficulties in the merit grant, and would rather have two grades, "good" and "fair"; as to payment by results, he says, that great progress has been made under the system, but he would be glad to see it changed; he has not thought out any substitute, but some system of payment by results must be retained at the lower end of the scale. There is a very large class of boards and of teachers who always wish to do as little as possible; the power of the purse is the only power for these, but good schools might be free to work for the sake of good work, and for the honour of good work. He would have no schedule of passes, but examine the school by the method of class examination.
Lord Lingen, who was Secretary to the Education Department at the time of Mr. Lowe's code, doubted the thoroughness of the individual examination under any sanction less stringent than the dependence of the payment on the individual pass.
[page 328]
and he does not think that the objections raised are of a nature to condemn the system.
Mr. Robert Wild, head master of a large London board school, condemned payments by results very strongly. He would have no part of the grant dependent on the examination. He would confide the education of a district to a public authority, such as a county board, who should be represented in various districts by local managers, or some of its own members. He would raise the funds from the parents, the parish, the county, and the Government.
Mr. Baxendale, head master of a British school in Bradford, was also strongly against the merit grant and payment by results .
Mr. Grove, head master of All Souls', Langham Place school, was against the merit grant, and opposed in toto to payment by results; no money, he said, should depend on any examination.
Mr. W. B. Adams, head master of the Fleet Road board school, London, gave doubtful evidence as to the merit grant; as to payment by results, he thinks Parliament must look for returns in the way of results if it pays money, but thinks the present system defective. He objects to a priced list of subjects, but approves of the standard examination and schedule up to and including Standard V; above that he would make the organisation and teaching of a school freer. He preferred the present system to that in force before 1862.
Miss Whittenbury, the head mistress of a large infant school under the London school board said the system of payment by results is wrong; it tends to neglecting and keeping back clever children. She thinks the grant to a school should vary according to the inspector's judgment of its excellence. Thus, it appears, she rather objects to the present method than to the principle.
Mr. Powell, head master of a rural Church of England school in Bedfordshire, objects to the merit grant as depending on the objectionable principle of individual passes, and, while he would retain individual examination, would make the grant depend on the average standard attained by each class.
Mr. Clark, head master of a mixed board school at Pensnett, near Dudley, said that the merit grant is an unmitigated abomination. He would abolish payment by results, but does not think it practicable. He would not allow thoroughly inefficient schools to get the same grant as efficient ones.
Mr. Charles Smith, of St. Thomas' Church of England school. Charterhouse, objects to the merit grant. He says individual examination is necessary as a test, but no notice should be taken of individual passes. He prefers a varying maintenance grant to the present system, but for this, more responsible management is required in voluntary schools.
Mrs. Burgwin, head mistress of the girls' department, Orange Street board school, Southwark, is opposed to the merit grant. As to payment by results, she would retain individual examination, but not pay for it. There would be no difficulty in basing the grant on the class as the unit. Below Standard 4 children should be examined in class.
Mr. Holdsworth, head master of a Wesleyan school at Newcastle, approves of the object of the merit grant, but thinks it has failed to a great extent, and hesitates to express approval of it.
Mr. Muscott, of Garsington Church of England school, near Oxford, approves of the object, but not quite of the working of the merit grant; as to payment by results, he would have a larger proportion fixed, and a less proportion variable.
Mrs. Knowler, head mistress of Dibden school, Hampshire, says that payment by results presses hard on such schools as hers.
Miss Napper, head mistress of a small village school with 59 average, got the excellent merit grant, and approves of payment by results.
Miss Neath, head mistress of a school of 58 average, does not like the system of payment by results.
Miss Castle, who has a small school in Sussex, said that to do away with the system would lessen the interest taken in dull children, and the teachers would let them slip through, but she thought the individual examination and consequent payment led to shifts and evasions on the part of the teachers, and that the whole system is also to blame. She added, the loss by the abolition of payment by
[page 329]
results would be greater than the gain. It is best, so far as the children are concerned.
Mr. S. B. Tait, formerly a teacher, and now inspector to the Huddersfield school board, said of the merit grant that it had produced more intelligent work, but it had increased the anxiety of the teachers. He said that the grant in Huddersfield is given for quality of work, not for percentage of passes. He would distribute the merit grant among the subjects; as to "payment by results", he would pay for the standard subjects in the same way as for the class subjects.
Mr. Newbold, formerly a teacher of a public elementary school, and now engaged in private tuition, said that the conception of the merit grant was excellent, but the purpose had been defeated in administration. As to payment by results, he would make the class, and not the individual, the unit in estimating the grant. Individual examination is desirable. If the payment on individual examination were very small, it might have a beneficial result.
Mr. Ridgway, head master of the Stavely Works boys' school, was in favour of the merit grant.
Mr. Horsfield, of St. Saviour's school, Everton, was in favour of the merit grant. If payment by results were done away with, the dull children would not be pressed so much.
Mr. Bradbury, head master of a large half-time school at Mossley, was fairly satisfied with the present system of payment by results in default of a better, but he would give more liberty of classification, and he disliked pricing subjects, a method which leads teachers to consider what subjects will pay and what subjects will not pay.
Mr. Scotson, of the Deansgate higher board school, Deansgate, Manchester, would abolish the merit grant, and return to the method of paying before 1862. He would abolish payment on individual results of examination, and pay as is now done for the class subjects. He looked to the publication of the reports in the district for inducing teachers to work well. He approved of the appeal to the emulation of teachers by official praise or blame, but not of money rewards. He does not absolutely object to payment by results of any sort; a better school ought to be able to earn a better grant. If payment by results were largely superseded, he would prescribe a curriculum which should be liberal, not less than is now taught in an ordinary good school. His feeling is in the direction of making drawing compulsory in all schools for girls as well as for boys. If payment by results were superseded, he would require further guarantees from voluntary schools.
Mr. Fish, head master of a Church of England school in Durham, considered the system of payment by results unsound in principle, but was not prepared to suggest another system. He would prefer class examination in all subjects, though examination in dictation and arithmetic must necessarily be individual.
Mr. Balchin, head master of the Nunhead Passage board school, London, would approve of the merit grant, subject to some slight modifications. Individual payments almost entirely destroy the value of scientific instruction. Payment on individual examination is good for mechanical subjects.
Mr. C. Twiss, head master of a school in Warrington, is not satisfied with the assessment of the merit grant. He thinks there must be payment by results. It has not improved the really good schools, but has stimulated the inferior ones.
The Rev. J. Duncan, Secretary to the National Society, objected to the payments on the results of individual examination, and preferred the system before 1862 to the present, but he said "there must be some system of payment by results".
The Rev. W. J. B. Richards, D.D., Roman Catholic diocesan inspector, presumes that payment by results is the only way in which payments can be made. He would not return to the system in force prior to 1862. The merit grant might be good if given solely in reference to the good conduct of a school.
Archdeacon Sir Lovelace Stamer, the chairman of the Stoke-upon-Trent school board, thought that individual examination could not be given up, and that payment by results must continue, but less should be paid on results, and the fixed grant should be larger.
[page 330]
The Rev. W. D. Parish, formerly a diocesan inspector in Sussex, said he had no recommendation to make as to payment by results of individual examination.
Prebendary Richards would prefer payment by the results of class rather than of individual examination in standards.
Mrs. Fielden, of Todmorden, would do away with the merit grant entirely. She would give apportioned payments for excellence in separate subjects of instruction. After a grant of 10s or 12s for fair work all round she would give 1s each for real excellence in such subjects as reading, arithmetic, needlework, singing, and writing.
Lady Stevenson, a manager of London board schools, would do away with payment on results of individual examination. When asked how she would have a guarantee for the efficiency of the teaching in a voluntary school, she said, "I am convinced that after a time the voluntary schools will have to be done away with". She says, there must be some check so long as a Government grant is given to voluntary schools, to see that they are well taught.
Canon Wingfield, rector of Welwyn, objects to payment by results, but he says that if the examination is not satisfactory, he would reduce the annual grant to the school.
The Rev. J. R. Diggle, chairman of the London School Board, said that the principle of the merit grant is good, and the want of uniformity might be remedied; it obviates the mechanical system of payment by results. He is in favour of payment by results, and thinks that if the three R's were examined as class subjects, a large number of children would escape without knowing anything at all about them.
Dr. Crosskey, of the Birmingham school board, objects to the merit grant because it is not given for real merit, and keeps inferior schools alive at the expense of the good ones; the character of the education, the healthfulness of the buildings, &c., should be considered, and not the pecuniary difficulties of the managers. In making his award, the inspector pays no attention to overcrowding, sanitary arrangements, and the supply of books and apparatus. He does not consider payment by results a good method of aiding schools, but if it is abolished, very emphatic educational tests would have to be applied.
Mr. E. N. Buxton, late chairman of the London School Board, considers that some portion of the grant should depend on results.
Mr. Hance, clerk to the Liverpool school board, says would rather not retain the merit grant; but if it is retained he thinks that it should be distributed, among the subjects. "Some payment dependent on results is probably necessary to the full efficiency of State aided education under the conditions which obtain in this country where so large a proportion of the education is supplied by private firms, if I may so say - but I think that under the existing system the principle is carried to excess".
The Rev. B. F. M. McCarthy, vice-president of the Birmingham school board, is thoroughly opposed on educational grounds to payment by results, and proposed a scheme of elaborate grading according to equipment and curriculum, by which payments fixed for each class, but varying with the category of the school, should be made.
Canon McNeile, chairman of the Liverpool School Managers Committee, dislikes the system of payment by results, but does not see how the system of payment for individual examination could be abolished altogether.
The Rev. J. Gilmore, chairman of the Sheffield school board objects to the present system as cram instead of education, but he would not abolish payment by results altogether.
Mr. James Hanson, vice-chairman of the Bradford school board objects strongly to the system of payment by results. He thinks the method of class examination would materially lessen the evils. He thinks Government must take means to ascertain that the purpose for which they give their subsidy is accomplished, and that the existence of voluntary schools increases the difficulty of the question.
Mr. O'Donoghue, clerk to the Hull school board, would do away with the merit grant, as no grant should depend largely on opinion only, unaided by any uniformity of standard. He is in favour of payment by results, and prefers the individual examination.
[page 331]
The Rev. Joseph Nunn, chairman of the Manchester school board, objects to the merit grant; it favours the board schools because they have the advantage of a board inspector, moreover the board schools have the help of the rates. There should be a system of payment by results, but more largely supplemented than at present by fixed payments. He would retain individual examination.
Mr. Wright, the inspector of the Bristol school board, was opposed to payment by results of individual examination. He would have the grant mainly a capitation grant, with a small grant dependent on class examination.
Mr. Lee, clerk to the Leeds school board, thinks the merit grant not well administered at present; he would distribute it over subjects; as to payment by results, less should depend on individual examination, which should be limited to Class 3 and upwards.
Mr. H. Birley, formerly chairman of the Manchester school board, and still chairman of the Salford school board, criticised the merit grant, but considered payment by results the only true guarantee the State can have of efficiency, and that every child receives an education. He says the system would work well if managers took more pecuniary responsibility for their schools.
The Rev. Prebendary A. M. Deane said that the system of payment by results as the basis of the grant is good. He thinks that 5s a head might depend on individual examination.
Mr. Mark Wilks strongly condemns payment by results, but thinks universal board schools a necessary preliminary to reform.
The Rev. John Menet, formerly principal of Hockerill training college, and Mr. John Nickal, inspector of the London School Board, were not favourable to the present system of payment by results.
This is an abridgement of the principal observations offered to us on the operation of the plan introduced by Mr. Lowe, and still subsisting, though with many important modifications of detail, which for shortness we have agreed to call "Payment by results". It appears from this summary that the large majority of witnesses, while criticising the present system from various points of view, are of opinion that the Parliamentary grant paid to schools must vary to some extent with the ascertained efficiency of the school as tested by Government inspection, at any rate so long as our system of popular education continues so largely under voluntary management.
The conclusion which Dr. Dale and Mr. Heller, reached on this question was expressed by an amendment moved by Dr. Dale on a passage in the chapter on the Parliamentary grant in the report of the Commission, which will be found appended as a note to the end of this chapter.
But we were unable to get any suggestions as to any alternative scheme which should make the grant entirely independent of the merit of the school as tested by the Government inspector, and reported on by him.
Indeed, Mr. Wilks, who was perhaps the most emphatic of any of the witnesses in his condemnation of payment by results, could only look forward to a system of universal board schools as the means of getting adequate security for good teaching under another system of public aid. Having prefaced what he had to urge on this point by the statement that the establishment of universal board schools is an essential condition of his evidence, he stated "Payment by results has worked out the most disastrous consequences, intellectual and moral, in our schools." "Payment by results destroys the spirit of education."
Others of those who advocated the abolition of payment by results recognised the necessity, if uniform grants are substituted, of setting up some responsible body of management which should have sufficient power over all schools to see that they are thoroughly efficient.
It is urged by the opponents of payment by results that in no country in Europe, except our own, has this system of public support been adopted. But it may be noticed that in no country but our own are volunteers allowed, so to speak, to contract with the nation for the supply of national education. Where the schools are under the management of a responsible public body, whether the State as a whole as in France, or the locality under State supervision as in Germany, Holland, Switzerland Italy, and other countries, the schools are part of the National establishments, and under very different guarantees from those which would subsist in this country if all voluntary managers were practically secure of a fixed subsidy irrespective of their own contributions and of the efficiency of their schools.
[page 332]
We are, therefore, forced to the conclusion that the State itself must at present take due precautions to see that its contribution is made in aid of local effort, and not in substitution for it, and that if that aid is given liberally it shall be given for real educational work.
And while we largely agree with Mr. Matthew Arnold, that well, framed curricula, with full and graduated schemes of instruction, thoroughly trained teachers in sufficient numbers, and careful inspection by experts, would, if education were under local responsible management, and mainly supported by local resources, be the most satisfactory guarantees of educational efficiency, yet we think that under the present conditions it is not practicable to recommend to Parliament any other method to secure efficiency than that which provides that to some extent the grant shall vary with the reported efficiency of the school.
We shall discuss hereafter more fully the burden of the cost, but we may mention here that the proportion of the whole cost borne by the State and by the parents has steadily and largely increased in the last 10 years, while the burden on voluntary subscribers has largely diminished, and we think it essential that those who claim the whole management should be responsible for half the cost. So long as the present system is allowed to continue, we think that the grant should not be so variable as very seriously to cripple the resources of the school by its diminution, nor should the range be so limited as to offer but slight inducement to efficiency. Possibly if of the total Government grant two-thirds were fixed and one-third were variable, a due proportion would be preserved between the stagnation of a fixed grant and the lottery of unlimited variation. We would, however, retain the present power, under Article 115, of fining a school for grave faults of discipline or instruction. This power is very rarely used. The total amount so deducted in 1886-7 was about £3,420 on a total sum of £2,986,747.
How the variable portion of the grant should be distributed is a question of detail rather for the Department than for us. We wish, however, to state that we consider the present mode of distributing the standard grant unsatisfactory for the reasons generally urged against it by many witnesses. But while teachers find fault with the mechanical effect of the schedule of passes in the standard subjects, they resent the freedom which some of them call the caprice of the inspector in awarding the merit grant. It has been suggested by several witnesses that if the successive rises were more numerous, schools would not feel that ticketing which causes so much heartburning and emulation; an inspector who should award sums ranging from 1s to 7s according to the impression left on his mind after a careful examination, would not cause the same mortification as one who labelled a school "good" instead of "excellent", or "fair" instead of "good".
We are of opinion that if the variable portion of the grant be distributed in one lump sum by the inspector upon his view of the work of the school as a whole, balancing the points of excellence against those where the work is only fair, even though the name of merit grant were suppressed, and though the gradations were more numerous, the substance of the present merit grant would remain, and both teachers and managers would feel that their freedom of action was unduly put in subjection to the personal preferences and ideas of the inspector. Again, if the presumption were that a certain sum were to be awarded by the inspector, unless he felt bound to make certain deductions from that sum for distinct and serious failures in some part of the teaching, there would be a danger that the average of ordinary efficiency would become the standard for the maximum grant, and managers who hitherto have been specially liberal in the quality and number of their staff, and in securing the best school appliances would get less aid than formerly. The objection to what has been called a priced list of subjects held good when schools were bribed to adopt a reasonable curriculum by payment for piece work, but where a full curriculum is prescribed, we see no objection to the managers and teachers realising distinctly that neglect of any part of it will entail pecuniary loss, and that similarly special efficiency will result in larger pecuniary means. Such a system resembles the present method of paying for the class subjects which is the one which has given most satisfaction or least dissatisfaction, but we feel that in adjusting the details of a Government scheme of payments we cannot undertake to make specific recommendations. We would, however, say this, that small village schools, if properly supported from local resources, and duly teaching the prescribed curriculum, should be treated with special liberality, and that the larger town schools with an extended curriculum should also, so far as the extended curriculum increases
[page 333]
their cost receive additional State aid to meet additional local contributions. Indeed, so long as the essential principle is maintained that the grant from the Treasury shall not exceed the local resources, we have no apprehension that mischief will arise from its increase. The returns collected by us prove that the small voluntary village schools are more liberally supported than the voluntary schools in towns, and we believe, with Prebendary Roe, that country managers, as a body, do not ask for further aid to relieve their own pockets, but to improve the condition of their schools, which must be exceptionally costly per head.
These grants and their probable extension should be borne in mind in estimating what is a reasonable capitation grant to be awarded on behalf of the scholars in attendance. We should be glad to see a considerable part of the grant awarded for conditions of efficiency, such as adequate staff, premises, school, and material, leaving much less than at present dependent on the report of the examination of the scholars.
To sum up the conclusions of this chapter, we are of opinion that the most satisfactory means of securing efficiency in our elementary schools would be the organisation of our national education under local representative management over areas of sufficient extent, subject to State inspection, which should rather aim at securing that the local authorities did their duty, than at testing minutely the results of instruction throughout the school. We look to the establishment of such a system as the best means of escaping from the injurious effects of the present system. But we recognise that as long as so large a proportion of the schools of the country are under private and isolated management, it is impracticable to propose to Parliament any scheme for the awarding of State aid that does not take into account the results of the work of the school as shown by the annual examination and inspection. In the meantime we are of opinion that the system of varying payments might be so administered as to cause much less friction, and to interfere less with satisfactory methods of teaching than it does now.
We recommend that the present method of assessing payment on the standard subjects be discontinued.
We are in favour of a larger portion of the grant being fixed, subject to the condition that greater guarantees of efficiency be secured in the shape of well built, well equipped premises, and a liberal staff of well qualified teachers, with curricula suited to the size of the school, and the possibilities of the locality.
We also recommend that more money be paid to provide the means of instruction, such as grants for the teaching of cookery, for the services of science demonstrators, special drawing teachers, organising masters, local inspectors, suitable means of instructing the pupil-teachers, &c.
As to the remainder of the capitation grant, which is variable, we recommend that while no inducement be offered to a school to go beyond a suitable curriculum for the sake of special grants, the variable grant be apportioned among the various subjects of instruction, so as to reward efficiency wherever the inspector recognises it; and especially that the inspector look rather to the quality of the work done by the scholars than to the high percentage of scholars who show some knowledge, in estimating the merit of the teaching.
We recommend strongly that where the size of the school makes it reasonable that a fuller curriculum should be taught, more aid should be given to meet corresponding efforts on the part of the managers.
We recommend special aid to small village schools which must be exceptionally costly, and which need a specially strong staff of teachers in proportion to the number of scholars.
And we recommend, in order to distribute State aid in proportion to the need of the school, and the poverty of the scholars, that the capitation grant shall increase with the lowness of the fee, and diminish with the raising of the fee above the average of the country.
NOTE BY DR. DALE AND MR. HELLER UPON PAYMENT BY RESULTS
(See page 331)
"On a review of the whole evidence, we have come to the conclusion that the system of payment by results, introduced into the Code of 1862, and retained with various modifications in all subsequent Codes, has done very much to discourage and counteract the efforts of those who have endeavoured to improve the quality of elementary education. It has had a tendency to induce managers and teachers to disregard, what should be one of their chief objects, the creation of intellectual
[page 334]
interest and activity in the children, and to adopt methods of instruction which will secure the mere mechanical accuracy that renders certain the attaining of a 'pass'. It, therefore, leads to the degradation of the teaching; the minimum of knowledge necessary for the dullest scholar, in order to secure the payment of the grant, determines the maximum of the teaching given to the brightest scholars in the class; the children with the least active minds receive a disproportionate amount of the teacher's time and attention, and are unduly pressed; the children with the most active minds who would profit most by the best, most careful, and most thorough teaching, are neglected; and, as the result, the knowledge acquired by the dull children is mechanical and formal; the knowledge acquired by the clever children is superficial; in both cases it is likely soon to be forgotten. An attempt to remedy these great and obvious evils was made by the introduction of the merit grant in 1882; but the evidence does not show that the grant has secured its object. We do not mean to affirm that in all schools the system has produced these grave evils, but that the tendency of the system has been to produce them. There are many managers and many teachers who have resisted, and successfully resisted, the strong inducements to sacrifice the educational interests of the children for the sake of obtaining a high percentage of 'passes' and a high grant; but there' are many who have been unable to resist; and it is one of the worst effects of the system that even to those who have a genuine educational zeal, and are prepared to make great sacrifices for the improvement of their schools, it suggests a false educational aim.
"We also think that the system exerts a prejudicial effect on the educational requirements of the Code. These requirements are naturally and inevitably regarded by teachers as determining the limits of the instruction which it is necessary for them to give; but under a system of payment by results, the requirements of the Code are necessarily restricted to the amount of knowledge which it is reasonable to demand from the great mass of the children.
"The system also affects very seriously the work of the inspector. It tends to make him a mere examiner, and to deprive the managers and teachers of the assistance which they ought to derive from the suggestions of a man having large educational experience and high educational authority on their methods of organisation, teaching, and discipline. While we do not desire that the schools should cease to be examined, we think it of the highest importance that they should be more frequently inspected. It is also our impression that though the relations between inspectors and schools are on the whole satisfactory, these relations would be still more cordial, and the general influence exerted by inspectors would be still more wholesome, if managers and teachers were not compelled to regard the distribution of money grants as one of the chief parts of the inspector's duties.
"It is apparent that the system of payment by results is regarded by the general body of teachers with dissatisfaction, and by large numbers of them with resentment. The grounds of their opposition to it are set out at great length in their evidence. The most distinguished and efficient teachers are as strongly opposed to it as the teachers who might be supposed to object to it on grounds of self-interest. Indeed, of all the complaints that are made against the system, one of the gravest rests on the allegation that it often secures more than they deserve to those who teach badly, and less than they deserve to those who teach well. Since the efficiency of all schools must largely depend upon the cheerfulness and heartiness and enthusiasm of the teachers, we are of opinion that the discontent with which the system of payment by results is regarded, and has long been regarded, by the great majority of the teachers who are working under it, is a strong additional reason for abandoning it."
CHAPTER 13
COMPULSION
Among the changes introduced by the Act of 1870 into English elementary education, the power of enforcing attendance was one of the most novel.
There had, indeed, been a certain amount of educational compulsion in force before that date through the Factory Acts, and the Act of 1870 did not directly assume the responsibility of enforcing compulsion. But it enabled the people in school board districts, through their representatives the school boards, to frame byelaws for compelling attendance at school.
[page 335]
The principal school boards, and many of the smaller ones, took advantage of this power, but the range of compulsion varied greatly. It was, however, proved that public opinion was ripe for imposing a legal obligation on parents to educate their children, and the Elementary Education Act, 1876, enacted (section 4), "it shall be the duty of the parent of every child to cause such child to receive efficient elementary instruction in reading, writing, and arithmetic, and, if such parent fail to perform such duty, he shall be liable to such orders and penalties as are prescribed by this Act."
Section 5 prohibited the employment of a child under 10 years of age, and only permitted a child upwards of 10 years of age to be employed if he had passed the prescribed standard, which is now the Fourth, or had made a certain specified number of attendances year by year at an efficient school.
This Act raised the age during which a child may be subject to compulsory education to 14, and it enabled such a child to be the subject of a school attendance order if the parent habitually and without reasonable excuse neglected his education, or if the child was found habitually wandering, or not under proper control, or in the company of rogues, vagabonds, disorderly persons, or reputed criminals. And disregard of such a school attendance order may result in sending the child to an industrial school.
This Act created authorities, called school attendance committees, throughout the country, where school boards did not exist, for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Act, and with discretionary power to make byelaws for school attendance like school boards.
In boroughs the school attendance committee is appointed by the town council. In Poor Law unions the guardians appoint the school attendance committee, but they could not make byelaws for a parish, except on the requisition of the parish (section 21).
Urban sanitary districts other than boroughs, if co-extensive with one or more parishes, and having not less than 5,000 inhabitants, might appoint a school attendance committee, and oust the authority of the guardians of the poor (section 33).
The effect of this Act was to create a general obligation of education throughout the country, and to furnish machinery by which gross and habitual violation of this duty could be corrected. It also put indirect pressure on parents to educate their children by a universal prohibition of employment of children under 10, and by the further prohibition of more than half-time employment for the great majority of children between 10 and 13, and of many children between 13 and 14. It also created the local optional power to enforce attendance at school throughout the country.
Under this Act there was a great extension of byelaws for compulsory attendance, but they were not universal, and they were not and are not uniform.
The Elementary Education Act, 1880, provided (section 2) that the Education Department might make byelaws for those districts which had not made them for themselves.
Under this Act byelaws for compulsory attendance have become universal.
The third section of this Act did away with the initiative of the parish before the school attendance committee of a union could make byelaws for that parish.
The Report of the Education Department for 1880-1, p. xxvi., shows that on the passing of this Act 450 out of 2,000 school boards, 20 out of 109 borough school attendance committees, 7 out of 67 urban school attendance committees, were without compulsory byelaws. Of 584 unions having school attendance committees, 275 were enforcing byelaws in one or more parishes, but only 15 were enforcing byelaws in all their parishes.
It appears that when byelaws became universal in 1880, out of 544 unions, 403 adopted the Fourth Standard, and 141 the Fifth Standard for total exemption.
Ninety unions adopted the Second Standard, 370 the Third, and 69 the Fourth, for partial exemption.
The Education Department proceeded to frame byelaws for those authorities which had failed to enact them for themselves; and in the byelaws framed by the Department Standards V and III were prescribed as the standards for total and for partial exemption.
Before the passing of the Act of 1880, 1,421 school boards, with 12,605,453 population, and 398 school attendance committees, with 3,665,705 population, had compulsory byelaws. In 1881 there were 2,051 school boards, with 13,318,492 population, and 761 school attendance committees, with 9,393,774 population, having compulsory byelaws. These are the figures of the census of 1871, the figures of
[page 336]
1881 being, of course, not at that time accessible. They represent the whole country under the operation of byelaws.
As the old byelaws enacted before 1880 may still remain in force, there is even now a great variation and irregularity in the extent of obligatory school attendance, even among closely neighbouring places; sometimes within the same town, if it is not a municipal borough, or a local board having a separate attendance committee. This is commented on in the Education Report of 1881-2, pp. xxix-xxxi, and illustrations will be found in the returns to our Circular A.
It will naturally be asked, what has been the effect of the introduction of legal compulsion upon the attendance of children at school and upon their education?
Some witnesses state that its influence has not been wholly good. They say that the existence of a limited legal obligation has in some cases tended to supersede the old feeling of a moral obligation; that children are now not sent to school before five years of age, where formerly they might have been sent earlier; and that, as soon as a child has passed the standard for total exemption, he is withdrawn from school, so that the age of leaving school is said to be earlier than formerly.
It is possible that this statement may be correct in some few cases, but we do not believe that the influence described is at all general.
In considering the question of children leaving as soon as they have passed, say, the Fourth Standard, we must remember that many children are now in school of a class who formerly escaped school altogether, and it is not reasonable to compare the action of their parents in seeking to take advantage of their labour with the action of those who formerly voluntarily sent their children to school. Any comparison as to duration of school life and appreciation of education must always be guarded by the remembrance that we are dealing now with many children who were never dealt with before.
Again, there is evidence that in some rural districts, the standard of exemption is kept low, and steps are taken to get the children out of school, not by the parents from resentment at compulsion, but by employers and others in authority, who do not wish to lose their supply of child labour. The raising of the fee after the Fourth Standard is said to be sometimes for this express purpose.
Again, as to the earlier age of leaving, there is no doubt that children are much more advanced educationally in regard to their age, than was the case 10 or 15 years ago; children were then kept at school till 14 doing work which they now master at 12, and the schools have not now the number of overgrown dunces that were formerly to be found in them.
All these things must be considered before we conclude that the age of leaving school is earlier than it was formerly.
The figures furnished by the Education Department do not confirm this contention.
Thus Table 18, in the Report of the Education Department, 1886-7 (p. 258), shows that of the total population under 15, which was 8,555,893, 4,553,751 were on the roll of inspected schools, or 53.2 per cent. The children on the roll between 13 and 15 were 16.3 per cent of all the children in the country of those ages.
In 1876 (see Table 13 of the Education Report, 1876-7 (p. 382)), the total population under 15 years of age was 7,364,399, of whom 2,943,774 or 40 per cent, were on the roll of inspected schools. The children between 13 and 15 on the roll constituted 10.2 per cent of all the children between 13 and 15 in the country. If the children between 13 and 15 on the roll had increased in the same proportion as the whole number of the children on the roll of inspected schools of all ages, they would have only increased by about 34 per cent, but they have actually increased nearly 60 per cent.
In certain districts there may be a disposition prematurely to remove children from school in order to put them to work, but this is in no way due to the dislike to compulsion, but is the fault of the low legal minimum of compulsion in certain districts.
Taking the country throughout, we are of opinion, that, during the last 10 years, there has not merely been a great increase in the number of children under instruction, but a considerable prolongation of the duration of school life.
But there is another criticism urged against our present compulsory system by many witnesses, namely, that, owing to the laxity with which it is carried out, it is ineffective.
We fully admit that the present system is very lax, and cannot for a moment be compared with the real compulsory enforcement of school attendance in Germany, and in some other parts of Europe, where it has entered into the habits of the people,
[page 337]
so as to secure a regularity of attendance which seems to our teachers and managers quite ideal.
We admit that in many cases the school attendance committees, largely composed of farmers, are not very forward either in appointing or in duly paying school attendance officers, and that their sympathy with education is not always very earnest.
We admit that the small rural boards are very reluctant to summon their neighbours for not sending their children to school, and that not unfrequently members of the board may be offenders against the law by employing children who should be at school.
We agree with the complaint so general from the witnesses, and in the answers to our circulars, that school attendance committees and school boards are constantly discouraged by the action of magistrates, who frequently refuse to convict, or who inflict nominal penalties when the law has been plainly and frequently broken. We think moreover, that stipendiary magistrates have often disregarded the law quite as much as the unpaid justices, especially in London.
We also think that the substitution of distress warrants for committal has enabled the magistrates to put further difficulties in the way of the local educational authority, and we think that the pressure on the time of the magistrates in London has necessarily forced them so to restrict the number of school board summonses as to enable inveterate offenders to defy the law.
But in making all these admissions we feel that the fact must be borne in mind that educational compulsion is a new thing, and that it was necessary to work it cautiously and tentatively. Any apparent harshness would have raised an outcry which would have resulted in greater injury to the cause of education than the gain from speedy and frequent convictions of the class of persons who are most commonly summoned for breaches of the byelaws.
We are, of course, anxious that all, and especially the most neglected, should get the full benefit of a good education, but it must be remembered that the section of society against whom compulsion is directly applied is but a small minority of the whole community, possibly not more than 5 per cent, certainly not more than 10 per cent, though in certain parts of our large towns they may be far more numerous. These people are often idle, and given to drink, and generally on the verge of misery, if not of starvation, and severe punishment applied to them causes the public to think more of their misery than of the causes which have led to that misery.
While, therefore, we hope that school boards, school attendance committees and magistrates will remember that it is their duty to enforce the law, and that to educate the young is the greatest security for relieving and removing the pauperism and the degradation which are now blots on our society, yet we look rather to the growth of public opinion in favour of education, than to increased legal penalties for securing regular attendance at our schools.
Moreover, it must not be supposed that the law of compulsory attendance is inoperative because it is rarely enforced, and even then not always effectively. We believe that a vast amount has been done, in consequence of the existence of the compulsory byelaws, to induce parents, by persuasion and warning, to send their children regularly to school. Members of school boards, managers, and attendance officers and others, have all helped in the work. We are satisfied that the attendance officers have, as a rule, shown much tact and consideration, and in their house to house visitations have had very great influence in persuading and inducing parents to perform their duty to their children. We think that the employment of well selected and adequately paid attendance officers has been a powerful influence, which has often made the appeal to the magistrate unnecessary, and their knowledge of the means and condition of the people makes them useful and efficient helpers in determining who are fit subjects for help, where fees may well be remitted, and where the strict letter of the law as to compulsory attendance may be waived on the ground of extreme necessity in the home.
For the great mass of the community, the knowledge that it is a legal duty to educate their children secures, on the whole, a willing compliance and an increasing effort to send the children regularly, even at the expense of some inconvenience and pecuniary loss to the family.
When we remember the great tax that has been put upon the poor, by preventing them from supplementing their wages by the early labour of their children, and when we remember with what cheerfulness this necessary restriction on their former liberty has been accepted, we see how powerful is the moral force of a law, and where the
[page 338]
law is in harmony with sound judgment, how seldom its coercive sanctions need be invoked.
In reference to the question of school attendance, we wish to record our strong opinion, that though summonses and fines may be necessary for a few, to be followed up, it may be, by the truant school and the industrial school, yet we believe that the progress which has been effected in the last 15 years has been only rendered possible by the liberal supply of good school buildings, easily accessible, at moderate fees, and by the great improvement in the teaching and curriculum. These improvements have satisfied parents that if they are deprived of the labour of their children they are getting that which is fully worth the sacrifice. It is to the still further supply of good well equipped school premises, with a liberal staff" of high principled and efficient teachers, and a curriculum well conceived and adequately taught, that we look, in the first instance for the further growth in numbers, in regularity and in punctuality of our school population.
We hope, also, that our recommendations as to inspection and examination will help to make the schools more attractive.
But while making due allowance for the reluctance of magistrates hitherto adequately to enforce the law, we think the time has come when the law should be strengthened, and magistrates should be required to give effect to the law. Not only in the evidence which we took orally, but in the memorials which will be found in our appendix, there is ample proof that school boards and school attendance committees are often fined themselves when they put the law in force against offenders. They have to pay in many cases the cost of the summons and other official charges; and then the offender is fined some nominal penalty.
We think that a second or further offence within a certain time should result in an increased penalty.
Magistrates are unfit judges of the amount of education that a child is receiving. Where a child is under instruction, otherwise than in a public elementary or other certified efficient school, it should be lawful to require such child to present himself for examination at a public elementary school near where he lives, and if such child fails to satisfy Her Majesty's Inspector that he is under efficient instruction, it should be evidence that he is not efficiently instructed.
We think that the substitution of distress warrants for the power of committal is cumbrous, dilatory, and costly. It has worked injuriously to the parents themselves, while it has certainly adversely affected the working of the compulsory laws.
As to industrial schools, we think that their educational side should be further developed, and we agree with the Commission which lately inquired into them, that their educational work should be inspected by the Education Department.
But the ordinary industrial school, while suitable, perhaps, to cases which are on the verge of crime, involves too long a detention to be applicable to many cases where boys are wild and masterful, but may be corrected by a short application of sharp discipline. For such cases as these, we think that truant schools, such as the London and other school boards have established, have been very useful. The power of sending a boy back to such a school is useful in the back ground, but the permanent detention of a boy for five years, is a needlessly costly, and elaborate remedy for what is sometimes nothing but an excess of ill-directed energy. Day industrial schools have been worked successfully in some towns, and attempt to deal with specially difficult cases.
We think the time has come, when throughout the country no child should be allowed to leave school unless it be under very exceptional circumstances, to be specially considered by the educational authority, under the age of 13; and, we think that no half-time should be allowed till a child is at least 11 years of age, and has advanced in instruction up to the attainments of the present Third Standard, to be raised in two or three years to the Fourth Standard, and even then half-time should not be a matter of right, but should depend on the child being necessarily and beneficially employed.
It would be very undesirable if the raising of the standard of compulsory education generally should be accompanied by any local lowering of the standard.
We may refer to the evidence from Huddersfield, showing the great advantage that has resulted there from fixing the Sixth Standard as the measure of instruction for total exemption from school attendance.
No child should be allowed to leave school before 14, unless he or she is profitably employed either at home or at work. Much evidence was given to us of the mischievous
[page 339]
effect upon character of setting big boys free from the discipline of school when they were not employed, but idled about the town or village.
We are not here dealing with the question of educational authorities, but we think that those whose duty it is to enforce compulsion, should act over an area much larger than the parish, as the invidiousness of ordering prosecutions would thereby be diminished, and we think that the districts proposed to be created by the Local Government Bill would be suitable units for this purpose; but their action might possibly be subject to inspection by the county authorities, who should require the attendance to be effectively and seriously enforced.
CHAPTER 14
SCHOOL MANAGEMENT
COMPARISON OF BOARD AND VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS
Under the existing school system of the country, whereby the only security for efficiency as regards the large majority of elementary schools, is the government inspection, and by which the State leaves the widest discretion to the managers of the separate schools, who in many cases are single persons, it is of great importance to consider whether any further precautions should be taken to secure that the schools so largely aided, and to which the mass of the children can be compelled to go, be efficiently and fairly managed.
In reference to the denominational question, we do not consider that the conscience clause, which merely enables a parent to use the school as a secular school, is an adequate security for fair play and religious impartiality in the management. Even if the conscience clause were largely used, there would be ample room, through the selection of teachers, and through the methods of instruction, to influence the whole spirit of the school. But this predominance of denominationalism in our national system must continue so long as the majority of the people of the country are willing to delegate the duty of public education to volunteers mainly influenced by denominational zeal.
While not interfering with the private management of voluntary schools, we are strongly of opinion that the report of the government inspector on the school should be made known throughout the district. Most of the parents are not only in humble circumstances, but are also not fully able to observe from the progress of their children the relative educational advantages of the various schools in their neighbourhood. We believe that the publication of the government reports would not only give much useful information to the district, of which many parents would avail themselves, but in the case of a somewhat inefficient school, would exercise a useful pressure on the managers and prove a great incentive to improvement.
Again, we are of opinion that the accounts of all schools receiving public money should be equally thoroughly audited, and the same rules of legality applied to their expenditure. The circular issued by the Huddersfield Church School Association, and entitled "Hints on Article 114 of the new Code", shows the temptations to which voluntary managers are exposed so to arrange their accounts as to obtain the maximum government grant, above 17s 6d, while evading some of the conditions on which that grant is awarded.
We quote the following paragraphs:
Extracts from Hints circulated by the Huddersfield and Saddleworth Church Day School Association
5. As much as possible the scholars should be encouraged to purchase their own school requisites, either of the managers or their deputy, the head teacher. The amount returned from the sale of school material may be reckoned as income.
[page 340]
6. In like manner all sewing materials used in the school should be provided by the managers, who could recoup themselves by a sale of the children's work at the end of the school year.
8. All accounts for the purchase of school materials should be paid in full, and the discounts received should be entered as items of income.
9. A small sum should be charged for the use of the rooms in the case of all classes, meetings, or entertainments held on the premises after the ordinary school hours, and even the Sunday school might be charged a small rent.
10. Where the managers provide a residence for the teachers, the latter should pay a rent for the same, and their salaries should be correspondingly increased.
11. All necessary work performed gratuitously on behalf of the school, or gifts in kind, should be paid for and the amounts returned as donations. This is not applicable in the case of paid officers of the school. (Minutes of Evidence, Vol. 3, Q. 46,560).
In some cases, when a school is built, the building is vested nominally in some third person, without a trust deed, and then the managers are charged such a rent as will enable the school to escape the limitations which prevent the grant exceeding 17s 6d a head, the nominal owner repaying as a subscription what he has nominally received as rent. This appears to be common in the Roman Catholic schools of Bradford and other places, where large sums are set down as rent of building, and yet these schools while apparently rented at considerable sums are rated at nominal values.
Thus, the managers of St. Mary Roman Catholic school, Bradford, stated in their school accounts of 1884, submitted to the inspector, that they pay £258 6s 8d rent. In 1885 they entered £250 rent, and in 1886 £200. The managers of St. Patrick's Roman Catholic school, Bradford, enter £260 rent, and other similar instances might be quoted.
In the absence of an efficient audit and of full publicity of accounts, it is possible to charge an apparently high salary as paid to the teacher, and to enter on the side of the receipts a subscription to the school representing the difference between the real and the nominal salary. It is said that teachers have sometimes signed receipts for salaries larger than they have received. If managers are tempted to commit such frauds, they may easily, while the accounts remain unpublished and unaudited, deceive the inspector, who has little time or inclination to examine the accounts minutely. We desire not merely that the accounts of voluntary schools should be subject to an independent public audit, but we think they should also be made public in the locality.
The fees should be fair and uniform, and should include all school charges such as books, &c., and should be approved by the Department for voluntary schools like the fees in board schools.
We have also in our recommendations on the curriculum indicated how far the State should take securities for adequacy of teaching in all schools. The practice of farming schools to the teacher is in our judgment fatal to efficiency and honest management. Any school in which, owing to the smallness or absence of subscriptions, the teacher is made to depend for his salary entirely or mainly on the fees and the grant, is in danger of suffering from the evils which result from farming schools. These are, amongst others, undue pressure on the children, the tendency to get rid of stupid and irregular children, the prominence of cram, and of striving rather for examination results than for thorough education; the undue reduction of the staff, and the inadequate salaries, especially of assistants and pupil teachers.
Nothing short of public responsible management of our schools, by representative bodies drawn from a sufficiently large district, will in our opinion completely remove the dangers we have indicated, but we think they may be reduced, if the measures we have suggested be adopted and strenuously enforced by the inspectors.
Comparisons are often made between the management of board and voluntary schools, and many witnesses lay stress on what they believe to be the greater interest taken in their schools by voluntary managers.
There is no doubt that if the results of government inspection are a fair test of the efficiency of schools the board schools are much more efficient than the voluntary schools. Taking the infant schools and the senior schools separately, in both cases the board schools, whether judged by the assessment of merit by the inspector, or by the results of examination in standard, class, and specific subjects, are distinctly superior to the voluntary schools.
[page 341]
Thus in the statistical tables giving the results of examination for the last year 1886-7, the following results appear in the case of infant schools:
BOARD SCHOOLS
Infants
Average attendance -
172,761 | Excellent | 41.6 per cent |
196,601 | Good | 47.4 per cent |
41,323 | Fair | 10 per cent |
3,912 | No merit grant | 1 per cent |
VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS
Infants
Average attendance -
160,019 | Excellent | 25.8 per cent |
323,719 | Good | 52.2 per cent |
122,215 | Fair | 19.7 per cent |
13,764 | No merit grant | 2.3 per cent |
In the case of senior scholars, the following table gives these results:
BOARD SCHOOLS
Senior Departments
Average attendance -
301,458 | Excellent | 83.3 per cent |
485,270 | Good | 53.6 per cent |
104,078 | Fair | 11.5 per cent |
15,021 | No merit grant | 1.6 per cent |
VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS
Senior Departments
Average attendance -
337,118 | Excellent | 20.9 per cent |
857,357 | Good | 53.3 per cent |
357,314 | Fair | 22.2 per cent |
57,249 | No merit grant | 3.6 per cent |
The average grant per head in board infant schools, was more than 15s 4d. The average grant per head in voluntary infant schools was 14s 6d. In the senior departments the board schools earned nearly 19s a head, and the voluntary schools nearly 17s 7d a head.
If the returns of the Education Department are examined in detail, it will be found that this superiority of results of instruction in board schools runs generally through the returns. Thus the passes in the standard examination are more numerous; class subjects are more generally taken, and are more successfully taught. Singing by note is more prevalent. Drawing is much more generally taught; and a much larger proportion of the scholars have been under instruction in practical cookery and have passed in specific subjects. This higher range of teaching is the natural result of the better means employed, the staff being more numerous in proportion to the scholars, of a higher quality, and as a rule, better paid. It is evident from these facts that school boards generally have been characterised by a desire to improve education, and not to manage their schools with a view to the lowest possible cost regardless of the efficiency of the instruction.
But it is urged that this is owing to two reasons; first, that the boards are not hampered by want of money, and that if voluntary managers had as much money they would produce as good results; and, secondly, it is said that the board schools
[page 342]
being, as a rule, larger, are bound to be better than the voluntary, especially the church schools, which are, many of them, small rural schools.
In reference to these observations, it is undoubtedly true that, as a rule, large schools are more efficient than small schools, and that the board schools, as a class, enjoy that advantage over the voluntary schools, and this is a reason why we must look to the extension of the board school system for an improvement of our education. If we organise our school instruction on the denominational plan, we shall be forced to multiply small schools in the interest of various denominations, where one united school would answer far better the general needs of the district.
As to the question of cost. Here too it is quite true that if our National education is to be efficient, it must be paid for with liberality. If we are to attract good teachers the salaries must not be lower than the wages of an artizan. We must train our teachers for their work, we must have classes of moderate size, and the school material and buildings must be thoroughly adapted to their purpose. All this will cost money, and if the public are to find the money, the public must have the management. It cannot be said that the school boards generally are spending more than is needed to secure their work being properly done. Indeed in many places the boards show themselves extremely sensitive to criticism as to expense, and at every election it is apparent that the question of expenditure is one to which the electors pay close attention.
We believe that, even apart from the questions of large schools and the power of levying money by rate, school boards are more likely to prove efficient than voluntary managers. In the first place, school boards generally have several schools to manage, and we are of opinion that the areas of school boards should be so extended that no board should exist with only one or two schools under it. Boards with several schools to manage are educated by their work. The comparison of one school with another makes them more conscious of the shortcomings of their less efficient schools, and sets before them a standard of higher excellence. On the other hand, while some voluntary managers perform an admirable work in an admirable spirit, there are many schools where the management falls officially into the hands of unfit persons possessing no practical knowledge of their duties, and yet there is no power to remove or supersede them, and the school may suffer for a lifetime. If a bad board is elected, the ratepayers can put the matter right in three years, and we believe that we may trust the electors, as a rule, though not incapable of making mistakes, to be ready and willing to correct them.
But it is the small rural boards which are generally picked out by the witnesses who favour the voluntary system as the specially inefficient bodies whose mistakes and incompetence make it necessary to preserve the voluntary system, especially in the country; and no doubt prima facie we might expect such boards not to do their work well. They have, as a rule, been formed either where there had been such want of interest in education that no efficient school existed at their formation, or they represent the indifference and abdication of voluntary managers who have turned their schools over to a board. The rate has generally been heavy in these rural parishes, and the farmers, who are largely represented on these boards, have not the reputation of being very ready to increase the rates.
But when we turn to the summary compiled for us in 30 poor law unions having a population of 1,031,901, we find, taking the schools with an attendance of less than 100, and there were 474 voluntary schools, with 27,094 average attendance, or an average of 57 each. These schools earned 16s 0¾d grant per head, and cost 39s 11¾d per head. In the same districts there were 91 board schools having 5,721 average attendance, or 63 each on an average. These earned 16s 3½d grant per head, and cost 39s 1d per head. These figures are taken on the schools whose returns are for 12 months.
It should be noted that a larger proportion of the voluntary schools than of the board schools get the special grant of £10 or £15, and if that were deducted from both sides it would show that the grant, as dependent on examination is still higher in board schools, as compared with voluntary schools, than is shown in the table.
If we take all the board and voluntary schools having less than 100 attendance in these 30 unions we find that the percentage of passes was 79 in voluntary schools and 83 in board schools. Ten per cent of the voluntary schools were refused any merit grant, and five per cent of the board schools; while 11 per cent of the board schools were assessed excellent against eight per cent,of the voluntary schools; 23½ per cent of the voluntary schools took no class subjects, 18½ per cent of the board
[page 343]
schools took no class subjects; and the other detailed statements show a similar superiority in the board schools though they cost 10d per head less.
If we pass to the larger schools, those with 100 and upwards, in these poor law unions we find again that the board schools cost slightly less than the voluntary schools; their average size is 258 as against 225 for the voluntary schools; and their results of examination show better work; thus the passes were 87 per cent against 84, the "excellents" were 27 per cent against 16 per cent, no merit grant was awarded to one per cent as against five per cent, and the grant earned was 17s 0½d against 16s 5¾d.
If instead of comparing departments, we were to take the children under instruction in the board and voluntary schools in these selected unions, it would be found that a much larger proportion of children in board schools are well taught than in voluntary schools, owing to the larger number of children in each department, there being a greater proportion of large schools under board than under voluntary management. Mr. Healing giving evidence as to Essex, says that he would prefer a board in a village, as owing to its command of funds it can be more efficient.
But further, it is alleged by some witnesses that the board schools are judged by a stricter standard than the voluntary schools, and that the inspectors out of compassion for the limited means and inconvenient premises which hamper many voluntary teachers, either consciously or unconsciously award grants to them more liberally than they would do in the case of a board where the command of the rates takes away any excuse for short-handed staff or insufficient equipment.
The inspectors and the advocates of voluntary schools who came before us, denied that there was any such inequality in the standard of examination. But it is hardly denied, and it certainly is the case, that as to buildings, playground, offices, lighting, furniture and all the other material equipment of the school, the inspectors while steadily pressing for a higher standard of accommodation, are obliged in the case of voluntary schools to put up with much less than they consider desirable.
In reference to accommodation, the Code itself permits children to be crowded in a voluntary school up to the limit of eight feet per child in average attendance, while ten feet are required in the senior departments of board schools; and we have already given references to a large number of passages from the blue book in which inspectors complain of bad structures, absence of playground, bad lighting, bad furniture, unsanitary offices, want of class rooms, and other hindrances to school work. We may note Mr. Blakiston's statement (Blue Book, 1886-7, p. 270), "against these evils (of unsatisfactory benches and desks), we wage perpetual war, but are constantly met with the plea of want of funds". The silence of inspectors is no proof of the satisfactory state of school premises. Thus we have called attention in detail to the bad character of the school provision of Stockport. Yet Mr. Lomax, in his official report (Blue Book, 1886-7, p. 293), says, "in no part of this district (Stockport) is there a deficiency of school accommodation".
Mr. Vertue reports (1886-7, p. 320), of the Newton Abbot district - "Neither the ventilation, cleaning nor lighting has received the attention it deserves, and I am sure that badly lighted and ventilated and dirty rooms have been and are still in this district serious obstacles to the progress of the children."
But though this inferiority in premises and appliances is generally recognised, yet in the case of voluntary schools, an indulgent estimate of the work done often leads to a higher merit grant than is due, because, although the managers have neglected their duty, the inspector is forced by his sympathy with the teacher to disregard any real standard of excellence. We quite recognise that exceptional difficulties in a school justify exceptional treatment by the inspector, if managers and teachers have done their best to overcome these difficulties; but where the school is allowed to suffer on account of the poverty or indifference of managers, it is not the duty of the inspector to give State aid, not in furtherance of, but in substitution for local effort.
As illustrations of the way in which the merit grant is awarded to some voluntary schools, we give the following cases extracted from the returns in answer to our Circular B, and from the portfolios at the Education Department: At Sheffield, the Moorfields national school, according to the return furnished in answer to our circular, presented 109 children, passed 61 per cent, obtained one shilling for the second class subject, and failed to get any grant for English, but was awarded the "fair" merit
[page 344]
grant. The inspector, in his report of 1884, thus refers to the infant school. "In so dark and cheerless a room, infants are quite out of place, they have no gallery, no low flat desks, no suitable low-backed seats, no proper apparatus, no books"; he recommends a grant on account of the work of the teacher.
Sheffield Ellesmere Road Wesleyan school, girls' department, with 220 average attendance passed in 1885 66 per cent and got the reduced grant of one shilling for English, and two shillings for needlework. The "fair" merit grant was awarded. The inspector says - "The teachers of this school are sadly hampered by having to handle so many girls in one large room. The talkative habits, however, noticed last year have been to a great extent overcome. Had more intelligent methods been employed, better results would have followed. As it is, needlework has so much improved as to justify the recommendation of the higher grant; but the oral examination in English revealed such mechanical teaching as to unfit that subject for the higher grant. Pains have been taken with reading and handwriting. The faults noticed in the former may be traced to the impossibility of teaching the subject thoroughly to such large groups in one large room. The defective attainments in all their subjects of the fourth standard indicate not only incompetency on the part of their teacher, but lack of supervision on the part of the head mistress. Mental arithmetic throughout the school has been very badly taught. More suitable reading matter should be supplied. It is hoped that the managers will see their way shortly to providing class-rooms and an approach less likely to cause disaster in case of panic, than the narrow stone staircase now used." The accommodation of this school is one room 56 by 30 feet, and two so called class-rooms, one 20 by 8 feet, the other 13 by 8 feet, or a nominal accommodation for 264 at eight feet per child. After this report in 1885, fifteen years after the passing of the Education Act, we find in 1886 the remark - "It is hoped by next year a safer exit in case of panic will have been supplied". The school accounts show £105 10s charged for rent, of which the Sunday school repays £52 10s credited as income; there are no voluntary contributions, and the fees are 39 children at 3d, 146 at 4d, 37 at 5d, 38 at 6d.
The Sheffield St. Catherine Roman Catholic school presented 146 children, and passed 71 per cent, and attempted no class subject. It was assessed as "fair".
In the case of the Sheffield Surrey Street Roman Catholic school, in 1885, 188 boys were presented and 77 per cent passed. Of 179 girls presented 66 per cent passed, each of the departments was assessed good by the inspector. In 1886 the girls' department was again assessed "good", and the inspector remarks - "The girls are in very good order, but their attainments, though somewhat in advance of last year in elementary subjects, are still far from good. Writing and arithmetic require increased attention, and intelligence should be more developed, especially in the lower part of the school. Needlework and singing deserve commendation. For English, the ignorance of the subject matter of the recitations forbids the recommendation of the higher grant. It is to be hoped that the efforts of the present teacher to amend these deficiencies, of which she is well aware, will be supported by the supply of an efficient staff. Two only of the present staff are able to render real help. The good merit grant is again recommended, still, as last year, rather in recognition of the difficulties than of the actual deserts of the school. It is hoped funds will be forthcoming to make the room brighter and more cheerful."
Sheffield, St. Luke, Church of England, Dyer's Hill boys' school, presented 113 for examination, passed 57 per cent, failed to get any grant for English, and took no other class subject, and was assessed "fair".
Sheffield, St. Luke, Hollycroft, Church of England school, presented 128 children, passed 59 per cent, and was awarded the "fair" merit grant.
In Accrington, St. Andrew's, Hyndburn Street National school passed 64 per cent, and failed in both class subjects, and was assessed "fair".
In Ashton-under-Lyne, St. James' National school passed 74 per cent and failed in both class Subjects, and was assessed "fair".
In Glossop, the old Glossop Wesleyan school passing 65 per cent of the scholars presented, was assessed "fair".
[page 345]
In York, St. Paul's Foundry, passing 63 per cent and not attempting any class subjects, was assessed "fair". This report, says - "Steps towards providing a permanent and suitable building for this rapidly increasing district should be taken with as little delay as possible." In October 1883, the report said, "Seeing the rapid increase of population in the neighbourhood, it will be necessary shortly to erect a more substantial and commodious building." The report for February 1886 condemns the building and teaching in the strongest terms. But there is not yet a school board formed in York, though the department has made repeated representations as to the inadequate school supply of the town.
In Derby, the Parliament Street Wesley an school, in 1884, presented 155 scholars, and passed 66 per cent., and attempted one class subject unsuccessfully. This school was assessed " fair. ' It was conducted without any voluntary subscriptions, the fees range from 2d to 5d, and the average fee is 13s a year. The whole school has 216 in average attendance. The staff was, head (untrained), salary £107; one ex-pupil-teacher, £40; two pupil-teachers at £14 and £12; an assistant under Article 84, £20. The total cost of school maintenance was £1 3s 6d per scholar.
The 1884 Report of the girls' department of St. Luke's Church of England school, Derby, says - "Discipline and order fairly good. The spelling and arithmetic are in an unsatisfactory state, English and needlework good, grammar pretty fair. I recommend the merit grant of "fair" with great hesitation, and I only recommend it because I feel that the mistress has worked very hard in her school, the crowded state of which (I called attention to it last year without any result being produced) renders it impossible for her to conduct her school properly. The managers should either provide additional accommodation or admit fewer children." The accommodation of this school at 8 square feet was 252, the yearly average 226. The school passed 68 per cent out of 247 girls presented. As a contrast to this the girls' department at the Nun Street board school, Derby, where 214 girls were presented and 84 per cent passed, and 2s was paid for English and a second class subject paid for, and 26 girls were taught cookery, the merit grant of "fair" was also awarded.
In St. Mary's Roman Catholic boys' school, Bradford, in 1884, the inspector awarded the excellent grant to the boys, because it is a new school, though he says, "the children have passed a fairly good examination in elementary subjects". In the girls' school he awards the merit grant of "good", though he says, "the children have passed a fair examination in elementary subjects". They passed 75 per cent.
At St. Anne's Roman Catholic school, Bradford, in 1884, the registers had been tampered with in the girls' school, and consequently a deduction of one-tenth was made from the grant. In the following year, 1885, though the inspector reports that the offices of both girls' and infant departments were found filthy, and though the registers of the infant school were incorrect, and a serious caution was addressed to the managers, both departments were assessed "good". The managers of this school in answer to our circular complain that the Code is too exacting. This school, with 357 average, returned no voluntary contributions, and cost £1 10s 8d a head.
At St. Peter's Roman Catholic school, Bradford, the inspector, in 1884, awarded the "good" merit grant. In his report he says, "the results of the examination are barely fair, the grants recommended are larger than the actual results would justify".
At Sheffield, the Brunswick Wesleyan school, in 1885, with 65 per cent of passes, and failing in English and geography, got the "fair" merit grant. In the inspectors' report we find the following remarks: "The 1s for needlework is recommended by a stretch of leniency. The structural defects pointed out in the last report still exist. [The class rooms too small to be of much value, tempt the teachers to overcrowd them." - Quotation from report of 1884.] This mixed school had 471 average attendance. In 1884 rates, taxes, and insurance are entered at £150; in 1885 rent is entered at £75 and no rates; in 1886 rent and fuel are entered at £100, and no rates are charged; in 1887 the rent charged is £70.
At Liverpool Christ Church national school we have an instance of a voluntary school held year after year in premises which violate the requirements of the Education Department. In 1885 the inspector says, "the schoolroom, which is underground, is most depressing"; in 1886 he writes of "the depressing conditions in which the work of a school in ill-lit underground premises must necessarily be carried on". In 1887 the inspector remarks that the school "continues to be taught in gloomy underground premises."
[page 346]
At Sheffield, St. Luke's Church of England school, the inspector gives the "fair" merit grant to a school passing 58 per cent and obtaining the 1s class grant in each subject. He writes in his report: "For lack of good methods and attendance the results are far from what could be wished; the staff is insufficient." 162 were presented; the staff was head and one assistant.
In the cases where no quotations are made from the reports of the inspector, those reports have been examined, but they do not remove the impression of bad instruction conveyed by the scheduled results.
These specific instances of grants awarded in excess of the merit of the schools, and where the schools deserved a serious fine for bad instruction rather than any merit grant, are illustrated by some general evidence of inspectors. Thus, the Rev. C. Johnstone, the chief inspector of the south-western division of England, and himself in charge of the Chippenham division, in which there are few board schools, says (Blue Book, 1886-87, p. 324), "The percentage in reading is a high one, and seems to imply that there is little room or necessity for improvement. But the reading that passes is not necessarily good reading. The testimony of inspectors. I believe, is uniform that the reading is not satisfactory. My own experience points distinctly in the same direction, and I have no hesitation in saying that the standard for a pass in this subject ought to be raised, and that, as a body, we have been satisfied with too little. ... Each inspector is compelled to judge for himself; he has no set standard before him, and he frames one out of what he finds in the different schools he visits. Where all around is low his standard becomes low also; he is conscious of it himself, and he laments it, but he says, 'these children are all very much alike; they can none of them indeed read properly, and as the Code implies they ought to read, but if I pluck one I must pluck all.' And so in fear of too great sternness he errs on the side of leniency and lets all through. In this way, and not by any intrinsic excellence, is the high percentage of passes in reading accounted for, &c."
Mr. Johnstone, in his report for 1886 (p. 337), further speaks of the inspectors suffering all schools to drift towards the common sink of "good". He says, "If a merit grant is to exist, it should have its distinctions, but probably the truth is that these distinctions are productive of heart burnings and anxieties, and that inspectors apply the palliative by a levelling upwards of all whom their indulgence can crowd into the class of good."
A few lines further Mr. Johnstone speaks of the "struggling village school, with only the clergyman to care for it; with no funds, and often an indifferent teacher, and an irregular attendance of indifferent scholars. The inspector who arrives is in a dilemma. He must either refuse the grant and perhaps crush the school, or he must recommend the grant for work which he knows falls infinitely short of the standard laid down for him in the Code. He chooses, probably, the more merciful part, and from that hour he perpetuates bad teaching by rewarding imperfect effort."
The same south-western division was reported on by our colleague, Mr. Alderson, in 1884, as chief inspector. After describing the character of the district, and stating (p. 243) that the presumption is against the antecedent probability of elementary education being seen at its best in the south-western division, he states (p. 244), "The great preponderance of accommodation is to be found in voluntary schools." Noticing, on page 249, the proportions of fair, good, and excellent assessments, and the relatively large number of "good" reports, he says, "A school which is more than 'fair', but less than 'good' is placed, as a rule, in the latter category." And he further says, "that the mark 'excellent' has been given to infant schools, he is inclined to think, too freely." And again, he says, "that the percentage of 60 excellent or good infant schools and classes seems to him in excess of their real merit." Speaking of the schools which take no class subjects, principally in the Salisbury, Bournemouth, and Newton Abbot districts, he notes that the proportion to all schools of 12.7 per cent strikes him as somewhat large.
Mr. Harrison, Her Majesty's Inspector at Liverpool, stated in his evidence before us that he was more indulgent to schools working under difficulties in awarding the merit grant, and that the difficulties of the school might perhaps unconsciously affect one's judgment in other matters.
Mr. Synge, the inspector for part of Norfolk, states that the standard of instruction is kept down to some extent for fear of causing a loss of income to the schools, since if the grant falls below a certain point the people (i.e., the managers) would have nothing to depend upon. This must mean voluntary managers, as school boards always have the rates to depend upon.
[page 347]
We may refer to the evidence of Mr. Mackenzie to show that inspectors in consideration of the financial difficulties of schools, award grants in excess of the real educational work done. He says, "The present standard is very low, and when it is known how much depends upon the examination, there is a tendency to accept a very low minimum. This we find especially the case in reading, and even in writing and arithmetic. I am often astonished at the kind of work that passes for 'good', and still more so with the class subjects." He states that the small village schools, which are extremely bad, are judged with more indulgence than their merit would justify; and he further says that sometimes schools are treated indulgently on account of their difficulties, while the difficulties have not been surmounted.
In 1877, when the work of the school boards was in its infancy, when board schools were far less well built and arranged than at present, and when the board schools recently opened were filled with ignorant children in the lower standards, Mr. Alderson spoke thus of the relative merits of the board and the voluntary system in the school board division of Marylebone (Blue Book, 1877-78, page 401), "The board school has the advantage of being entirely detached from the machinery of the parish. It can be conducted with a more single eye to learning. In voluntary schools it not unfrequently happens that an incompetent or superannuated teacher is sustained in office because he has been or is so useful in the parish, and so much respected there. Thus a sort of ' vested interest ' grows up in the post of teacher, which is often a hindrance to progress. Then the management of the board school is more uniformly careful and vigilant than that of the voluntary school. The management of voluntary schools of the best class is equally good, probably superior, but in many of the less efficient ones signs of apathy and indifference on the part of the managers may be discerned. I am far from claiming for inspectors an unerring judgment, but it is impossible not to notice as an almost new experience how sensitively the board school vibrates, go to say, to the touch of official criticism. The Government report undergoes a rigorous scrutiny, the figures of the teachers' salaries depend (too exclusively, I think) on the percentage of passes. [Note, the teachers of the School Board for London are now paid fixed salaries.] Each entry upon a certificate is scanned and weighed, and may seriously affect the prospects of the holder. In the best voluntary schools the same alertness is visible, but not in all. The report is sometimes regarded as a mere formality for announcing the amount of the grant; no action is taken upon it when adverse; the incapable teacher remains, and the record of his incapacity fills a corner of the school portfolio. Another advantage of the board school is the higher standard of school accommodation which it has introduced, an illustration of this will suffice. I was not myself aware, or rather I did not realise, how defective the lighting of many voluntary schools was until I came to compare them with the airy, brightly-lit chambers of the board school. This has led to the improvement of the light in several voluntary schools. Of the school work in board schools, a marked feature, due, of course, to their superior teaching power, is superior nicety. A first standard prepared by a certificated teacher is very different from a first standard prepared by a raw monitor; but then an equally marked feature in school board instruction in its present stage is its limited range. It will be a surprise to many who have credited the London School Board with au over ambitious programme, to learn that elementary school work nicely executed is at present the 'note' of their operations in Marylebone."
Mr. Alderson goes on to point out that at that time only 16 per cent of the children presented were above the third standard in board schools, compared with 30 per cent in voluntary schools.
The evidence of Mr. Martin shows the relative efficiency of board schools and voluntary schools in Marylebone ten years after the above remarks of Mr. Alderson. We find in 1886 that 37.5 per cent of the board schools and 14.5 per cent of the voluntary schools were classed excellent, five per cent of the board schools and 24.8 per cent of the voluntary schools fell to fair, no board schools and 2.7 per cent of the voluntary schools were refused any merit grant. Of the pupil-teachers 30 per cent of the board and 3.1 per cent of the voluntary passed well and earned 60s, 37.8 per cent of the board and 64.2 per cent of the voluntary earned nothing, but it must be noticed that these figures fail to show the full superiority of the board pupil-teachers, because the London School Board does not seal the indentures with its candidates till at the earliest the close of the first year, and, therefore, a very large number of the board pupil-teachers earned nothing, not because they passed badly,
[page 348]
but because the Department refuses to pay on pupil-teachers for the year's examination at which they are admitted to apprenticeship.
We may refer to the results of the answers to our Circular B to managers of voluntary schools and to boards, as proving in other large towns how greatly superior is the work of the school board. Thus, in Liverpool, of the board schools 46.8 per cent were rated excellent, 49.4 per cent good, 3.8 per cent fair, and to none was the merit grant refused. Of the voluntary schools in the same town 10.5 per cent were rated excellent, 60.5 per cent good, 27.3 per cent fair. To 1.7 per cent the merit grant was refused.
In Sheffield 21.1 per cent of the board schools and 4.4 per cent of the voluntary schools were rated excellent. In Leicester the extraordinary proportion of 75.7 per cent of the board schools were rated excellent, and 16 per cent of the voluntary schools. In very few of the large towns are the voluntary schools abreast of or superior to the board schools as judged by the reports of the inspectors.
We think, therefore, that we are justified in concluding that school board management, by securing a sufficient area of collective supervision, by its command of sufficient funds for the due maintenance of schools, and by its greater facilities for building schools large enough to secure efficient organisation is more able to promote national education than the voluntary system; that already the results of board school teaching are proved to be distinctly superior to the education provided in voluntary schools, that there is evidence to show that the standard of educational efficiency is kept down out of tenderness to the want of means of voluntary schools, and that a lower standard is applied to them, avowedly in the matter of school buildings and furniture, and also to some extent in the estimating of the results of examination.
CHAPTER 15
COST OF PUBLIC ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
The cost of our elementary education is defrayed mainly from three sources.
1. The fees paid by the parents, amounting to about 10s 6d head.
2. The grant from the State, amounting to about 17s a head.
3. (a) The subscriptions in voluntary schools, amounting to about 6s 9d a head.
(b) The rates in board schools, amounting to about 18s 6d a head.
The gross cost per head in voluntary schools was £1 16s 6d, in board schools, £2 5s.
Many questions arise on these figures and on the distribution of the cost.
Many persons demand that fees should be abolished, though no definite scheme has been put before us showing how and at whose cost this is to be done.
We are not agreed in principle on the question whether school fees should form one of the sources of income for a national compulsory system of elementary education.
But having regard to the fact that the larger part of the education of the country is in the hands of voluntary managers (more than 63 per cent), it becomes a practical question how it would be possible, consistently with the continuance of the voluntary source of school supply, which we all agree will continue largely to contribute to our public elementary school system, to introduce any subsidy either from local or national sources to make good the deficiency of income which would result from the abolition of fees generally. The first question is, should the loss be made good from local or from national sources?
As it is always thought more popular and more easy to assail the Treasury than to put new burdens on the ratepayers, probably there would be found more advocates for charging the proposed subsidy on the Imperial Exchequer than on the rates.
But, assuming this to be granted, on what principle should the subsidy be based?
It would clearly not be equitable to give no help, or very little, to the managers who are educating the poorest, at the lowest fees and at the highest cost to themselves, and it would be unreasonable to give a very large public subsidy to the parents who, by paying 9d a week and even more, have shown that they are comparatively well-off. We are therefore thrown back on the idea that an average subsidy from the State,
[page 349]
approximately equal to the present fee income, say 10s a head on the average attendance, should be given to all schools alike.
But if this grant were made to the low-feed and free schools security would have to be taken that the money was used in improving the education, and not in relieving the pockets of the voluntary subscribers or the local ratepayers, and conditions of increased efficiency would have to be enforced on these schools for the poor which might prove a matter of some intricacy to settle in detail.
On the other hand, the schools charging a fee of 6d and upwards, having 3.75 per cent of all the children under instruction, or nearly 169,000, would lose an income of at least 12s per child per annum, and the schools charging a fee of 4d to 6d, having 18 per cent of all the children, or nearly 585,000 children on the roll, would lose 5s a child per annum of income. The bulk of these children paying the higher fees are in voluntary schools, and a much larger proportion of the whole than in board schools.
Now, however undesirable it may be that the better education of children in elementary schools should be coupled with a heavier charge on the parents, and however much some of us may desire the extension of the board school system, for this reason among others, that it would make the liberality of the school curriculum more independent of higher fees, yet we must all of us recognise that it is better that there should be good schools, even though they be maintained by higher fees, than that their efficiency should be seriously crippled by cutting off a material part of their income. And no one can doubt that the mass of high-feed voluntary schools, if deprived of their fee income and contracted in their resources by a loss of from 5s to 12s, or possibly more than a pound a head, would be unable to raise so great a deficiency by subscriptions, and would be forced to lower their salaries, reduce the amount and quality of their staff, and generally injure their education. At any rate, while we have a right to expect some substantial effort of a local character, either voluntary or from the rates to meet the liberal grants of the National Exchequer, it would not be wise too absolutely to contract their present resources. And even in the case of school boards it is doubtful whether the higher elementary schools which have been founded with so great advantage would have been as warmly supported by the people if the power to charge high fees had not lightened the burden on the ratepayers.
We are therefore compelled in the interest of education to conclude that no practical scheme of free education compatible with the continuance of the voluntary system has presented itself to us.
But stopping short of the recommendation of free education there is no doubt that there are substantial grievances coupled with the present fee system, and that a refusal to sweep away that system makes it the more imperative on us to reduce its practical hardships to a minimum. And in dealing with the fee question we have to consider two classes - the average poor for whom a reasonable fee is required, and the specially poor for whom free education is necessary.
And first to deal with the average poor. In the case of school boards the intervention of the Education Department is necessary before a board school fee can be finally settled and become legal. The Department has used its right of interfering in the settlement of the fee as much in the direction of insisting upon a high fee as of securing a low one. We think that the duty of the Department is to secure that the fee shall not be beyond the means of the parents, but if a school board proposes a low fee, they are the elected representatives of the ratepayers on whom the loss will fall, and the Department should not interfere for the purpose of raising the fee.
Secondly, we think that in no case should the fee be raised with the standard in which the child is working. The sound principle on which a fee should be settled is the ability of the parent to pay, and an increase of fee as the child gets higher in school has a bad influence and tends to drive the child prematurely to work. Indeed, we had evidence that the fee is raised in this way sometimes with that express intention.
The returns from managers of voluntary schools in answer to our Circular A are very interesting as illustrating the evil result of raising the fee by age or standard. Of the counties to which Circular A. was sent, three - Lancashire, Durham, and Stafford - are populous and manufacturing, and the labouring population in those counties may generally be supposed to be better off than in the seven remaining counties: Berks, Leigh of Devon, Dorset, Gloucester, Kent, Leicester, Lincoln. The three first-mentioned counties are the three counties in which the majority of the schools raise their fees according
[page 350]
to age or standard, and not according to the means of parents or number in the family. The proportion being -
| Age or Standard | Means of Parents or No. in Family |
Durham | 180 | 29 |
Lancashire | 1,260 | 217 |
Staffordshire | 203 | 141 |
| 1,643, 81% | 387, 19% |
In the remaining seven counties the following were the figures -
By age or standard, 481, 25 per cent, by means of parents or number in the family, 1,410, 75 per cent.
In answer to the query, are the fees paid with or without difficulty, in the first three counties the numbers are -
| Without difficulty | With difficulty |
Lancashire | 842 | 308 |
Durham | 191 | 154 |
Stafford | 214 | 116 |
| 1,247, 68% | 578, 32% |
In the seven other counties the answers are, without difficulty 1,680, or 86 per cent: with difficulty 274, or 14 per cent.
It certainly cannot be supposed that the poor in such counties as Berks, Devon, and Dorset would find it easier to pay fees than in Lancashire, Staffordshire, and Durham.
Thirdly, we think that the fee should cover all the cost of the schooling, and that extra charges for books and school material are objectionable, as are special charges for special extra subjects taught. The curriculum of a public elementary school should be suitable to the children attending it; and class distinctions should not be introduced in the school, nor should there be a danger that the poorer scholars will be neglected for the select few, who receive special instruction at an extra charge.
These rules should apply to all schools, voluntary as well as board. In many parts of the country the voluntary schools have a monopoly of the school supply. In all parts they are reckoned as part of the school supply available for all. It is right therefore that the fee should not be capricious. We should not permit higher fees to be charged for backward boys, or irregular boys, or insubordinate boys - practices which exist at present, though to what extent it is hard to say, as these matters seldom come to light.
There is, however, a common and growing practice in many voluntary schools of raising the fees and then making a return of a part as a reward for regular and punctual attendance. This method seems to be a very convenient and effective one in the interest of school discipline and punctuality, but it cannot be accepted as satisfactory as it amounts to a new fine imposed on irregularity, not by the magistrate, but by the managers, and must fall most heavily on the poorest who unavoidably are most in danger of sending their children irregularly to school.
We think, therefore, that in all public elementary schools the fee should be approved by the Department, whose duty shall be to secure that it is not in excess of the power of the generality of the parents in the neighbourhood to pay. This fee should be uniform throughout a department, and not rise by class or standard, though there may be a reduction for the number in the family. It should cover all school charges, and where the school is the only one, or the other schools with lower fees are full, it should have a prescribed maximum of a moderate amount.
Passing now to those who should be exempt from fees. The action of the guardians cannot on the whole, according to the evidence before us, be considered satisfactory.
In the first place it should be the duty of the guardians to pay the fees of all children, whether under five or past the standard for exemption, whose parents wish to send them to school and who are otherwise fit subjects for aid.
Secondly, in the case of outdoor paupers, the guardians should pay all fees direct to the managers of the school, and not give a lump sum to the parent to include fees.
Thirdly, if the guardians retain the duty of paying fees, they should entertain applications at places convenient to the applicants and away from the workhouse, and
[page 351]
especially in rural districts they should make arrangements in the different villages for hearing applications.
But the guardians have not generally given satisfaction in the discharge of this duty, and there is among many a feeling that it should be transferred to school boards. A majority, however, of managers have answered our circular adversely to this proposal, and though this may be owing partly to their ignorance of school boards, and their unwillingness to promote their formation, yet we think, having regard to the strong feeling that existed in reference to the 25th clause of the Act of 1870, that it would be unwise to re-open that topic of contention. But we are of opinion that facilities should be given whereby poor parents may obtain the payment of moderate school fees for their children in voluntary as well as in board schools without any association with ideas of pauperism.
Facilities might also be given to managers by a re-adjustment of the grant which would make it easier for them, in suitable cases, to remit the fees of poor children in their schools.
It is a hardship, not to say a scandal, that the largest share of public support should now go to those who need it the least, and who make the least effort to deserve it by corresponding contributions on their own part. The large high-fee'd schools of the towns, which are admittedly the easiest to maintain in a state of efficiency, and which often cost the managers nothing or next to nothing, receive very high grants; on the other hand, the struggling village school, or the school working among the poorest people in our large towns, with low fees and comparatively liberal contributions from rates or subscriptions, owing to the difficulties of teaching earns a low grant. It would not be desirable, so long as the State is not in favour of a general policy of free schools, to pay the managers such a subsidy as would make them indifferent whether they collected fees or not, but we think that where the conditions of the neighbourhood make the managers think low fees expedient they should be recouped a pari of the necessary loss; this would enable them more easily not only to acquiesce in a general low fee, but to remit the fees to those who either temporarily or permanently are unable to pay them.
We suggest that in all schools where the fee income for the year is between 9s and 10s a head, the fixed grant shall be augmented by sixpence a head, and be increased sixpence for each shilling diminution of fee income, and on the other hand, that schools receiving from 11s to 12s a head from fees should be subject to a diminution of sixpence on the fixed grant, and should be diminished an additional sixpence for each increase of 1s on fee income up to £1 a head from fees, where the diminution should cease.
Such a re-adjustment of the grant would do much to maintain the small village schools and the large schools in the poorer districts of our towns, where a missionary work is carried on among the most difficult children. We recommend further that school boards have full power if they see fit, without any check from the Education Department, to make some or all of their schools free schools. They are not likely to do so largely, on account of the cost it would entail on the ratepayers, but it would be well they should have that liberty, as the financial loss only affects their constituents.
In connection with the question of free schools, we must consider the case of those very poor children who come to school unfed and who not only need free education, but should be fed if they are to be enabled to benefit by the instruction of the school.
Free halfpenny and penny dinners have been supplied of late years in many schools, and there is no doubt that the regular feeding of the poor children in schools is a great aid to their regular attendance and to their progress in their studies.
We consider this question apart from the other question, whether self-supporting dinners might not well be organised by managers, both in country districts, where children come from great distances, and in towns where the parents have gone out to work and the children cannot go home to dinner. Such a system of self-supporting dinners must often be of great use, and we trust that managers will provide them where they are satisfied that they are needed.
But the free dinner or free breakfast opens a much wider question, and brings the administrators of education in contact with the problems and the work of those, who either as guardians of the poor or as charitable persons, relieve the destitute or succour the indigent.
Some have thought that day industrial schools are the best way of helping these very poor children. But while day industrial schools may be a way of reclaiming children whose surroundings are not merely miserable but degrading, there are many
[page 352]
cases of extreme poverty where the children should not be forced into any associations which must have a humiliating or even a contaminating character.
While we recognise that the misery which prevails in many parts of our great towns is a serious hindrance to the education of large numbers of children, and cordially acknowledge the value of the relief which is afforded by free or cheap dinners, we cannot ignore the fact that where food is given freely on a large scale, there must be a tendency to neglect safeguards of investigation, and to diminish the self-supporting efforts which are the greatest protection of the poor against their permanent depression.
Much is done quietly now in the way of feeding the hungry and clothing the naked by managers, teachers, and school board visitors in the poorest districts.
Sometimes sewing clubs are formed in the schools, where the girls who are better off bring clothes and make and mend them for their poorer fellow scholars, and nothing can be better for the character of all than such mutual help. We cannot doubt that in our large towns there are hundreds, and in London thousands, who need nearly daily food as well as free schooling. But seeing the dangers of collective action and its certain indirect evils, we make no recommendation on this subject.
The second main source of income in elementary schools, and far the largest in amount for the whole country and for the voluntary schools, is the Government grant.
Before 1870 the average Government grant was less than 10s a head, but when the Education Act was passed the Government, as has been before mentioned, in order to give a better opportunity for the voluntary schools to hold their own, enacted that the grant might amount to not more than one half of the total expenditure of the managers, and subject to that condition to a possible maximum of 15s, which maximum was afterwards removed. The grant rose steadily, and after the Act of 1876 it rose rapidly, while the fees also rose, but subscriptions fell off, the managers being enabled in an increasing measure to conduct their schools by the help of the fees and the grant.
It is now urged by a very great number of witnesses that the obligation to find one-half of the cost of school management from local resources, as a condition of receiving more than 17s 6d from the Government grant, should be relaxed or repealed. It is only of late years that this cry has been very loud, as it is only since the increased grants made payable by Mr. Mundella's Code that it has become a practical thing for any large number of schools to earn even as much as 17s 6d. But undoubtedly at the present time a considerable number of large schools can earn 17s 6d, and more than 17s 6d, with comparative ease; especially if they have small or no infant departments attached to them.
The claim of the managers sounds plausible when they say, "Under a system of payment by results you should pay us all we earn". Their attitude is that of contractors with the Government for scholastic results, and they contend that if they deliver so many good passes, so many class subjects, and so on through a priced catalogue of educational items, the Treasury has nothing to do but to add up the bill and give a cheque for the amount.
But this description of their relations with managers has never been accepted by the Government nor by the law, as expressed by Parliament. The law is a provision for State assistance in aid of local effort, and the local effort down to 1876 was always an essential condition of State aid. The relaxation of the obligation of the local sources of income to equal the Government grant which was made in 1876 cannot be taken as an argument why all securities for local contribution should be swept away. Nor has the Government ever admitted, even at the time of the promulgation of Mr. Lowe's Code, that their system of payment was one for results in the sense in which it is now urged as a reason for removing the obligation to furnish local funds for education.
At page xiii of the Education Report of 1874-75, issued by the Duke of Richmond and Viscount Sandon, occurs the following important passage: "By the changes in the Code, which will come into operation next year, we hope to check the practice of withholding children from individual examination who are qualified for it by attendance, and to secure that due attention is paid to branches of instruction beyond the standard course, which have recently been neglected by school managers and teachers on the insufficient ground that no special grants were offered by the Code for their encouragement. The spirit, and even the letter, of the instructions to the inspectors, issued in September 1862, after the introduction of the Revised Code, appear to have been strangely forgotten, for we find in those instructions the following passage [Report, 1862-63, page xviii]: 'The grant to be made to
[page 353]
each school depends, as it has ever done, upon the school's whole character and work. The grant is offered for attendance in a school with which the inspector is satisfied. If he is wholly dissatisfied, and if the reasons of such dissatisfaction are confirmed, no grant is made.' ' You will judge every school by the same standard that you have hitherto used, as regards its religious, moral, and intellectual merits. The examination under Article 48 (i.e. by standards) does not supersede this judgment, but presupposes it. That article does not prescribe that if thus much is done a grant shall be paid, but unless thus much is done no grant shall be paid. It does not exclude the inspection of each school by a highly educated public officer, but it fortifies this general test by individual examination. If you keep these distinctions steadily in view, you will see how little the scope of your duties is changed.'"
No doubt there has been a tendency year by year to forget the standing conditions of efficiency required by the Code, as requisite for the payment of a grant, such as suitable premises, appliances, proper staff, honesty in the management and conduct of the school, and to look more to the special tests applied on the day of inspection which determine the exact amount of the grant to be paid. It seems to us that the tone and attitude assumed by so many managers towards the question of the 17s 6d limit is one of the most serious facts we have to consider in reference to the question whether steps should not be taken to dissociate the grant paid from this mechanical assessment of scheduled results. The very managers who clamour for the repeal of the 17s 6d limit in a great number of instances ask for the abolition of payment by results; not seeing that the repeal of the 17s 6d limit would intensify the idea that these scheduled results of examination are the things for which the Government pays, and not rough and ready tests, by which it ascertains whether the State aid offered to local effort is really deserved.
Many of the managers and teachers who oppose the 17s 6d rule also complain of over-pressure, but nothing is more likely to produce over-pressure, and nothing has more contributed to such over-pressure as exists than the mechanical forcing of a large number of children to get through the examination, when the whole equipment of the school is regulated by the greatest parsimony, and the fees and the grant are the principal if not the sole sources of support. Managers who contribute little or nothing to the yearly maintenance of the school are not in a position to insist on rational management, nor can they control or check the teacher. He must be at liberty to arrange the school, not for the welfare of the children, but so as to secure a maximum of school income. Hence the curriculum is arranged with a view to what will pay. The staff is kept down, or at any rate assistants are engaged at starvation wages, while a vigorous teacher is often engaged at a considerable salary, who drives the school rather than teaches it, and practically pits his intelligence against that of the inspector, so as to produce the best paper result on the day of inspection.
One witness, who was very full of criticism of the working of the Code, having a school with 140 half-timers and an average of 350 to 360, and 476 children on the roll, told us that he worked the school with six assistants, mainly ex-pupil teachers, all women; he teaches English and geography all through the school, and presents the girls in needlework to earn a shilling on that subject. There are no subscriptions. The ten assistants get - one £60, three £45 each, one £35, and one £30, and the head master gets £30 fixed, a third of the grant, a third of the pence and the night school money. It is not surprising that in this school the religious instruction is neglected before the examination, and that in the opinion of the head master the clerical managers know it.
In this school, where the head master received a salary of £275 9s, besides the night school grant, the demoralising effects of what is practically a farmed school, though the fact was denied by the witness, are plainly apparent. No wonder complaint is made of over-pressure, where with such poorly paid assistants, and with a large number of half-timers, the girls are made to take two class subjects in addition to the needlework, and the head teacher has the inducement of a large but uncertain salary to crowd his time table up to the 17s 6d limit. Who can doubt that if that limit were withdrawn in such a school as we are referring to, an attempt would be made to wring 18s or 19s grant out of the children without any improvement of the staff at the expense of the managers.
The Code, the inspector, everything is blamed except the greed of those who wish to manage and conduct schools at no cost to themselves, and practically for private profit.
[page 354]
In reference to the 17s 6d limit it may be noticed that Mr. Birley in his evidence stated that a school in Manchester for boys, girls, and infants, fairly managed, should cost 30s a year; at this rate 17s 6d would be nearly three-fifths of the entire cost, certainly an ample sum for the central fund to pay, and the alleged growth of cost of school management cannot be urged in Lancashire in support of the relaxation or abrogation of the present law if this evidence be generally correct. We are of opinion that whatever may be the fate of the 17s 6d limit, we are, in all cases, entitled to expect a substantial amount of local contribution as a condition of State assistance.
Assuming that the share of the cost of elementary schools borne by the Treasury is already sufficient, and we may note that some witnesses, such as Lord Lingen, consider it excessive, it is urged by a few witnesses and by several memorials that the pressure on voluntary schools is too great, and that they should be entitled or enabled to obtain aid from the local rates.
The majority of the witnesses who appeared on behalf of the denominational schools expressed their apprehension that local aid from the rates must involve local control by the ratepayers, and apart from other considerations the majority of the advocates of the denominational system are not willing to give up their power of managing their schools in consideration of a subsidy from the rates.
But in considering the question of the burden on subscribers we must examine whether that burden is really excessive.
The annual returns of the Education Department from 1869 to 1886 show that voluntary schools as a whole cost the subscribers 6s 9d per child in 1886 as compared with 7s 3d in 1869, while the parents are paying 11s 2d as compared with 8s 4d in 1869 and the taxpayers contributed public aid to these voluntary managers to the amount of 16s 10d per child in 1886 as compared with 9s 7d per child in 1869. Thus it does not appear that the complaint of the friends of the voluntary system is justified, or that the burden on them has been increased unreasonably.
But some advocates of voluntary schools put forward the claim that if they furnish gratuitous and voluntary management, they are entitled to throw the whole burden of maintenance upon the parents and upon the public resources, whether local or national. Such a pretension seems to us inconsistent both with reason and with justice. Already it appears that through the irresponsible power of taxation by raising the fees, the burden on the parents has been increased in voluntary schools by 2s 10d per child in average attendance.
While we recognise the fairness of increasing State aid in proportion to the poverty of the parents, and the consequent increased pressure on the funds of the managers, and therefore recommend that the State grant should vary with the fee income of the school, we cannot recognise the propriety of aiding by large grants schools in which the voluntary subscriptions are little or nothing. As to the proposal to aid voluntary schools from the rates, this matter was considered in 1870. The original Bill empowered school boards, if they thought fit, to aid voluntary schools, subject to the obligation that they must aid all or none. But it was felt that it was inexpedient to raise the burning controversies that must necessarily accompany such a proposal; that part of the Bill was abandoned, and in lieu of it the aid of the Treasury was enlarged to a grant not exceeding half the total income, nor 15s a head. Both of these limits have since then been relaxed.
There are two great difficulties which seem to us to make any proposal of aid from the rates to denominational schools impracticable even if it were politically expedient.
First, there is the religious difficulty of directly subsidising schools where varying theological dogmas are taught, and where the teachers are limited to distinct denominations.
Secondly, there is the still greater difficulty of giving local aid without local control. The State has the fullest power of regulating the conditions on which its aid is given, and from year to year the ministry, subject to the check of the House of Commons, can vary or put an end to its payments.
But if aid were given by the locality it must be either optional or compulsory. If optional, we should see revived in every school district the old Church rate controversy, and the managers of voluntary schools would hardly wish to depend upon so uncertain and so unpopular a means of support. If compulsory, it would be necessary to give the local contributors, that is the ratepayers, that power of management which the present managers consider the chief advantage for which they are willing to bear the burden of their voluntary contributions.
[page 355]
Some have suggested a definite capitation grant from local sources to be paid over to all voluntary schools. If this were done, then the schools which have no subscriptions would enjoy a surplus; the schools where subscriptions exist would probably see their subscriptions fall off; it is not likely that permanently the income of the schools would be augmented, but merely that the burden would be shifted from those who now bear it to the public.
In a rural parish, where at present there is no board school, it is not to be expected that the ratepayers would accept the burden, and not have the same voice as in an adjoining parish where there is a school board. So, too, in towns it is impossible that the ratepayers would be willing to bear the cost of the schools and not participate in their management.
If the schools were partially transferred so that an attempt at some kind of mixed management were set up, there would very soon be a claim that the managers of schools intended for the use of all, and maintained at the cost of all, should not exclude as teachers all but the members of one church.
If we look at the evidence we see that witnesses who would have no objection on principle to the establishment of a denominational system at the public cost shrank from the practical consequences of proposing such a plan.
The following references to the evidence are worthy of attention on this point:
Mr. Allies, on behalf of the Roman Catholic body, states: "If our schools are supported by rates I dread their falling pro tanto under the power of the ratepayers. ... I have great dread of assistance from the rates for that reason. There is more difficulty in our country, because the theological feeling enters so largely into the minds of the people, and I cannot imagine but that the ratepayers would always be stirring up opposition to this, and would fix upon this or that thing taught in this or that school, whether ours or somebody else's, and would say, 'We have to pay for this, and we do not believe in anything of the kind.' I do not see very well how to meet that jealousy."
In answer to the analogy of industrial schools and reformatories, he says, "I can conceive that to be possible certainly. ... My trust in the ratepayers is very small indeed at present. There must be a great change, I think, in the feelings of the people to make such a scheme as your Eminence mentions act well. It is possible, I think, certainly. I have a very great distrust of the ratepayers."
Mr. Allies says further that he has no scheme for making public assistance given to board and voluntary schools equal, and that he has considered a scheme of exemption from rates, and does not like it, and that his dread of receiving from the rates is great.
The Rev. J. Duncan, Secretary to the National Society, while desiring more public aid for voluntary schools, thinks that help from the Consolidated Fund is more feasible than from the rates. He does not see any reason in principle why the supporters of denominational schools should be called upon to give subscriptions. He sees nothing unreasonable in the recognition and support of voluntary management by State funds in the total absence of voluntary contributions. Mr. Duncan, however, states, that he has no sympathy with the schools that are supported without any subscriptions.
Sir Lovelace Stamer is opposed to giving aid to the voluntary schools from the rates; he says, "putting the voluntary schools on the rates would involve the loss of their independence of management; I foresee that at once, and I would much sooner that we should face our own difficulties and keep our own independent management."
The Rev. Canon Wingfield sees no objection to voluntary schools receiving a small portion of their support from the local rates, but adds that that could not be done without involving some control on the part of the ratepayers, and he thinks that such aid would be a step towards universal school boards.
The Rev. Joseph Diggle, Chairman of the London School Board, says, "I do not see personally how you can throw more upon the rates without giving the people who pay the rates control over the expenditure of the money."
The Rev. Canon McNeile thinks that aid from the rates would imply interference from the school board.
Mr. Herbert Birley is of opinion that if the voluntary schools get aid from the rates their managers will lose the control of them.
The Rev. Prebendary Deane is opposed to any plan for aiding voluntary schools out of the rates.
[page 356]
Mr. J. A. Brooke of Huddersfield, Chairman of the Huddersfield and Saddleworth Church Day School Association, says that he should not advise voluntary schools getting aid from the rates.
Mr. Brodie, Her Majesty's Inspector in Worcestershire, considers that if voluntary schools are aided from the rates they must eventually become board schools.
On the other hand Lord Lingen and Mr. Cumin both gave evidence in favour of decentralising the administration and support of elementary education and contemplated a closer connexion between the ratepayers and their representatives and the denominational schools.
Lord Lingen considers that the proportion of the whole cost now borne by the National Exchequer is excessive, and he lays the chief blame on the Act of 1876, which so long as the grant does not exceed 17s 6d a head, permits it to exceed one-half of the total yearly cost of maintenance. Lord Lingen states that he would never permit the Government grant to exceed the amount raised from other sources, and he would also wish to have a fixed maximum of 15s per scholar, though he would prefer a fixed maximum on population. Lord Lingen, while conceding a maximum State grant of one-half, would prefer a maximum of one-third. He would hand over the Government grant in a lump to some local education authority administering a considerable area, which would not only have wide discretion in the distribution of the Parliamentary grant, but would have power to make terms with the voluntary schools and subsidise them out of the rates. He has not elaborated any details of his scheme, but he proposes to repeal the 14th or Cowper-Temple clause of the Act of 1870, and he seems to suppose that the repeal of this clause would enable the local educational authority to subsidise denominational schools. He seems here to confuse between the power to maintain denominational schools and the power to aid schools not under the management of the school board, two entirely different things. His scheme, though a mere sketch, implies very extensive changes in the present law, and leaves a great deal to free negotiation in the various localities between the various managers of voluntary schools and the representatives of the ratepayers.
Lord Lingen brings the vigilant economy of an ex-Secretary of the Treasury to bear against the tendency to increase the burden on the Exchequer. Mr. Cumin brings the grievances of an overworked secretary to the Education Department to bear from other motives in the same direction: the decentralisation of our educational machinery, and the throwing more responsibility and more power on local authorities. Mr. Cumin also proposes to repeal the Cowper-Temple clause, and he also is somewhat obscure in his evidence as to whether he contemplates the subsidising of denominational schools under voluntary management, which has nothing to do with that clause, or the establishment of denominational board schools. He seems from some of his answers to contemplate both results. He says, in answer to the question, "Do you seriously believe that a school board in a county such as you contemplate would set up in a populous district a Wesleyan school, a Church of England school, and a Roman Catholic school, and appoint a Wesleyan teacher in one, a Roman Catholic teacher in another, and a Church of England in a third?" (Answer) "I do not see why they should not", and he seems to contemplate that the voluntary schools would be transferred to the boards, keeping their denominational character, but lacking their denominational management, and yet he contemplates the former managers retaining the appointment of the teachers, and the settlement of the curriculum and the fees, and of the salary of the head teacher. On the whole it appears that, though Mr. Cumin made in some parts of his evidence considerable concessions of power on paper to the voluntary managers, yet what he expects is that the effect of his proposed system would be to put an end to all the voluntary schools, and he speaks of his scheme as the application of the Scotch system to England. We are of opinion that the large changes opened up by the evidence of Lord Lingen and Mr. Cumin, of which aid from the rates to denominational teaching forms only a small part, would not be acceptable to the mass of voluntary managers who value highly their present direct relations with the Education Department, and while we dissent from their views we think that the consideration of so extensive a revolution must be consequent on any new scheme of local self-government that may pass into law.
There is a class of schools which specially need and deserve aid from the Parliamentary grant - the small village schools.
[page 357]
These were recognised by the Act of 1876, and a special grant of £10 or £15 is given where the population within two miles, and solely dependent on the school, is below 300 or 200. This grant, however, is not coupled with any special requirement of efficiency. We are of opinion that these village schools need further aid. The test of population is a difficult one to apply. The population is not necessarily that of the parish or township, and the inspector is forced largely to rely on the statement of the managers as to the number of inhabitants within the prescribed distance. We are of opinion that where there is an isolated school with no school nearer than two miles by the nearest road, that school is needed for the local population; and if the average attendance is below 100, the school requires special aid to be carried on efficiently. At the same time, we think that the alternative between £10 and nothing is too abrupt, and we should be glad to see a grant paid to all such isolated schools where the attendance is below 100, increasing by 6s 8d for each child by which the attendance falls below 100 up to a maximum grant of £20. At the same time we think that the Department is entitled to attach certain conditions of efficiency to this grant, such as the existence in all cases of a certificated head teacher of experience and efficiency at a minimum salary of £60, and the requirement of a proper curriculum, such as we have already indicated. The employment of provisionally certificated teachers, and the limitation of teaching to the three standard subjects, are found almost exclusively in these small village schools, and we think that while we may justly claim for our agricultural population a fuller measure of instruction, schools of this class should receive further aid to meet their special difficulties and cost. We refer to the evidence of Prebendary Roe on this subject. He has made a most careful examination of village schools in the county of Somerset, and his evidence is of great value. He states that the managers generally express their willingness to improve their staff if they have further aid from the Treasury, and he considers it fair to couple further requirements as to staff with an augmented grant. In these small rural schools Prebendary Roe found that in populations below 200 where the £15 grant is given, the burden on subscribers was 16s a head on the average attendance. In populations from 200 to 300 where the extra grant of £10 is made, and the infants are paid for as senior children, the subscribers found 12s.2d a head on the average attendance. In districts with a population over 300, and not more than 500, and therefore receiving no special grant, the burden on subscribers was 14s 10d, and in districts where the population is from 500 to 600, the cost of the schools to the subscribers was 10s 3d a head. Taking all the Church schools in the parishes with less than 600 population, Prebendary Roe finds the burden on subscribers 12s 11d a head in 151 schools averaging 48 scholars each.
The local effort of subscribers here compares very favourably with what is done in the large towns, where nevertheless the State aid from grants is highest, and where higher fees are obtained from the parents. Thus, in Liverpool 47,936 children in average attendance in voluntary schools were maintained by voluntary contributions amounting to £6,436, or about 2s 8d a head. In Manchester 27,735 children cost £7,735 in voluntary subscriptions, or 5s 7d a head. In Burnley 7,006 children in average attendance cost the subscribers £1,114, or about 3s 2d a head. In Preston 14,085 children cost £2,821, or 4s. a head. In Oldham 12,853 cost the subscribers £757, or 1s 2d a head. In Stockport 8,776 children cost the subscribers £600, or about 1s 4d. In Birmingham 21,704 cost the subscribers £4,581, or nearly 4s 3d a head.*
We think that these facts show that without any absolute increase of the Parliamentary grant it might be redistributed in such a way as to aid local effort, and meet special difficulties in thinly-peopled districts more than it does now.
CHAPTER 16
LOCAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AUTHORITIES
We have now examined the history and growth of elementary education since 1870. We have noticed how far the present school supply can be considered sufficient in quantity and satisfactory in quality. We have reviewed our present staff of teachers
*Return to Circular B.
[page 358]
and the existing modes of preparation and training which are applied to them, the curriculum, the inspection, and the relative merits of board and of voluntary schools.
We now turn to the question - how should our elementary schools be managed.
Many witnesses, mainly advocates of the voluntary system, have given evidence as to the advantages resulting to education from the rivalry between the two systems working side by side. Mr. Brooke, of Huddersfield, stated that he believed if voluntary schools ceased to exist the ratepayers would look exclusively to economy in the management of the board schools, and that sectarian emulation contributes now to secure efficiency in the management of board schools. The Rev. J. Duncan, Secretary to the National Society, spoke of the advantage to the secular instruction of the competition between board and voluntary schools, and said that if the voluntary schools ceased to exist side by side with board schools a great stimulus to efficiency would be withdrawn. Mr. Duncan states that the existence of a board school near a voluntary school tends to raise the standard of the expenditure and instruction in the voluntary school, and again, he states that in regard to school work, and particularly to religious instruction, he has no doubt that the competition is good, and that there is rivalry in good work, he further states that the effect of the rivalry is most felt where the two systems are working side by side, and is mainly, though not exclusively, felt in towns where there are school boards, and is reduced to its minimum in the rural districts.
Many other witnesses speak to the same effect.
We are of opinion that though undoubtedly the existence of two different systems leads to much jealousy and friction, and often mixes the consideration of educational questions with denominational struggles, yet that this countervailing advantage does undoubtedly exist to some extent, that the denominational system is forced where it is brought in comparison with the school board system to justify its existence by redoubled efforts after efficiency, and the success which may attend such efforts has been remarkably shown by what has been accomplished for the Church of England schools in Huddersfield through the association described in Mr. Brooke's interesting evidence.
We are of opinion that, having regard to the share in national education now taken by voluntary bodies, it would not be a practical proposal to transfer the whole maintenance and management of all our elementary schools to public representative bodies. At the same time we feel bound to call attention to the serious evidence of Mr. Mark Wilks, a member of the School Board for London. He says, "The working of these two systems together in London, the voluntary school system and the board school system, has been disastrous. It was thought that we should work in all respects very harmoniously. It has ended in producing a friction that is doing harm to the children of London, that is to say, it is stopping progress, as friction very often does It has been more expensive. ... The education of the children has been delayed unwarrantably. ... The quality of education in our schools is kept down to a large extent by this system of rivalry. I meet a great many men who are managers of board schools, and who are managers of these board schools, not so much to promote a generous and liberal education in those schools, as that they say, 'You must keep these schools down to the level of a neighbouring very poor denominational school.'" Mr. Wilks' conclusion is, "I say that it would be better that we should come to have one system all through London."
Other evidence shows that the board schools suffer from the election of a board more anxious to protect the supposed interests of the voluntary schools than to promote the efficiency of the board schools. Thus the evidence of Mr. Palgrave shows that at Great Yarmouth the education in the board schools has fallen short of what it might have been, and that the school supply has for years been inadequate, and the fees have been levied so as to injure school attendance, the majority of the board having been elected by the supporters of the denominational system.
And at Stoke-upon-Trent, Archdeacon Sir Lovelace Stamer, for many years chairman of the board, gave evidence that he was employing trained assistants in his own school, while the board relied mainly on ex-pupil teachers. The curriculum in the board schools, moreover, was much narrower than is desirable in such a district as the Potteries. Sir Lovelace Stamer had a higher "church" school with a fee of 6d, but the board has no such school, and drawing is not taught in any of the board schools, though it was formerly taught in two of them.
We have no doubt that the conflicting interests of the voluntary and board systems have led very generally to the election of members of school boards sometimes of the
[page 359]
majority, whose policy and action have considered first the supposed interest of voluntary schools, and, secondly, the full development of the education of the district.
We are also of opinion that it is the absence of responsible public management, drawing adequately upon local resources, that forces us to acquiesce in the present unsatisfactory method of determining the distribution of the money given from Imperial funds in aid of local effort.
But if the vested interests of the supporters of existing voluntary schools compel us to acquiesce in this state of things, we are of opinion that large numbers of people living in districts where at present no school boards exist, have suffered severely in their educational interests, by the non-existence among them of that educational competition, the value of which is fully recognised by advocates of denominational education in school board districts.
Not only is the educational efficiency of the schools likely to suffer where there are no board schools, not only are the buildings often of an obsolete and unsatisfactory, not to say of an unsanitary description, but playgrounds are often non-existent or too small to be of any real use; the furniture is inconvenient and unsuitable, the curriculum is narrowed, the fees are fixed by an irresponsible authority, and are apt to be higher than in similar districts under school boards; and the nomination of the teacher is mainly in the hands of the clergy of the Established Church; and the large body of Nonconformists, who are principally to be found among those using elementary schools, have to submit to a school system permeated by the influence of an unsympathetic, and often hostile, church organisation, and in the management of these schools they have no voice, though they furnish compulsorily a large part of the scholars in attendance.
The Act of 1870 called into existence for the first time a large number of elementary schools, which are under the management of boards elected by all the ratepayers in the several school districts, but it also gave a strong impulse to the creation of schools of the older type which are in the hands of private and, in many respects, irresponsible managers.
The prolonged existence, side by side, of schools of both descriptions is sometimes spoken of as a part of the compromise of 1870; as though all parties had accepted it as a final and satisfactory solution of some of the most difficult and perplexing questions which have to be considered in any attempt to construct a system of national elementary education. But it is clear that the Act of 1870 was never accepted as a satisfactory settlement of these questions by large bodies of Your Majesty's subjects who were specially interested in the education of the children of the great masses of the people. The politicians who had led a great popular agitation for the establishment of a national system of unsectarian education to be administered by public representative bodies, rejected it and recorded their rejection both in and out of Parliament in every form that was available to them. The Nonconformist bodies also rejected it, and in January 1872 a conference was held at Manchester, to which 2,500 delegates were appointed, of whom 1,865 were present, representing Nonconformist churches and organisations, by which the settlement of 1870 was condemned.
Among the most remarkable of the resolutions condemnatory of the Act were those passed by a large and powerful committee especially appointed by the Wesleyan Conference in 1872 to consider the question of primary education, which were laid before us by one of our witnesses.* The report of this committee was adopted by the Conference of 1873, which passed the following resolution on the subject: "The Conference adopts the Report of the Special Committee on Primary Education appointed by the last Conference. In adopting this report the Conference expresses its regret that the essential parts of the recommendations of the Committee have not been adopted by the Government in their measure for the amendment of the Elementary Education Act, 1870, and records its deliberate conviction that in justice to the interests of national education in the broadest sense, and to the different religious denominations of the country, school boards should be established everywhere, and an undenominational school placed within reasonable distance of every family."
The existing dissatisfaction of Nonconformists with our educational system was expressed in resolutions recently passed by a large number of Nonconformist organisations, and submitted to us by one of the witnesses who appeared before us, and by many other resolutions which have been sent to the
*See Chapter on Nonconformist Grievances.
[page 360]
Commission during the course of our inquiry. The general demand of these resolutions is that "all public elementary schools receiving parliamentary grants should be placed under the direct control of the representatives of the ratepayers." There are various reasons assigned for this strong opposition to what is commonly described as the denominational system.
The large majority of the public elementary schools, which are not under the management of school boards, are regarded and administered by their managers as part of the equipment and organisation of the several churches with which they are associated; and their primary purpose is to instruct the children in the faith of the churches to which their managers belong. But there are large numbers of persons who believe that to identify the public elementary schools of the country with different churches, and to commit a large part of the control of the education that is given in them to the clergy of these churches, is certain to prolong and embitter social and religious divisions, and to prejudice the unity of the national life. They hold that national education is pre-eminently a national work, and should not be subjected to any sectional or sectarian predominance. But under the present system the work is to a large extent taken out of the hands of the nation to be placed in the hands of ecclesiastical organisations in proportion as they are wealthy, and willing to purchase the right to administer the grants voted by Parliament and to control the education of the people.
The system is objected to by many on constitutional grounds, because, contrary to the recognised principles of administration in this and in all countries where representative government exists, it commits large sums of money, raised by general taxation, to the control of private persons who are neither nominated by the Crown nor elected by the people; and in this particular application of public money there is this additional aggravation, that while the money is drawn from taxpayers of all shades of religious opinion it is placed at the disposal of school managers who avowedly conduct schools described as public, and largely supported by the money which they receive from the State, and from the fees fixed by their unchecked discretion, and levied upon scholars who are compelled to attend, for the maintenance and propagation of the distinctive dogmas of the several ecclesiastical organisations of which they are members and ministers. It is alleged that at a time when Parliament is considering the best means of extending and improving the institutions which entrust to the people the conduct of their own affairs, it seems especially incongruous to strengthen a system which excludes the people from a right to share in the management of what must be regarded as one of the most momentous of all their affairs - the education of their children. Moreover, we have received evidence showing that among Nonconformists of all descriptions the system is regarded with deep resentment as inconsistent with the elementary principles of religious liberty, and as inflicting on themselves, in large districts of country, grave hardships and injustice.
But the special Nonconformist grievance is dealt with in a separate chapter of this report, and we dwell at present on the political objection to confiding the mass of our national education to private managers, who have special denominational interests to which they attach the highest importance, whereas we ought as widely as possible to interest the whole community in the administration of popular education, with a sole view to its greater efficiency, and its more complete correspondence with the wishes and feelings of the majority of those who use it, always showing the most scrupulous regard for the views of any local minority. We, therefore, think that even though the existing system be so widely established that it cannot be superseded where it exists, yet that in the development of the future the policy of the country should be directed towards the extension of a popular and comprehensive system not of one privately managed and based on sectarian differences.
We recommend, therefore, that for the purposes of school supply, small country parishes should be consolidated, and the smaller school boards united; and that, provided the areas of administration are sufficiently large, where there are at present no school boards, there should be a competent local representative authority, to whom should be entrusted the supply and management of any additional schools required. We also think that the demand formulated by the Wesleyan Methodist body in 1872 is a reasonable one, that there should either be a board school or other undenominational school within reach of all the population. This provision would be nothing but equitable if the claim of the denominational bodies to retain their schools under independent private management, with very large aid from the State, is to continue to be supported.
[page 361]
In reference to the mode of election of school boards we are of opinion that the present cumulative vote is an unsatisfactory mode of securing proportional representation.
Some of its defects might be remedied by other forms of proportional representation, but it is questionable whether the election of school boards should be conducted otherwise than other local elections for administrative bodies are conducted.
Proportional representation, especially as it works through the cumulative vote, tends to the representation of small cliques, and often puts upon a board a person unsuitable and positively objectionable to the mass of the community, who is nevertheless able to use his position on the board for the purpose of obstructing business, and discrediting its character by unseemly disturbance. The cumulative vote, or any system of proportional representation, operates as a direct invitation to conduct school board elections on sectarian lines.
The present system, by compelling a contest to take place throughout the whole of the school district, either entails a heavy cost, both on the ratepayers and on the candidates, or leads to compulsory compromises in order to avoid that expense. In some towns the knowledge that a contest will inevitably lead to sectarian animosities also operates so as to induce leading men to arrange a compromise list.
We are of opinion that the larger towns should be divided into wards, returning not more than five members each, and if any form of proportional representation be retained, believe that the single transferable vote is preferable to the present cumulative vote.
If school boards should be formed in rural districts of a considerably larger area than the parish, which is our recommendation, we think that the local element should be considered in any scheme of representation.
The question has been raised whether school boards should be superseded by some other local authorities to be created either under the Bill now before Parliament, or by some future legislation.
We are of opinion that it is premature to consider this question, and that no suggestion should be entertained as to the possible superseding of school boards, at any rate until the country has had a considerable experience of the working of the new local bodies proposed to be created.
CHAPTER 17
COMPLAINTS OF THE ADVOCATES OF DENOMINATIONAL SCHOOLS
In the course of our inquiry many witnesses appeared who specially represented the interests, and the point of view of the advocates of denominational schools, and they made numerous complaints against the existing system.
First as to the school supply, many of them complained that owing to the prior right of school boards to supply deficiencies of accommodation, the various church organisations may be prevented from building schools suitable to the wants of the members of their denominations, or at any rate they may be excluded from a share in annual grants.
The representatives of the National Society, and of church school managers, the Rev. David Waller, a Wesleyan, and several Roman Catholic witnesses, among them Mr. Allies, the secretary of their Poor School committee, all urged this grievance.
We have already stated that the Act of 1870, undoubtedly put upon school boards the responsibility, and the duty of supplying for the future all school accommodation needed in their districts.
But, partly from reluctance to spend the ratepayers' money, school boards have generally been ready and willing to welcome any extension of the voluntary school provision. There have, however, been some cases, where either because they had already built schools and did not wish to see the attendance diminished, and the consequent cost of management increased, or because they considered board schools better and more suitable to the district, they have opposed the admission of new voluntary schools to annual grants. These cases have not been numerous. Indeed, compared with the large addition to the voluntary school accommodation since 1870, they have been extremely few; for voluntary schools have increased between 1870 and 1886, from 1,878,000 to 3,438,000 places, an increase of 1,560,000 places. The
[page 362]
Appendix to our first volume, pages 525-7, shows the cases dealt with as to unnecessary schools, page 527, giving those where annual grants have been refused in school board districts. The whole number in this list is small, only 51 schools, some of these are board schools, and several have been admitted afterwards to the receipt of annual grants. But, though, practically throughout nearly all the country, full freedom of expansion has been enjoyed by the advocates of voluntary schools, yet a few exceptional cases of refusal, and the fear that in future other refusals might be experienced, have led to a great deal of agitation, and to a strongly expressed feeling of grievance, and it is urged that there should either be full liberty to promoters of voluntary schools to obtain annual grants, or at any rate, that the Education Department should consider the religious needs of the population, or of any section of it, in deciding on the suitability, and consequently on the necessity, of the proposed school provision.
The word "suitable" is one that appears in the Act of 1870. In section 5, it is enacted "there shall be provided for every school district a sufficient amount of accommodation in public elementary schools (as hereinafter defined), available for all the children resident in such district, for whose elementary education efficient and suitable provision is not otherwise made", and in section 8 the Education Department is required to procure returns as to the amount of public school accommodation required in a district, and "after such inquiry, if any, as they think necessary, shall consider whether any, and what public school accommodation is required for such district, and in so doing they shall take into consideration every school, whether public elementary or not, and whether actually situated in the district or not which in their opinion gives, or will when completed, give efficient elementary education to, and is or will when completed, be suitable for the children of such district."
This word has led to a great deal of controversy, and its interpretation is connected with one of the matters which has caused as much irritation as almost any other in the administration of the Act, especially coupled with the fact that as the law has imposed on school boards the duty of supplying all the deficiencies of accommodation (under section 98, of the Act of 1870) the Education Department has been in the habit of consulting school boards when a new voluntary school in their district applies for annual grants, as to whether the school is needed or not, and when the board has supplied, or is willing to supply the deficiency, the department has refused to admit the new school to annual grants. A typical case of the grievance is that of the Dan y Graig Roman Catholic school, within the district of the Swansea school board. There was a local Roman Catholic child population in that immediate neighbourhood of about 90 children, and of these, some 55 were attending the board school. Canon Wilson, the Roman Catholic priest, was anxious to build a Roman Catholic school for their accommodation, and he commenced operations in November 1883. In the following January he wrote to the Education Department sending the plans, and asking for recognition of his school. The Department answered that before annual grants could be promised, the school board must be consulted, and on February 21, 1884, on receipt of the plans, they stated that the plans were approved of for 195 places, but that no annual grant could be promised, and that they must invite the opinion of the school board. About this time or before June in that year, the school board for Swansea sent an application and plans to the Department for an enlargement of their own school, and on June 7, the Department informed Canon Wilson that they had assented to the proposal of the school board. The Roman Catholic school was finished in July, and opened in August 1884, and was inspected and recognised as an efficient school on April 1, 1885, but repeated applications to be admitted to the receipt of annual grants have been refused by the Department on the ground that the school is unnecessary, the Swansea board having supplied all the places needed for the accommodation of that district; though on the day of inspection there were 181 children in attendance at the Dan y Graig Roman Catholic school. Now it is urged by the Roman Catholic body that this case is covered by the word "suitable" in the Act of 1870. It is urged by them that they have a strong objection to mixed schools, that they desire religious as well as secular education, and that the only religious education they can recognise is that in their own faith. Without, therefore, discussing the point whether in the absence of a Roman Catholic school, it is consistent with their conscientious belief to attend a Non-Catholic school for secular instruction, they insist, that where the choice is open to them between a Roman Catholic and another school, it becomes vital to them to attend their own school, which is the suitable one, and the other, even if suitable before will become unsuitable. They, therefore, urge that even where there is an ample supply of school
[page 363]
places numerically, they should be allowed to provide a school of their own and be admitted to annual grants. It must be admitted that the Education Department from the time of Mr. Forster, immediately after the passing of the Act of 1870, has contended down to the present day, that every public elementary school having a conscience clause was ipso facto suitable to all, no matter what their religious opinions. In this sense a Protestant or board school is suitable for Roman Catholics, and a Roman Catholic school, even conducted by Nuns or by Christian brothers, is suitable to the extremest Protestant, the Jew, or the Freethinker.
It is obvious that board schools being under the management of the representatives of the inhabitants, must be managed suitably to the majority of the population where they exist, but minorities consisting of persons as Mr. Forster described them, of strong religious convictions, by which it is clear he meant of strong and distinctive religious convictions, may not find themselves suitably accommodated in board schools, or in any schools except those of their own persuasions. No doubt the law only imposes the obligation of building schools in the case of a school board, but it would seem equitable where in all ordinary understanding of the word the people for whom the schools exist show that they do not consider them suitable, by frequenting others, that the State should not exclude these schools if efficient, from annual grants.
We agree with the Rev. W. J. B. Richards, Roman Catholic diocesan inspector of schools, that the conscience clause is not of much use as a protection. We think that it is in the management of the school, and in the appointment of the teachers that the true securities for fair play and freedom from the danger of proselytism are to be found.
The cases will be rare where schools will be built and frequented from a repugnance to the type of teaching given in board schools. The mass of the Protestant population of this country do not desire to see the minor differences among the various denominations emphasised in the day schools. Where the management is moderate and conciliatory, we find that parents choose their school largely by its neighbourhood, by its efficiency, by its pleasantness, by its cheapness, sometimes by its dearness and consequent exclusiveness. The one exception is the Roman Catholics. They are unwilling to go to other schools, when they can have their own, and their schools are rarely used, and mainly for want of other accommodation by Protestants. Other bodies may build schools in connexion with their church organisations, but their efforts will not necessarily be responded to by members of the congregations, but no one doubts that the Roman Catholic parents, whether in deference to their priests or by their own preference, do their best to frequent the schools of their own church. It would be well if Parliament should recognise this fact, and should give, as in Scotland, a wider meaning to the word suitability. The same principle would apply where school boards are desirous of building on account of the great pressure on their schools and their popularity. Where the parents show that they consider the board schools most suitable, the boards should not be restrained from building in the interest of some voluntary school which has remained for years half empty, unpopular, and often structurally and educationally inefficient and unsuitable.
We must point out that the liberty of establishing distinctive and denominational schools under private and largely under clerical management, is a fair concession to minorities where the general school system is popular and representative, but the circumstances are materially altered if this liberty to found exclusive schools prevents the mass of the people from having the control of the management and the appointment of the teachers in the schools to which they are by law forced to send their children.
There are other circumstances that render a school unsuitable to a section of the population who otherwise would use it, besides the marked denominational character of its management. Among them may be mentioned the demand of a fee disproportionate to the means of the majority of the parents. The Education Department recognises that a high fee may render a certain school not fully available for the population among which it is placed, and the words of the fifth section of the Act of 1870, "available for all the children resident in such district, &c.", have been so construed as to enable the Department to affirm that if the only school has an excessive fee it will not be considered available for all the children in the district. These distinctions of language are not very important. So long as it is recognised that there may be a need of further school provision in spite of the existence of a sufficient number of places in some kind of public elementary school or other, it matters little
[page 364]
whether the reason for the need be found in calling the existing accommodation not available or not suitable.
Another complaint which is commonly made against school boards is that they have built excessively, and thereby closed efficient voluntary schools by their competition. The phrase commonly used is that the school board system was intended to supplement, but that it has been used to supplant the voluntary system; that not only have schools been needlessly multiplied, but that the increase of cost has told severely upon the managers of voluntary schools who have had increased claims made on them for subscriptions in spite of the promise made in 1870 that the cost should be lightened to them by an increase in the Parliamentary grant.
We had one or two specific allegations of over building by boards to the prejudice of voluntary schools, which we were able more or less to test.
The Rev. J. Gilmore, Chairman of the Sheffield school board, who is also the manager of several voluntary schools in Sheffield, in which he states that there are no voluntary subscriptions made, two complaints. He said, in reference to a school opened by the Sheffield board, "We proved by figures and statistics to the Education Department that there were in existing efficient elementary schools, within half a mile radius, 1,500 vacant places", and notwithstanding that the school board of Sheffield was allowed to build this large school for 850 children. Mr. Gilmore states that school accommodation should be provided for one-sixth of the population; at that rate, the population in Sheffield in 1886 being estimated by the Registrar-General at 310,957, there should be nearly 52,000 school places. The Education Department's statistics for 1884-85 furnished to us for our Return B, showed a little more than 47,000 places of all kinds; and the reports of Her Majesty's Inspector showed that much of this accommodation is unsuitable and unavailable. Our returns show that in the Sheffield voluntary schools, out of 74 principal rooms, there are 38 above 25 feet in width, the widest being 57 feet; and out of 125 class-rooms, there are 41 less than 14 feet wide, the narrowest being 7 feet wide, and there are six under 10 feet high.
Mr. Gilmore rested his objection to the building of a board school in Sheffield on the existence of vacant places in existing public elementary schools, but he afterwards stated that whether the voluntary schools are full or empty, there ought to be places for one sixth of the population. He further admitted that vacant places in Roman Catholic schools are not suitable for Protestant children, and that schools with high fees are not suitable, so that it cannot reasonably be expected that their vacant places should be filled.
The school which, according to Mr. Gilmore, the Chairman of the Sheffield board, ought not to have been built in Sheffield, had been open a fortnight when he gave his evidence, and was already full, having 860 accommodation, and about as many on the roll. He complained, however, that it had been filled by partially emptying other schools, drawing 250 children from St. Matthias, 150 from St. Barnabas Church of England school, from St. Mary's 42, and from the Brunswick Wesleyan school 27, from a second St. Barnabas school 44, and from the surrounding board schools 204. But according to Mr. Gilmore's evidence some of these board schools were permitted by the department to be overcrowded temporarily, pending the opening of the new school, and were, therefore, bound to part with some of their scholars when that event took place.
The Brunswick Wesleyan school appears by the Education Report of 1886-87, to have had a nominal accommodation of 1,030, and a yearly average of 630, thus accounting for 400 of the 1,500 vacant places. We have already referred to the Government examination of the school, and the report of Her Majesty's Inspector in the year 1885, which complains of the bad teaching, the unremedied structural defects, and the class rooms too small to be of much value, which tempt the teachers to overcrowd them. In the year 1886 no merit grant was awarded to this school. The main room is 57 by 57 feet. There are two class rooms each 9 feet wide.
St. Barnabas, Alderson Road, national school, had 143 scholars in average attendance, and 237 places according to the Education Report, 1886-87, or 94 vacant places, but the principal room is 49½ feet by 33, and supplies 206 places at 8 square feet per child. If this room were measured at 10 feet, and the width beyond 24 feet excluded from the calculation, it would hold less than 120.
In St. Barnabas, Cecil Road, with accommodation for 546, and 359 average, or 187 vacant places, the main room is 60 feet by 30, that is, it accommodates 225 children at 8 feet per child. At 10 feet per child, and excluding the space beyond 24 feet in width, it accommodates 144 children. The infant school has a room 62 feet by 30.
[page 365]
St. Matthias, stated by Mr. Gilmore to be the best school in Sheffield, had 853 accommodation, and by the Blue Book of 1886-87, returned 748 average attendance, or nominally 105 vacant places. In this school the principal room in the boys' department is 65 feet by 36 feet. In the girl's department it is 45 feet by 36 feet. In the infant school there are two class rooms each 13 feet 10 inches wide.
In St. Matthias school, the fees in the boys' department are 4d, 5d, 6d, and 9d a week, according to standard, and subjects taught; in the girls' department 4d, 5d, and 6d.
St. Mary's, Hermitage Street, Church of England school, had 926 accommodation, and 582 average, or nominally 344 vacant places. The fees in this school, are, boys 4d, 5d, 6d, according to class.
In the Brunswick Wesleyan school the fee is 3d. 1st Standard, 4d 2nd, 5d 3rd, 6d. 4-5-6-7 Standards.
Of the 1,500 vacant places alleged by Mr. Gilmore as a reason against building this Sheffield board school, 1,100 were in the schools he mentioned. We have shown the character of the nominal accommodation, and in some cases the fee of these schools, and also the fact that Sheffield generally, though a town where the working class is a preponderating element of the population, has school places, reckoning all these bad buildings at 8 feet per child, for less than one-sixth of the population.
The second case of improper building of a school by a board, complained of by Mr. Gilmore, was at Hull. He says, "When I had charge of St. Philip's national schools at Hull, about nine years ago, the Hull board determined to build schools within a few yards of those old national schools. I then represented the matter to the Education Department, and did all I possibly could to stop it. It seemed that Her Majesty's Inspector had given his consent, and the consequence was that the Education Department did not wish to withdraw, but to effect some sort of compromise in the matter; and the result was that the national school, Trippett, or St. Philip's, was closed just as soon as the board school was opened. The new school was not more than half filled at the time; there was no necessity whatever in that case for the board to build schools so near to the existing efficient national schools; the board school was the Charterhouse Laue board school."
Mr. Gilmore stated that when the Hull school board built this school there was accommodation in the neighbourhood for more than a sixth of the population, and that the board school was just across the street from a large national school. It appears that this took place in spite of Mr. Gilmore, in 1879, when the Duke of Richmond was President, and Lord George Hamilton, Vice-President of the Education Department.
We had the advantage of hearing Mr. O'Donoghue, the clerk of the Hull school board, a few days after Mr. Gilmore gave his evidence. He stated that owing to the great pressure for want of schools, the Hull school board has been even too careful in delaying to supply the necessary accommodation, and that the fear of trenching upon denominational schools had kept the board from fully discharging their own duty in the matter of school supply. Mr. Stevelly, Her Majesty's Inspector for Hull, reports in 1879, the date of Mr. Gilmore's complaint, that 24,500 children should be in attendance, and the whole accommodation was for 21,727 scholars. He states that it is difficult to choose sites without coming near existing schools. In reference to the special case of the Trippett school, complained of by Mr. Gilmore, Mr. O'Donoghue said that the school was closed, but not as a result of the opening of the board school. It was closed before the opening of the board school, and the managers asked the board if they would take the master in connexion with that school. "I should say that the master had farmed the school - it was a very weak inefficient school ... the master said he could not pay an assistant master, which would have involved an expense of £70 a year with the off chance of getting enough children to fill the school." After the boys' department at the Trippett school was closed, the average attendance of girls and infants in the following year was higher than the previous attendance of all these departments.
The board school though near this church school had its entrance in another street, so that the entrances were a considerable distance apart.
Another case of alleged over-building was brought before us in reference to the London school board.
That board projected and built a school for 1,200 children in Upper Kennington Lane, Lambeth. There was great opposition to the building of the school by the clergy and others interested in the neighbouring voluntary schools, but at length
[page 366]
the school was built. The present school board for London asked the present Education Department to allow them not to open the girls' and infants' departments; this application was, however, refused, and the school was opened and filled immediately.
Some facts and figures in reference to this school will be found in Appendix D, XVI, of our Second Report. The official letter from the board shows that after building Upper Kennington Lane school and another school (since abandoned), there would be a deficiency in the district of 238 places, reckoning every voluntary school-place in the district as fully available, though 598 of these places were, in the judgment of the board, unavailable. In 1886, the figures of children scheduled by the board show a deficiency of 906 places after building the school in Upper Kennington Lane. The dimensions of the rooms and fees of the various voluntary schools are shown in a table at page 1,043.
No doubt individual instances may be found where some particular voluntary school has fallen off in attendance after the opening of a board school in the neighbourhood, and considering that there are many schools bad in premises, management, staff, and teaching, it would be strange if some had not suffered when parents had a chance of sending their children to a thoroughly efficient and well equipped school. But if we examine the facts broadly, we shall find that the growth of the board school system has accompanied a great improvement and expansion of the voluntary schools.
The pledge given by the Government in 1870, that the board system was to supplement and not to supplant the voluntary system, has been kept, and more than kept.
Apart from the text of the Act, the spirit in which it was conceived may be found expressed in the words of Mr. Forster in his introductory speech when he stated "We must take care not to destroy the existing system in introducing a new one. In solving this problem, there must be consistently with the attainment of our object the least possible expenditure of public money, the utmost endeavour not to injure existing and efficient schools, and the most careful absence of all encouragement to parents to neglect their children. I trust I have taken the House thus far with me. Our object is to complete the present voluntary system, and fill up gaps, sparing the public money where it can be done without, preserving as much as we can the assistance of the parents, and welcoming as much as we rightly can the co-operation and aid of those benevolent men who desire to assist their neighbours." That welcoming of voluntary aid was not only applicable to the then existing voluntary schools, it was intended and enacted that a period should remain open during which the denominational friends of education should be invited and encouraged to supply the need of schools. In the same speech Mr. Forster said as to the supply of new schools, "Now, here for a time, we shall test the voluntary zeal of the district. Not only do we not neglect voluntary help, but on the condition of respecting the rights of parents and the rights of conscience, we welcome it. To see then whether voluntary help will be forthcoming, we give a year. We think we ought to give enough of time to test the zeal and willingness of any volunteers who may be disposed to help, but we ought not to give longer time, because we cannot afford to wait. If that zeal, if that willingness, does not come forward to supply the schools that are required, then the children must no longer remain untaught, and the State must step in." The Bill went through considerable changes of detail during its passage through the House of Commons, but on the third reading, Mr. Gladstone, the Prime Minister, made a memorable speech in answer to Mr. Miall, in which he spoke in very much the same tone about the Bill. He said (page 507, Report of Education Debates): "It was with us an absolute necessity, a necessity of honour and a necessity of policy, to respect and to favour the educational establishments and machinery we found existing in the country. It was impossible for us to join in the language or to adopt the tone which was conscientiously and consistently taken by some members of the House who look upon these voluntary schools having generally a denominational character as admirable passing expedients, fit indeed to be tolerated for a time, deserving all credit on account of the motives which led to their foundation, but wholly unsatisfactory as to their main purpose, and therefore to be supplanted by something they think better. That is a perfectly fair and intelligible theory for any gentleman to entertain, but I am quite sure it will be felt that it has never been the theory of the Government." Sir John Packington in the same debate, after one or two small criticisms of detail, stated that he accepted the measure with thankfulness and joy, and, indeed the general conclusion which may be gathered from the debates is, that the Government, with the aid of the Conservative party, fully carried out this
[page 367]
policy of cordial recognition of the existing voluntary system, in opposition to the strong and repeated attacks of the more advanced section of their own supporters.
But it was never intended or understood that this favourable treatment of voluntary schools should relieve them of the obligation to make some exertions and to submit to some personal sacrifices on behalf of a system, which enabled them, with considerable State aid and a large measure of administrative freedom, to retain the monopoly of the education of many districts, and to be strongly protected in their existing rights in those places where school extension under boards should prove necessary. Nor was it intended to prevent the growth of school boards and the gradual and voluntary transfer of existing schools to representative bodies. On the contrary, we find that in the debate on the second reading, Mr. Forster in answer to Mr. Dixon (page 42, Ed. Debates Report) said, "I was glad, however, to hear my hon. friend expressing his belief that under the provisions of the Bill, school boards would quickly become universal, and compulsory attendance insisted upon, because I agree with him in entertaining the hope that the effect of the Bill will be that school boards will be established throughout the country, and that in a short time attendance at school will be rendered compulsory." And again in the debate of the 20th June, on the motion that the Speaker leave the chair on the recommitted Bill, Mr. Forster urged in favour of the new proposals of the Government, "The school boards will come into operation more speedily, and they will work more cheaply, and these are two reasons why their number should be increased, rather than diminished." And on June 27, in the debate on Mr. Walter's amendment in favour of universal school boards which he moved avowedly for the purpose of facilitating the transfer of voluntary schools to boards, Mr. Forster said that "He had always looked forward to many of the existing voluntary schools being willing to transfer themselves to school boards, and he hoped that that would be the case."
But where voluntary managers have been willing to continue their schools, let us consider what has been the effect of the Act of 1870, and of its administration by the Education Department.
Before 1870 it used to be estimated that the average yearly cost of school maintenance was about 30s per child in average attendance, roughly divided into equal parts between the fees, the grant, and the voluntary subscriptions. (The appended table gives, omitting fractions of a penny, the income per head from fees, grant, and voluntary subscriptions, and the total income in Church of England schools from 1865 to 1886).
CHURCH OF ENGLAND SCHOOLS
INCOME PER CHILD: AVERAGE ATTENDANCE
[click on the image for a larger version]
The Government in 1870 promised that aided schools might in future earn a further grant so as to make the proportion that the grant might bear to the whole income a possible maximum of one half, and a possible amount, subject to that limitation, of 15s a head. The restriction as to the grant not exceeding half the total income was imposed by section 97 of the Act, its augmentation was determined in the Code. Some friends of the voluntary school system urged that parliamentary security should be given them for the augmentation, but it was felt that the solemn pledges of a Government associated with legislation of such importance were a sufficient guarantee, and on the advice of Mr. Disraeli, no legislative enactment was pressed for.
[page 368]
It may here be noticed that in 1876 a further concession was made to school managers by the removal of the parliamentary obligation that other sources of income must equal the grant in all cases where the grant did not exceed 17s 6d, and at the same time the conditions of public aid were so altered under the vice-presidency of Lord Sandon, as to largely increase the grants which might be earned on the adoption of a more liberal curriculum. But it was never intended in 1870 that schools should be maintained without local contributions. Mr. Gladstone, on the 24th June, in the debate on the recommitted Bill, said: "We shall take care that under no circumstances shall the public grants be allowed so to operate as entirely to supply, together with school pence the sum necessary to support those [voluntary] schools, and there shall always remain a void which must be filled up by free private contributions, and without which, failing other sources of assistance, these schools would no longer deserve the character of voluntary." As a matter of fact, even in 1870, there were a few high-feed schools which were self-supporting by means of the fees, and of the grant; and since then, the raising of the fees and of the Government grant, has greatly increased their number; but such a state of things was never contemplated as normal, or intended to be the financial basis of our national system.
Under these conditions of increased financial support, and with their prior right on the school constituency carefully protected from school board competition, both by the natural reluctance of the boards to spend money, and by the action of the department, where boards have been anxious to push the erection of schools; what has been the career of the voluntary schools, and can it be said that as a system the board system has been false to the honourable pledge given in Parliament, and has superseded the voluntary schools?
A time of grace was extended to voluntary effort, which by the statement of the Earl de Grey, then President of the Council, made in his speech on the second reading in the House of Lords, practically gave a period of from 18 months to two years "before the door will be closed against voluntary exertion". It was therefore contemplated that after that date, the further supply of school provision was to be practically entirely in the hands of the boards, but if we take the year 1874, as fixing the period up to which this vested right of expansion was operative for the growth of the voluntary system, what are the facts since that date?
In the schools inspected in 1874, voluntary accommodation was 2,626,000 school places; the average number on the roll was 2,277,000, and the average attendance was 1,540,000 children. In 1886 in round numbers the accommodation was 3,443,000 places, the average number on the roll was 2,867,000, and the average attendance 2,187,000, an increase of 817,000 accommodation, 590,000 on the roll, and 647,000 average attendance; while the board schools in the same time have increased from 245,000 accommodation, 221,000 on the roll, and 138,000 in average attendance, to 1,692,000 accommodation, 1,638,000 on the roll, and 1,251,000 in average attendance. But so far from the board schools having emptied the voluntary schools, the latter are fuller now than they were in 1874, the average attendance being 63.5 per cent of the accommodation, whereas it was 58.6 per cent of the accommodation in 1874. The voluntary schools which in 1874 had accommodation for 65.4 per cent of the estimated child population needing school places, had in 1886 accommodation for 73.6 per cent of the estimated child population, and if we look to the number on the roll, we find that in 1874, 57.7 per cent of the child population was on the roll of voluntary schools, and in 1886, 61.7 per cent of the child population was on the roll of the voluntary schools inspected during the year. So far, therefore from the school boards having superseded or supplanted the voluntary schools, it is evident that both together have been labouring, the one in discharge of a Parliamentary duty, the other as a self-imposed task in overtaking the lamentable deficiency of school provision and school attendance which disgraced the country before 1870.
And so far from the strain on the resources of voluntary subscribers having been increased, the table of subscriptions, fees, and grant, which we have given for Church schools, shows that the income from voluntary subscriptions is 2s 3d a head, or nearly 25 per cent less than it was in 1876 when Lord Sandon's Act materially increased the grant, and relieved managers from the obligation in all cases of finding half the income of the school.
In the case of other voluntary schools, the voluntary subscriptions are lower than in the case of Church of England schools. Thus, the Wesleyans in 1886, with 130,088 scholars, derived £15,691, or 2s 5d a head from voluntary contributions.
[page 369]
In 1878, the first year when their returns were separated from British schools, their subscriptions yielded 3s 1d a head.
The British schools in 1886, with 258,396 scholars in average attendance, had an income from subscriptions of £74,694, or 5s 9d a head. In 1878 their subscriptions yielded 6s 10d a head. The Roman Catholic schools derived 7s 2d a head from subscriptions in 1886, and 9s 5d a head in 1876.
But some of the advocates of voluntary schools complain that the lightness of their subscriptions is no refutation of the reality of their grievance, because, in addition to subscribing to their own schools, they have to pay rates for the support of the board schools, thus maintaining a system they dislike, and crippling, so far, their means of maintaining their own schools; and some of them ask that they may be excused from payment of the school rate to the extent to which they subscribe to their own schools.
As to the grievance of contributing to a system they dislike, that is inseparable from the fact that the maintenance of schools has been made a public duty charged on public funds. No man is allowed to take credit for his expenditure in private charity in diminution of the poor rate. If the proposal to allow deduction of subscriptions to voluntary schools from the school board rate were allowed, that would be in practice maintaining all schools, denominational and others, from the rates. The proposal, even if it were theoretically reasonable, is not a practical one. As to the further complaint that people who pay rates are unwilling to subscribe any longer to voluntary schools, this merely shows that there is no keen desire on the part of such people for the maintenance of denominational schools. Indeed, to a large extent voluntary schools are now maintained, not from religious zeal, but from fear of a heavier charge if a school board were established, and it is the commonest appeal to subscribers that it is cheaper for them to maintain the existing schools than to suffer them to be closed or handed over to a school board. It must be remembered that the title these denominational schools claim, is that of voluntary. They are maintained, not in obedience to a legal obligation, but because their supporters declare their wish for something which the State declines to give, namely, the maintenance of distinct denominational teaching and the control and management of the schools, including the power of appointing and dismissing the teachers. These are very important powers, and it is not unreasonable that those who wish to preserve them should bear some material part of the cost of securing them. It must be remembered, too, that there are other incidental advantages secured to the churches by their denominational schools. Thus, an organist and choir master could often not be secured unless the salary of schoolmaster were added to the small sum that the church body is able to pay for these ecclesiastical services. It is common to require the teacher of the day school to teach in the Sunday school. The Sunday school, which is held in the day school, has the building kept in repair out of the funds of the day school. All these advantages are of great value and should be paid for.
Indeed, most of the witnesses who spoke on behalf of the voluntary schools, admitted that there should be voluntary subscriptions, and the few who did not admit this, thought it unlikely that Parliament would allow private management to continue if all the school funds were derived from public grants, or taxation of the parents.
Another grievance urged by the friends of voluntary schools is the levying rates on school buildings.
No doubt the policy of the law has for many years been against exceptions to rating, and exemption from rating is, pro tanto, a subsidy from the ratepayers.
We think, however, considering that in public elementary schools there can by law be no profit made by the managers, that it would be equitable that public elementary schools in premises conveyed by a trust deed free for the purposes of education, should be exempt from rating.
It is obvious, as Mr. W. S. Daglish, the representative of the North of England Voluntary Schools Federation said, who came specially to complain of the grievance of rating school buildings, that buildings for which a rent is paid, should be rated.
Another complaint of the advocates of voluntary schools is the hardship upon poor persons who use the voluntary schools in the matter of the payment of fees.
The school boards have power to remit fees, and very generally use that power; but voluntary managers state that their poverty makes it difficult for them to sacrifice that source of income, and they are thus obliged to send the poor to the guardians to obtain the payment of the school fee. This has a tendency to pauperise, or at any rate to
[page 370]
humiliate the parent, and, moreover, the guardians are apt to be very grudging in their readiness to pay the fees for the poor who are not paupers.
We desire here to repeat the opinion which we have already expressed in the chapter on the cost of elementary education that the poor are fairly entitled to free schooling, whether in a board or a voluntary school, and that it is right that, if necessary, a moderate fee should be paid for them by some public authority, to the managers of the schools attended by the children. We think it undesirable to associate this aid with the idea of pauperism, and it is deserving of consideration whether the district councils proposed under the Bill now before Parliament should not have this duty entrusted to them.
In that case we think it should be their duty to pay the fees both for children who are under the age of compulsion, and for those who may be exempt from the obligation of school attendance, if their parents or guardians are willing to prolong their education.
Some witnesses complained of the excellence of board schools and of the keen competition from which the supporters of voluntary schools suffered, owing to the better premises, better staff, and more liberal curriculum of the board schools. Thus, Mr. T. W. Allies, secretary of the Catholic Poor School Committee, after describing the enormous advantage which the school boards have over voluntary schools, on account of the power of levying a rate, says that the school boards "supply themselves with everything they need, including excellent and well furnished buildings, complete apparatus, and skilful teachers (most of all, perhaps, teachers) at practically any cost they like to impose upon the people. We, on the other hand, are deprived of all those advantages, and I have felt most acutely in the last 15 years the perpetual disadvantage under which we lie. It has hardly, perhaps, come into full action till about the last five years; but now it is every year more and more apparent, and it is so great, that it seems to me that it will ultimately destroy the voluntary schools if it is carried on in the same ratio as it is now." He fears that the board schools will become the normal standard of education. His remedy is in some way to prevent the enormous predominance of wealth from public sources which the board schools have at their command as against voluntary schools. He accuses the school boards of increasing the cost and extending the range of education for the purpose of driving the voluntary schools to destruction. He says of the board schools, "I only see magnificent buildings, which, when I compare them with some of those which we are obliged to use, fill me with a feeling of discomfort. I see palaces raised where we can only raise very humble buildings, and I feel the effect of that upon the parents. They say of the board schools: 'We see everything we want here, spacious rooms, &c., &c.' If we go to our own schools there is very small accommodation in comparison. All that is done I say by an act of injustice." And he says, "I think that the moral and intellectual results may be disadvantageously operated upon by bad buildings"; and he goes on to repeat that the educational superiority of board school teaching is only at its commencement. He says, "The educational results as to the sixth and seventh standards are a good deal superior in board schools, and I am afraid that superiority will go on increasing. That is produced by the great wealth that they have at their command." He says, "The board schools are carrying out further and further their attempt to give a first-rate education and they are making all education much more costly than it was"; and he says, "The school boards wish to be the sole schools in the country. They wish, that as a lever for democratic power; all the education should be in the hands of schools that are maintained upon their principles; that is to say, detaching religion from the whole system of education." Mr. Allies says, I object to [school boards] giving in those schools an education which does not properly belong to the children of the parents in their actual condition."
The Rev. W. J. B. Richards, who has been a diocesan inspector of Roman Catholic schools for 16 years, was also called as a witness on behalf of the Roman Catholics. He complained that the competition of the school board made it harder for the Roman Catholics to work their schools. Thus, he said that the higher salaries paid to teachers by the London school board made the Roman Catholic teachers dissatisfied with comparatively small salaries; and he says that the London school board furnishes all their schools as perfectly as it is possible to furnish them, and that causes unpleasant contrasts to be made. He also complains that the better instruction given to pupil teachers and the relief from some of the
[page 371]
hours of teaching in school given by the London school board places the board pupil teachers at an enormous advantage when sitting for the scholarship examination compared with their pupil teachers. He does not blame the London school board for their liberal salaries; nevertheless the contrast makes the Roman Catholic teachers discontented.
Mr. James Murray, head master of the St. Francis Xavier Roman Catholic school at Liverpool, gave similar evidence as to the low salaries of Roman Catholic teachers compared with the salaries paid by school boards, and as to the badness of the Roman Catholic school buildings compared with board schools. Mr. L. Conway, head master of Holy Cross Roman Catholic school, Liverpool, also spoke of his school suffering from insufficient salaries paid to teachers owing to the poverty of the managers, and he mentions the badness of their buildings. He also objects to the system which allows the school board and does not allow them to have prizes for regular attendance. He thinks prizes should be found for them out of public money.
The Roman Catholic body being, as a rule, poorer than the other voluntary school managers, make their complaints as to want of means more emphatically, and they also feel most keenly the question of exclusive denominational teaching as of high importance, but the same complaints may be found in the evidence of Church of England managers and other advocates of denominational schools.
The various circulars we sent out gave full opportunity for those who received them to make any criticisms on the present law, the Code and its administration; on the whole, considering the amount of agitation there has been, and the fact that in many cases organisations suggested answers making complaint against various parts of our system, it is remarkable to how large an extent the Acts, the Code, and its administration have given satisfaction.
Circular A received 3,759 answers from managers of voluntary schools to the first question: "Is there anything in the Education Acts which hinders the satisfactory education in your school?" 764, or 20 per cent, answered by complaints of the Acts. Two-thirds of the managers find the Code suited to the children; one-third make criticisms; 62 per cent are satisfied with the administration of the Code; 27 per cent are not satisfied; 11 per cent make no reply to the questions; 46 per cent of the voluntary managers are satisfied; and 48 per cent are dissatisfied with the encouragement given by the State to moral training.
Question 9 in Circular B, "Have you any observations to make on the working of the Education Acts and the Code?" has drawn out many complaints of the hardships of voluntary schools, but many more answers contain no complaint. These answers, however, have not been tabulated.
When complaints are made, they are often not deserving of any very great attention.
In the case of Circular B, it has been possible to illustrate by the condition of the school the reasonableness of the complaints of the managers.
In Bradford, 29 voluntary school managers answered our Circular B. From these answers we make the following extracts:
The managers of St. Cuthbert Roman Catholic school complain "too much is expected from the class of children who come to this school, as the parents are poor, &c." The merit grant was refused to this school; the grant for English was refused; the percentage of passes was 53; the average attendance at the school was 176; the cost £1 7s 10d a head. The fee is said to be paid, in most cases, without difficulty.
The answer from the Reverend Canon Motler, manager of St. Joseph's Roman Catholic school complains of unfair working of the Act, and unequal competition of board schools. The accounts of this school show that it was worked without any subscriptions. It received the excellent merit grant, though English and Geography were only paid for at 1s each.
St. Thomas Church of England school, Bradford, complained that "the Acts are being so worked as to crush out voluntary schools steadily, but surely." This school had an average of 214 scholars, and £28 6s 8d voluntary subscriptions out of a total income of £266 7s 10d, or about 2s 8d a head; the fees were £133; the cost per head was £1 8s 4d; the percentage of passes was 53; no class subjects were attempted, and the merit grant was refused.
St. Paul's Church of England school, Manningham, complained that "the Act or Acts are made to act prejudicially to the interests of denominational schools." This school, with 437 average attendance, drew £18 1s 11d of its income from voluntary subscriptions, or about 10d a head, and £397 from fees, or more than 18s a head, and £360 from grant; thus, 2.2 per cent of the whole income was furnished by the
[page 372]
voluntary managers. The school is in three departments, and they all got the fair merit grant.
The managers of Bankfoot Bradford national school complain of the injustice of being rated, but make no return of the amount. The school has 254 accommodation, and 238 average. As Manningham St. Paul's school, with 693 accommodation, returns a total payment for rates of five shillings and two pence, it is not likely that the burden on Bankfoot can be very oppressive. The Bankfoot managers also complain that the board schools are worked to supplant the voluntary schools; that there are too many inspectors who have fanciful and useless crotchets.
In this school the voluntary subscriptions are £8 out of an income of £368, or 8d a head, and 2.2 per cent, of the income.
The cost per head is £1 10s 4d. The merit grant was refused to the senior department, which passed 70 per cent.
St. Mary, Laister Dyke, Church of England school, asks for more liberal grants to enable denominational schools to continue which are in danger of closing. This school, with 190 average, has no voluntary contributions, and spends £1 8s 9d a head in school maintenance. The senior department got the fair merit grant. No merit grant was given to the infant class.
St. Anne's Roman Catholic school complains that the code is too exacting for the class of children attending. This school, with 357 average attendance, had no voluntary subscriptions, and cost £1 10s 8d a head. The girls' department got no merit grant on account of tampering with the registers.
The managers of Holy Trinity, Bradford, say that voluntary schools ought to draw their fair share from the rate.
This school, with 798 scholars on the roll, and 588 average, received £507 15s of Government grant, £373 from school pence, and had no voluntary contributions.
Thirteen schools out of 29 made no observations on the working of the Act and code, and, therefore, presumably, were satisfied.
We are of opinion with reference to these and similar complaints, that it is unreasonable for voluntary managers to object to the progress of education because their limited means do not allow them to keep up with it. Voluntary management implies voluntary effort, and if the effort is inadequate, there is no duty imposed on them to maintain their schools, which are now a much lighter burden to voluntary managers than they were 10 years ago.
CHAPTER 18
THE GRIEVANCES OF NONCONFORMISTS
In a previous chapter of this Report we have pointed out that the Education Act of 1870 was constructed on the principle that it is no part of the duty of the State to secure religious instruction for children attending public elementary schools. School managers may, if they please, provide religious instruction, but since 1870 the connexion of a school with some religious denomination, or the provision of religious instruction has ceased to be one of the conditions of obtaining a share of the Parliamentary grant. Nor, since the passing of the Act, has it been the duty of Her Majesty's inspectors to inquire into any religious instruction that may be given in schools receiving grants.
Liberty, as we have said, is left to school managers to provide what religious instruction they please; but this liberty is restricted by clause 7 of the Act, which insists that in public elementary schools -
The time or times during which any religious observance is practised or instruction in religious subjects is given at any meeting of the school shall be either at the beginning or the end, or at the beginning and the end of such meeting, and shall be inserted in a time-table to be approved by the Education Department, and to be kept permanently and conspicuously affixed in every schoolroom, and any scholar may be withdrawn by his parents from such observance or instruction without forfeiting any of the other benefits of the school.
[page 373]
In the same clause it is also enacted that -
It shall not be required as a condition of any child being admitted into or continuing in the school that he shall attend or abstain from attending any Sunday school or any place of religious worship, or that he shall attend any religious observance or any instruction in religious subjects in the school or elsewhere, from which observance or instruction he may be withdrawn by his parent, or that he shall, if withdrawn by his parent, attend the school on any day exclusively set apart for religious observance by the religious body to which his parent belongs.
According to the theory of the Act of 1870, it is for the secular instruction only that the grant is given. During the hours of secular instruction the leaching is to be free from any religious bias, and parents have the legal right to withdraw their children from any religious instruction and observances which they disapprove.
The question whether the public elementary school accommodation in any school district is adequate to its requirements is therefore determined without regard to the churches with which any of the schools may be connected, or the religious preferences of the parents for whose children the schools are provided.
It is the view of the Legislature, according to the high authority of Mr. P. Cumin, that a public elementary school connected with any denomination is "suitable" for the children of every other denomination. The Catholic parent, so it is assumed, can without difficulty withdraw his child, who is attending a Church of England school, from the instruction that is given from the English Bible and the Church Catechism during the first three-quarters of an hour after the school opens; and it is also assumed that during the two hours given to secular subjects there will be nothing in the teaching or in the general spirit and tone of the school to impair the child's faith in the Catholic Church. The parent who is attached to the English Church may, under the same protection, send his child to a Catholic school.
The compulsory law is worked on these assumptions. If there is only one public elementary school within reach of a child's home, the parent who can make no other provision for his child's education is compelled, under legal penalties, to send his child to that school, however widely his own religious faith may differ from the religious faith which the school was established and is maintained to promote.
It was our duty to inquire whether the provisions of the Act of 1870 for securing the rights of parents are effective; and on this question we have received evidence from a large number of witnesses.
All the evidence goes to show that the conscience clause of the Act of 1870 is very rarely violated. In other words, children are not refused admission into Church, Catholic, or Wesleyan day schools because they refuse to attend Church, Catholic, or Wesleyan Sunday schools; they are not compelled to receive the religious instruction in day schools if their parents ask that they may be withdrawn from it, and religious instruction and religious observances are not permitted to interrupt the secular work of the schools; but, according to the requirement of section 7 of the Act, are restricted to the beginning or the end. or the beginning and the end, of the school hours.
The definite cases submitted to us in proof of its alleged violation were very few. Mr. T. Snape, who holds several important official positions in connexion with the United Methodist Free Churches, informed us that "at Kidlington, in the Oxford (United Free Methodist) Circuit, in 1884, several boys were flogged for absenting themselves half a day (from a Church of England day school) to attend the treat given by the Free Methodist Sunday school. Our minister", he continued, "wrote to Mr. Mundella, who was then Vice-President of the Council, on the subject, and the matter was brought to the notice of the House of Commons. Mr. Mundella instituted inquiries, and the master and managers were reproved by the Department. Obstacles had also been put in the way on former occasions to prevent the scholars attending similar treats." But it does not appear to us that cases of this kind, however reprehensible, are violations of the conscience clause. The parents of the children who stayed away from the day school at Kidlington to attend the Sunday school treat of the United Methodist Free Church had not withdrawn their children from the religious instruction of the school, nor could they allege that the day of the treat was, in the words of the Act, "a day exclusively set apart for religious observance" by the religious body to which they belonged; and therefore the managers and teachers of the day school were perfectly within their legal right in requiring the children to attend school on that day. When the master
[page 374]
flogged the children he used his legal right unwisely and ungenerously, and incurred the reproof of the Department; but if he had violated the conscience clause the Department might have suspended the grant.
Mr. Snape cited another case, "The son of the station-master at Worleston (in Cheshire) attended the National School on week-days and the Free Methodist School on Sundays. The father, disapproving of the religious instruction given in the day school, availed himself of the conscience clause to withdraw his son during the time the religious instruction was given. In consequence the boy was excluded from the secular instruction; but Mr. Mundella, who was then Vice-President of the Council, upon receiving a representation of the facts, directed that the boy must be re-admitted, or the grant would not be continued." This was a definite violation of the law, and was remedied under threat of the withdrawal of the grant.
The witness, after stating that the boy was re-admitted, went on to say that "because of the circumstances attending his withdrawal and compulsory re-admission, influence was exercised with the railway superintendent in Chester to get the father removed from his position as station-master at Worleston. This removal was about to be carried out, but, through the intervention of the Rev. Thomas Naylor, the Tree Methodist minister of the Crewe circuit, the facts were placed before the railway authorities, and the superintendent then cancelled the notice of removal." But whatever influence may have been exercised in order to remove the station-master from his post was clearly no violation of any clause in the Act of 1870; the demands of the conscience clause were satisfied when the child was re-admitted into the school.
The other witnesses who appeared before us as representatives of certain Nonconformist denominations which, as the witnesses alleged, have cause of complaint against our existing educational system did not insist that the conscience clause is violated; it was their contention that in large districts the present provisions of the law, even when they are not violated, offer no adequate protection to the religious liberty of Nonconformist parents - a contention which is illustrated by the cases already quoted from the evidence of Mr. Snape. According to these witnesses the important question is not whether the law is violated, but whether it is effective.
The Reverend Robert Bruce, M.A., D.D., has been a Congregational Minister at Huddersfield for 33 years: he was for three years Vice-Chairman of the Huddersfield School Board, and since retiring from the vice-chairmanship has been Chairman of the School Management and General Purposes Committee. Dr. Bruce is also Chairman for 1888 of the Congregational Union of England and Wales. He informed us that in connexion with the Congregational denomination there are, in England and Wales, 4,315 churches and branches, and about 3,500 ministers and missionaries. He does not think that the conscience clause is effective, "because in so many cases children go and learn religious doctrines which neither they nor their parents understand or believe." When asked how it is that the parents do not avail themselves of the power to claim exemption, the witness replied: "I am afraid that in many instances it is owing to the indifference of the parents; in other instances the parents are probably ignorant of the existence of the clause; it is very seldom seen; I do not remember having seen the clause myself. And, then, from the dependent position of many of the parents, small shopkeepers, or persons employed by rich masters belonging in the main to the predominant church, they are afraid to risk boycotting of some sort. Then, sometimes the child might be marked, and suffer in some way, both educationally and socially, by being made an exception; the parents naturally prefer the happiness and comfort of the children, and they take the risk of children learning doctrines which they do not believe in order to have the chance of correcting the errors themselves." Dr. Bruce thinks that the conscience clause is an ineffective protection in board schools as well as in voluntary schools, only "the board school is forbidden to use any church formulary, and therefore it has a natural conscience clause which the other has not." The witness informed us that a member of the Huddersfield School Board withdrew a daughter of his own from the religious instruction given in the board school at which she attended, but "the head mistress went to the gentleman and said that she felt so much for the poor child sitting by herself in a class-room, miserable, while the others were in school, that she asked him, for the child's sake, to let the child come in, and she came in." The father was strongly opposed even to what Dr. Bruce described as the "mild form of religious instruction" given in the Huddersfield board schools.
[page 375]
Dr. Bruce believes that managers of denominational schools endeavour to carry out the conscience clause according to the letter, and in the main according to the spirit; but he thinks that there is no doubt that the spirit is sometimes violated. Prizes or treats are given "to those children who conform to the religion of the school"; by which the witness subsequently explained that he meant that they are given to children attending the day school who also attend the Sunday school of the same church; and if prizes are Sunday school prizes he thought that they should be given at a time when only Sunday school children are present. In other ways children not attending the Sunday school are made to occupy a humiliating or disagreeable position, and the impression is given that it is "a shabby thing" for parents to send their children to a day school and not to send them to the same place on Sunday. "This has been done", the witness said, "in our own town." The witness also thought that if membership of a clothing club or a sick club is confined to those children attending a day school who are also in the Sunday school of the same church, the club money should not be collected in the day school. The club becomes a temptation to the parents of poor children.
Mr. Thomas Snape, of Liverpool and Widnes, stated that the religious connexion which he represented (the United Methodist Free Churches) numbers in the home districts, excluding the Colonies and foreign countries, 1,353 congregations. The persons attached to these churches belong largely to the classes for which public elementary schools are provided. The witness claimed to have a large knowledge of the opinions both of the ministers and members of the United Methodist Free Churches in different parts of England on educational questions. He thinks that in districts where there is only a Church of England school within reach of the children of members of the United Methodist Free Churches, the conscience clause, instead of being an effective protection of their religious liberty, is "practically inoperative". It was within the knowledge of the witness that members of these churches in many parts of England do not avail themselves of the conscience clause for two reasons: "In the first place, they are afraid of losing their employment; and, secondly, they believe, truly or falsely, that the children who have been withdrawn from religious instruction are not treated kindly. The unkindness sometimes comes from the teachers, and sometimes from their fellow scholars. The parents do not care to have their children regarded as heretics." The witness also stated that parents have ground of complaint, even if they do not withdraw their children from the religious instruction. "A half-holiday and treat may be given to the day school children, who also attend the Church Sunday School; but the children who attend the Methodist Sunday School, while they have the holiday, are excluded from the treat. Rewards may be given to one set of children, from which the other set is excluded; and a sick fund may be established in a day school the benefits of which are confined to the children who also attend the Sunday school. Complaints of this kind are made from many parts of the country." The resentment provoked among the Free Methodists by what they regard as the unfair and unjust position in which their children are placed was described as "sometimes very strong and bitter." In this connexion the witness mentioned the case, which we have already quoted, of several boys who were flogged for absenting themselves half a day from a church day school, in order to attend the treat given by the Free Methodist Sunday School.
The Primitive Methodist Connexion which has in England and Wales rather more than 5,000 churches, and about 180,000 persons in church membership, and close upon half a million attendants at public worship, was represented before the Commission by its president, the Rev. John Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson stated that the Primitive Methodists belong exclusively to the working classes, and that practically they have no support from the wealthy; that they had reached the heedless, the shiftless, and the helpless, and had succeeded in carrying a higher life into hundreds and thousands of homes which were before neglected. The whole of the ministers of the Connexion are drawn from the working classes, and remain in the most intimate relations with them. He informed us that the commencing salary of a Primitive Methodist minister is £50 a year; that at the end of 10 years it might reach £100 or £110; and that the highest salary of any minister in the Connexion is about £150 a year. The witness further stated that about one-half of the churches of the Primitive Methodist Connexion are in districts where
[page 376]
there is no school board; that a very large number of them are in rural districts; and that, as a matter of necessity, the children attend the day schools of the Church of England. The fact that the children of Primitive Methodists attend church schools is no proof that the parents value the religious instruction that is given in them; and the witness stated that the teaching of the Church Catechism, on the doctrine of baptism for instance, does not correspond with the religious belief of the Primitive Methodists; and yet the children are taught the Catechism. There are other grounds on which the religious instruction given in Church of England schools is objectionable to witness, but as the information which reached him came through children, he was unable to rest his complaints on his own personal knowledge; but the children state "that they are cautioned against attending Dissenting places of worship, and it is impressed upon them that to attend these places is very wrong"; complaints of this kind are made in many parts of England where Primitive Methodist churches are found. The Secretary of the Connexional Sunday School Union, in answer to the inquiries of witness, had informed him that "from various parts of the country he receives information from time to time that the children attending the day schools are influenced in the direction of separating themselves" from the Primitive Methodist Connexion. These complaints came to the secretary in his official capacity, and from many parts of England; he named the counties of Stafford, Derby, York, Norfolk, Berks, Gloucester, Monmouth, Middlesex, Herts, Kent, Surrey, Chester, Worcester, Durham, Cambridge, Dorset, and Northumberland. The conscience clause, as far as the witness knew, is inoperative in the schools at which the children of Primitive Methodists attend. The principal reason why Primitive Methodists do not avail themselves of its protection is "their fear of incurring the displeasure of their superiors in the neighbourhood, and imperilling their employment." In many parts of England this is the reason which prevents parents from taking advantage of the conscience clause. The witness was cross-examined with regard to the statements of children attending Church of England schools, that they were cautioned against attending Dissenting worship.
44,578. Do you think that if the Commission wished to go into this question further, and to have evidence before them which they could sift, you could produce any cases which they might examine into? - I think I could.
44,579. Of course we could not expect children to be brought here, but, as I understand, the children complain to the parents, and the parents to your ministers? - Yes.
44,580. I do not mean that we should ever think of bringing the children to cross-examine them here, but supposing that we wished to test the matter, and asked any of your ministers if they would come and state upon their own authority that they have had such complaints from parents in their districts, do you think that any ministers would attend here to say so? - Yes, I think they would. Although, perhaps, in some instances they would scarcely feel at liberty to divulge the names of the parents, still the ministers would attend and state what had been told to them.
4,581. I am not saying anything about the individual names of parents or children; but supposing that the Commission wished to test this matter they might obtain the statements of individual ministers who would depose to what you have now stated? - Yes.
The general impression of the witness with regard to the consideration that is shown to the children of Primitive Methodists attending Church of England day schools is given in the following extract from a later part of his cross-examination:
44,584. My experience of the clergy of the Church would be that they would rather shrink from teaching the Catechism unless to children whom they believe to be members of the Church of England; do you confirm me in that? - No.
44,585. For instance, no clergyman, I hope I may say, but, at any rate, no clergyman worthy of his calling, would wilfully teach a child which had not been baptised to speak about what vows he had made at his baptism? - All the children of our people are baptised.
44,586. Then, of course, that particular point would not arise; but, speaking generally, do you not think that the majority of the managers of Church schools
[page 377]
would wish to respect the religious feelings of the parents of their children? - I cannot say that my experience would lead me to admit that.
44,587. You would not go as far as that? - No.
The Baptist denomination, which has 2,892 chapels in England and 607 in Wales, was represented among the witnesses who appeared before us by the Rev. Charles Williams, of Accrington, President of the Baptist Union of England and Wales, April, 1886 - April, 1887. The witness stated that by far the larger number of places of worship connected with the Baptist denomination are in villages: that in Buckinghamshire, for instance, which he had recently visited two or three times, out of a total of 78 Baptist chapels, at least from 60 to 65 are in small villages. He further stated that during the year that he was President of the Baptist Union he travelled over a great part of England; that he had made a visitation to villages, a special feature of his year's work as President; that he had come very largely into contact with the members of the Baptist village churches; and that in nearly every instance when he visited a village he asked about the state of education, as he was interested in the general work of day schools. The witness informed us that in the villages which he had visited, and which, of course, were only villages in which there are Baptist chapels, he thought that generally there were more children connected with the Nonconformist Sunday Schools than with the Church of England Sunday Schools, "which would seem to imply that denominationally the Nonconformists certainly have the greater number of children." At Mursley, in Buckinghamshire, for example, with a population of 300, the Baptist Sunday School had 65 scholars and the Church of England Sunday School about 30. At Newton Longville, in the same neighbourhood, with a population of 480, two Nonconformist Sunday Schools contain just about twice the number that attend the Church of England school. In the judgment of the witness the presence of the majority of the children in Nonconformist Sunday Schools indicates the religious preferences of the parents; they send their children to the National schools during the week, of necessity, because there is no other school within reach. The witness, however, stated that scholars remain in Baptist Sunday Schools for a considerable time after the age at which they leave the Sunday schools of the Church of England. Mr. Williams and those whom he represents do not regard the conscience clause as an efficient protection for the children. "Whether", he said, "the parents are right in the impression in every instance I cannot say, but the representation made to me is this: That if they were to claim the protection of the conscience clause it would expose their children to considerable inconvenience, and some parents, much against their will, instruct their children to attend the religious instruction given in Church of England schools as a less evil than being marked off and exposed to annoyance in consequence." He had been assured by his friends in the villages which he had visited that if the children were withdrawn from the religious instruction in Church schools both children and parents would suffer annoyance. When asked how it was that a man who has sufficient strength of conscientious conviction to go to a Nonconformist chapel on Sunday, and to send his children to a Nonconformist Sunday School could not make up his mind to claim the protection his conscience demands on weekdays, the witness answered: "The only reason why he cannot make up his mind is this - the other fact has now been accepted, and a man, to the credit of all parties I say it, is thought nothing the worse of because he goes to chapel; but this is a new thing, this option given by the conscience clause, and it is very seldom used from the impression that I speak of, an impression that may not be well founded, and which I regret quite as much as anyone." Again, "Going to chapel has been accepted now as one of the conditions that clergymen must reckon with in their conduct of parochial affairs, whereas within the school the clergyman thinks, and I think properly, that he is the principal manager, and that his will, therefore, should go for more there than in the village at large." When asked whether it was mainly from the clergyman that the annoyance came, and not from the people generally, Mr. Williams replied: "I should not like to say that. I daresay there is a fear of offending the clergyman; but then, if the clergyman should be offended, it is just as likely that some ladies of the parish, or that some gentlemen of the parish, would look with disfavour upon the party who withdraws his children from religious instruction." The witness was reminded that he had declined to produce instances in proof of his allegation that parents were afraid to avail themselves of the conscience clause because of the
[page 378]
annoyance which might come to themselves and their children; and it was put to him that if the parents themselves refused to appear before the Commission through fear of the consequences, Nonconformist ministers could come and say that certain parents had complained to them that in their case the conscience clause was of no value. He replied: "Supposing that a minister came here to do that and gave you facts, as I have no doubt that he would be asked to give facts with all the particulars, that would be known; he himself in his particular village or town would be regarded with ill-will in consequence, and the parents of such scholars would be exposed to the disfavour of those whose good-will they value, and whose help sometimes to them is very welcome."
The Rev. Dr. Crosskey, who, since 1870, has been one of the honorary secretaries of the Central Nonconformist Committee (Birmingham), said that in his belief the conscience clause is ineffective; there are large numbers of parents who know nothing about it, and though, no doubt, Nonconformist ministers might, if they chose, diffuse the information wherever there are Nonconformist parents, speaking for himself, he is unwilling at present to press poor people to take advantage of the clause; his unwillingness arises from the fact that in many parts of England the poor themselves are afraid that if they did they would incur the displeasure of powerful people in the neighbourhood on whom they largely depend. He also thought that the separation of Nonconformist children from others in the school places them in a position extremely painful to a sensitive child; and for that reason he had never pressed Nonconformists in towns to take advantage of the clause; and to his knowledge parents are unwilling that their children should be what they call "black sheep". Further, in the belief of the witness, an effective conscience clause would prevent everything in the management of a school that could be an inducement either to the parents or to the children attending it to leave their own church in order to become adherents of the church with which the school is connected; and no degree of liberality on the part of the managers of a school in which all the teachers are members of the English Church can prevent the school from being a powerful influence in favour of drawing the children of Nonconformists into the Establishment. The clause, in the judgment of the witness, leaves unchecked some of the most powerful means of attracting Nonconformist children into the Church of England.
We received further evidence on this point from Mr. T. Smyth, who was elected to attend as a witness by the London Trades Council on behalf of the various trades connected with that body. Mr. Smyth informed us that he was living in Chelsea at the time he appeared before us; but that he had worked at his trade as a plasterer in different parts of London, and in different parts of the country; that he had taken trouble to ascertain the views on the subject of elementary instruction for their children held by the men with whom he worked; and he described his evidence "as the general outcome" of his "conversation with all these men at different times from the first starting of the Act". Throughout his whole evidence he claimed to represent the general opinion of working men, the parents of children attending public elementary schools, on the subjects into which it was our business to inquire. He corroborated the testimony of other witnesses to the effect that there is no appreciable number of boys who are withdrawn under the conscience clause from religious instruction. Any boy that was withdrawn would be "a singular exception". Many men preferred that their children should go to board schools rather than voluntary schools because the religious instruction in board schools is not specific. Some men whom he knew had removed from Pimlico because there was no board school within reach to which they could send their children; some had had to send their children to board schools in the districts surrounding Pimlico. The conscience clause did not meet the case. The following extract from his evidence contains Mr. Smyth's explanation of its inadequacy:
52,256. As a matter of fact, it is so very unworkable. If parents have to claim exemption for their children, it is in a manner making martyrs of them in a school of that character (a school belonging to a religious denomination;), and they would rather put up with religious instruction that they did not agree with than go to the trouble of doing anything.
52,257. Do you contend that any child attending a voluntary school in Pimlico (some of the schools of which are very large), and claiming the conscience clause, would be made a martyr of? - I feel so.
[page 379]
52,258. In what way would he be made a martyr of? - He would be removed out of the class; he would be marked off and put aside; he would be in a manner pointed at, and pointed out as a boy different from the rest.
Even in board schools Mr. Smyth thinks that the conscience clause does not work satisfactorily. He instanced the case of a child of his own who attended Cook's Ground School, which is under the London School Board. The boy was "put to religious instruction, or religious instruction was offered to be given. I sent and asked that he should be withdrawn from that religious instruction, and I will tell you what happened. There was a demur about doing so, and i had a consultation with the schoolmaster about it; I sent my wife also to ask about it, and the result of all the negotiations was that the boy was put up at one end of the room by himself in front of all the school; while they were being given religious instruction he had to stand there." On the election of Mr. Firth, as a member of the London School Board for Chelsea, Mr. Smyth obtained a pledge from him to take action in order to secure a redress of this grievance, and the witness informed us that he believed that after Mr. Firth's election the board found a separate room for boys withdrawn from religious instruction, and appointed teachers to take charge of them. Definite provision, however, had been made by a resolution of the London School Board, passed July 26th, 1871, that "During the time of religious teaching or religious observance, any children withdrawn from such teaching or observance shall receive separate instruction in secular subjects." [Parliamentary Return, 1884.]
But Her Majesty's inspectors are of the opinion that the conscience clause is effective.
The Rev. D. J. Stewart, whose original appointment dates from the year 1850, and who, when he appeared before us, had been one of the chief inspectors for about 12 years, in reply to the question, "Have you reason to believe that the conscience clause is effective?" answered, "I should think it quite so." This statement, however, receives useful illustration from subsequent replies of the same witness.
3973. Can you tell us what it 'effects'? - Perfect protection for the child and the child's parents.
3974. But, as I understand, you have rarely seen a child protected by it? - I said that I had rarely seen a child withdrawn.
3975. "Will you explain how it is effective if it protects no child? - I have never seen any cases of difficulty about the religious instruction given to children.
3976. But a provision to be effective must 'effect' something? - Yes.
3978. Would you not rather say that it is inoperative than that it is effective, if it is never put into operation? - I should not say that.
The Rev. T. W. Sharpe, who was first appointed as one of Her Majesty's inspectors in 1857, and has been one of the chief inspectors since 1875, was also examined on this subject. He had never had any complaints that the conscience clause is violated. Mr. Sharpe was subsequently asked whether such complaints on the part of parents were likely to reach the inspectors, and he said: "The ordinary process would be to complain to the Education Department direct, and the complaint would be remitted to the inspector, who would inquire into the case at once." In answer to a further inquiry whether poor parents, especially in rural districts, are likely to find access to the Education Department, Mr. Sharpe replied, "I have often said that I cannot find courage for all the cowards that exist." There is one other point in connexion with the conscience clause on which the judgment of an inspector of Mr. Sharpe's eminence is important, and we give it at length.
6751. Should you regard it as a violation of the conscience clause if children attending the National School and also attending the Church Sunday School were charged lower fees than children who attended the National School but did not attend the Church Sunday School? - I think it would be better to charge uniform fees without respect to any religious denomination.
6752. Should you regard it as a violation of the conscience clause? - The words of the Act do not put that into the conscience clause, and, therefore, I should not.
6753. Managers can do that without bringing themselves within reach of the law? - So far as I know they can.
Mr. Brodie, another of Her Majesty's inspectors, has "no reason to believe" that "there is any grievance rankling in the minds of Nonconformist parents, though they
[page 380]
have not complained of it, through having to send their children to the church schools in the country districts." He had "never heard" of the grievance. Mr. James McKenzie, a sub-inspector, who is attached to the Education Office, and is sent to visit schools on emergencies, has never heard that any class of Nonconformists thought it "a hardship that children should be sent to schools of a denomination other than their own". He has "circulated over 23 districts in England", and never heard of the grievance; but he has had cases brought under his notice occasionally where "Jews or Roman Catholics were attending the parish schools", and these have been pointed out to him as showing how amicably they worked.
Mr. Fitch, however, who was first appointed inspector in 1863, became one of the chief inspectors in 1877, and is now inspector of the training colleges for mistresses, gave evidence which indicates that, although it would be the duty of an inspector to interfere if he were informed that the conscience clause has been violated, it lies beyond his province to inquire whether the conscience clause is effective. The following passages are extracted from Mr. Fitch's evidence:
57,798. I think you have said that you have not come across, in your own experience, cases of grievance tending to show the inefficiency of the working of the conscience clause as a protection to parents from having their children taught religious doctrines when they disapprove of them? - No, I have heard a great many complaints, but I have not been able to verify them, and my experience does not justify me in saying much about it.
57,799. From what class of persons have those complaints come?- Specially from Nonconformists, who have said that in a village where there is only a church school their children went to the school and received instruction in the Catechism and in the Liturgy, which they did not care about, and that they themselves were too much afraid of the influence of the squire and the parson to exercise their undoubted right of withdrawing their children. That is very often said, and one knows enough of human nature to believe that that is a very likely thing to happen, but I have not verified the evidence.
57,800. Are the persons from whom you hear this persons who are personally acquainted with the working of the school, or do they merely repeat the current opinion of their body? - That sort of thing has often been told me by very trustworthy people who have lived in small country places where there is only one school, or who in other ways have been cognisant of the working of the denominational school in their neighbourhood.
57,801. We have heard a good many statements from persons occupying that position, and they have especially emanated from ministers of Nonconformist bodies, but we have not had, I think, an equal number of statements of the same kind from persons cognisant with the actual working of the school; is it your opinion that the parents themselves feel this, or that the persons of the religious denominations, to which the parents are supposed to belong, feel it most? - I could give you nothing but opinion; I could not give you what is really evidence on that point. The kind of statements that you refer to have been repeatedly made in my hearing, but 1 cannot say that I have gone to the parents and sought to verify them; I have felt that to be rather out of my proper province."
The name of Mr. Fitch, who was at one time the Principal of an undenominational training college, is well known to large numbers of Nonconformists; and for that reason he may have been more likely to hear of Nonconformist "grievances" than those of Her Majesty's inspectors whose evidence we previously quoted.
We received a considerable amount of evidence on this subject from representatives of educational societies connected with the Church of England, the Wesleyan Methodists, and the Roman Catholic Church. The Rev. Canon Willes, Rector of Monk Sherborne, Basingstoke, Secretary of the Board of Education for Leicestershire, and for many years Chairman of the School Attendance Committee for Lutterworth, assured us that no complaints of the infraction of the conscience clause had ever reached him; and expressed his belief that the grievance of Nonconformists, who believe that if they availed themselves of the conscience clause they would suffer great social disadvantage is "purely imaginary". But in the Lutterworth Union, in which, with the exception of one board school, all the schools are Church of England schools, the conscience clause is practically inoperative. According to the estimate of this witness one-fourth of the children attending the Church of England day schools during the week attend the
[page 381]
Dissenting schools on Sunday; but out of 29,000 day scholars only 12 were withdrawn from the diocesan inspection.
47,169. Then the fact is that these children who are largely attending Dissenting schools present themselves for examination in the Church of England theology? - If you put the question in another way, I would say that they present themselves for the examination in the religious instruction given in our schools.
47,170. Which includes the Church Catechism? - As a matter of course; unless they are specially withdrawn from it.
The Rev. James Duncan, who has been Secretary of the National Society since 1870, gave it as his opinion that the conscience clause is found to be effective. But this witness also gave evidence which shows that of more than 2,000,000 children on the registers of Church of England schools only 2,200 are withdrawn from the whole of the religious instruction, and only 5,690 from any part of it - 7,890 in all. The partial withdrawals are, in the opinion of the witness, from the Catechism.
The Rev. David J. Waller, Secretary to the Wesleyan Education Committee, informed us that very few children are withdrawn from the religious instruction given in Wesleyan schools. "Teachers of 20 or 30 years' standing have never had one single case of withdrawal. Some three or four teachers have stated that occasionally a few Roman Catholic children have been withdrawn, and sometimes the Jews have requested that their children might not be taught the New Testament; but they are very anxious that they should be instructed in the Old Testament Scriptures. In many of our schools, which are attended by Roman Catholics, Jews, and others, there is no case of withdrawal; and in one of our schools, a very large one, where about one-third of the children are Jews, there is no case of withdrawal. If any do withdraw in any way it is by coming late." The attention of the witness having been recalled to his statement that the children of Roman Catholics and of Jews were not withdrawn from the religious instruction given in Wesleyan schools, he was asked some questions concerning the character of this instruction.
7226. You give them Christian instruction? - Yes, we give them Christian instruction.
7227. And Protestant instruction? - Yes, we give them Protestant instruction.
In Mr. Waller's judgment the conscience clause is "effective" and is a security "that the conscientious scruples of the parent are not interfered with". He admitted, however, that, considering how few children are withdrawn from religious instruction in any of the schools of the Kingdom, the clause might be described as "inoperative". As Secretary of the Wesleyan Education Committee the witness sometimes received complaints of the violation of the conscience clause, into which it was his business to inquire; he found that the great majority of cases were of a kind that "would break down altogether if brought under the notice of their Lordships"; but he added that "frequently there has been some amount of ground for the complaint, which has been forwarded." There was pressure brought to bear on the parents out of school to send the children to the Church Sunday School. While the witness regarded the conscience clause as effective, he thought that the clause could not interfere with certain influences which may occasionally be brought to bear in various ways outside the schools. ... The parents of the children may be visited, and the thought may be pressed upon them that, going to the day school, they ought to go to the Sunday school of a particular denomination; and there may be charitable gifts and other things which no conscience clause can ever prevent. I do not see how they can be prevented."
The Rev. Charles Henry Kelly, Secretary of the Wesleyan Methodist Sunday School Union, confirmed Mr. Waller's testimony as to the efforts sometimes made to dissuade children attending Church day schools from attending Wesleyan Sunday Schools. Complaints had reached him "occasionally", even in "recent years". When complaints of this kind reached him he sometimes took steps to appeal to the Department, "but", he said, "it is not always wise; sometimes the parents are very poor people, and in villages they dare not say too much." Such cases occurred "almost entirely" in villages. The witness did not think that there is "any great system of persecution": the cases complained of "arise chiefly from individuals". He thought that "it would be very hard to pass
[page 382]
a law which would secure that everyone would do right", and he looked to a healthier state of public opinion as the great security. Mr. Allies, Secretary to the Catholic Poor School Committee, stated that "there are a great number of non-Catholic children" in Catholic schools "by the pure choice of their parents", there being no sort of attraction held out either by the teachers or managers; but he had never heard of a case in which a child was withdrawn from the religious instruction. The witness, however, was not able to say positively that there were no cases of withdrawal.
We also examined a large number of the managers of Church of England schools, and they were unanimous in their judgment that the conscience clause is effective, and that Nonconformists have no ground of complaint. The Rev. W. Aston, LL.D., for example, the Vicar of St. Thomas's, Bradford, has never heard of Nonconformists who say that they cannot avail themselves of the conscience clause. But the same witness informed us that he did not remember a single instance in which any Nonconformist claimed its protection. The Rev. R. B. Burges, Vicar of St. Paul's, Birmingham, had never known an instance in the whole of his experience in which a parent had shrunk from taking advantage of the conscience clause through fear of incurring damage or loss. He also informed us that in church schools "the religious teaching" is "very acceptable" to the people, adding, "During the twenty years that I have been in Birmingham there have not been more than six children who have asked to be excused from religious teaching in my large schools, where we have nearly 1,200 children, and we have had children of Jews and others."
The masters and mistresses of Church of England schools are of the same opinion in reference to the effectiveness of the conscience clause as the managers. Mr. Muscott, the principal teacher of the Garsington Church of England School, near Oxford, has children of Dissenters in his school. The religious teaching is given according to the diocesan syllabus; it occupies three-quarters of an hour daily; and the children are examined by the diocesan inspector. No children are withdrawn from this examination, and Dissenting parents make no complaints. Miss Charlotte Neath is mistress of a National School near Maidstone; the conscience clause "is in the school, but nobody troubles about it". There are Dissenters in the parish, "but they do not withdraw their children, and they do not object to their learning the Catechism." Mr. Edwin Mr. Edwin Horsfield is head-master of St. Saviour's School, Everton, near Liverpool, Horsfield. which has an average attendance of 340. Not more than half of the children are members of the Church of England. There is ample liberty to withdraw the children from the religious teaching; and the conscience clause is strictly observed. But as far as the witness could recollect only two or three had been withdrawn during the eight years and a half that he had been head-master. The witness stated that his religious teaching is "of a distinctly denominational character"; that he instructs the children in the principles of the Church of England. But as far as he had been able to judge he did not think that this instruction had a tendency to make them Church of England people. Mr. E. Stevens, master of the Hartlip Endowed School, Kent (Church of England public elementary school), stated that there are a great many Dissenters in the parish; that there is no other school; that the Bible is read and explained on three days a week, and the Prayer Book and Catechism on the other two days; that the Dissenters do not make the "slightest" objection, and that no child is withdrawn from the religious teaching.
It also appears that very few children are withdrawn from the religious instruction given in denominational schools not connected with the Church of England. Mr. J. H. Devonshire, headmaster of Mintern Street Wesleyan School, Hoxton, informed us that in his school there had been only one case during the last seven years in which a parent had availed himself of the conscience clause. "The father", said the witness, "was not extremely anxious for the child to be withdrawn; but I said, that if he at all wished it, he had better have him withdrawn." The father is a Roman Catholic. There are prayers in the school every day, and the Bible is read three days a week. Mr. Holdsworth, master of the Clarence Street Wesleyan School at Newcastle-on-Tyne - 313 on the books - informed us that religious instruction is given in his school on every morning, except Friday, from 9 o'clock
[page 383]
to 9.45. He never had a withdrawal. The children are not all from Wesleyan families. Some of them are children of Unitarian parents, and some the children of Jews. In one case the witness told a Jewish child that he might stay out of the class when a lesson out of the New Testament was to be read, but the child brought his Bible and read with the other children; "he said that his father did not mind it at all". The father was described as not "a religiously indifferent Jew", but as "really an earnest religious Jew". The witness thought that the father would not have permitted the child to receive the religious instruction if he had thought that it was likely to make the child a Christian. He inferred, from the father's refusal to protect his child by the conscience clause, that he could keep his child right by means of the Jewish school to which the child was sent on Thursday afternoons, and his own private instruction.
Miss Fox, mistress in the infant school of St. Patrick's, Manchester (Roman Catholic), had never had any children withdrawn from the religious instruction; indeed, if she had ever had a child of another religion than the Catholic religion she did not know it. She thinks that a great number of the parents do not know of the existence of the conscience clause.
That very many parents do not know that they have the right to withdraw their children from the religious instruction given in public elementary schools is also the opinion of Mr. J. E. Powell, who is a visitor under the London School Board. Mr. Powell served an apprenticeship as a bookbinder, and is Secretary of the Bookbinders' and Machine Rulers' and Consolidated Union for the Metropolis, and appeared before us as one of the witnesses appointed by the Trades' Council. He hears no complaints of the violation of the conscience clause either in board schools or voluntary schools. The conscience clause, according to this witness, "works very smoothly". When asked "Does it work at all?" the witness answered, "That is perhaps the better way of putting it. It works so smoothly that no one knows of its existence so far as my immediate locality is concerned." "It is not operative? - It is unknown; it is as dead as anything else." "Dead things do not work smoothly, do they? - It is never alluded to."
Our summary of the evidence which we received on this question would be incomplete if we did not add that Her Majesty's inspector, the Rev. D. J. Stewart, thinks that even where the conscience clause has never been put in force by the actual withdrawal of a child, "it may have had an indirect effect" on the kind of religious teaching given in the school. We also note with satisfaction that the Rev. W. D. Parish, Vicar of Selmeston, Sussex, and formerly a diocesan inspector, stated, that in his school care would be taken not to allow a child to answer questions in the Catechism which its parents might object to its answering, or which it could not answer truthfully. The Rev. Prebendary Roe, Rector of Poyntington, Somerset, and a diocesan inspector, made a still broader statement, and informed us that "in (church) schools where there is anything like a large proportion of Nonconformists, the beginning of the Catechism is almost invariably left out."
In estimating the value or the evidence submitted to us by Her Majesty's inspectors on the efficiency of the conscience clause, we attach great importance to the statement of Mr. Fitch, which we have already quoted. If in small country places an inspector is informed that Nonconformists are "too much afraid of the influence of the squire and the parson to exercise their undoubted right of withdrawing their children" from "instruction in the Catechism and in the Liturgy", it is no part of his duty to visit the parents in order to verify these complaints; this in Mr. Fitch's judgment "would be rather out of (his) proper province". The inspector has discharged his duty if he reports to the Department any violation of the law by teachers or managers in those cases in which parents have exercised their right to withdraw their children from religious instruction which they disapprove; it is not his business to discover whether for any reason the parents are afraid to exercise their right. He visits the schools, not the parents; it is not his duty to visit them. But if he is to learn whether Nonconformist parents regard it as a grievance that their children who attend Church of England schools are taught the Church Catechism, and receive instruction in the Prayer Book, it is only from the parents he can learn it; and the parents are the only persons who can tell him why they do not avail themselves of the conscience clause. We do not, therefore, think that the large
[page 384]
amount of evidence given by Her Majesty's inspectors in support of the efficiency of the conscience clause has much weight. They have no means of forming a judgment on its efficiency.
Nor does it seem to us that on this question much weight is to be attached to the evidence of the representatives of educational societies connected with the churches which sustain denominational schools, or to the evidence of the managers and teachers of such schools. If the important question had been, whether the conscience clause is often or ever violated, the evidence of these witnesses would have been valuable. The secretaries and other representatives of the great educational societies could have informed us whether the schools with which they are severally associated had ever been called to account for violating the clause; and if any of the managers or teachers who appeared before us had violated it themselves, we have no doubt that they would have acknowledged the violation. But the real question on which we desired assistance was not whether the clause is violated, but whether it is effective; and the clergyman of a country parish is not likely to know whether the Nonconformists, whose children attend his school, are too much afraid of the influence of the Church in the neighbourhood to use the conscience clause; nor on this question is it likely that the Secretary of the National Society will have any information. And if, as some witnesses allege, parents decline to withdraw their children from religious instruction, which they disapprove - not from any dread of losing employment or incurring any annoyance themselves - but because they fear that the children would suffer some disadvantage in the school, they are not likely to communicate their fears to the teachers.
On the other hand, we think that great weight attaches to the evidence of Mr. T. Smyth, a working man, who was selected to appear before us by the London Trades' Council, and to the evidence of the witnesses who, on the ground of personal knowledge and official position, claimed to be the representatives of various Nonconformist denominations. It was very apparent that Mr. Smyth had a large knowledge of the opinions of working men, the fathers of the children attending public elementary schools; and the force of his evidence was not lessened by any other witness who appeared before us having the same knowledge as himself. On the question why it is that large numbers of Nonconformists whose children attend Church of England schools do not withdraw them from the religious instruction. Nonconformist ministers have better means of being well-informed than any other witnesses whom we examined.
On a review of the whole question, we have come to the conclusion that the conscience clause, though rarely violated, is wholly ineffective; and that the protection it is supposed to offer to parents whose children are attending schools where the religious instruction is contrary to their own religious belief is illusory.
According to the figures furnished us by the Rev. J. Duncan, out of 2,000,000 children attending Church of England schools, less than 8,000 are withdrawn from the religious instruction. No exact statements were given to us as to how many are withdrawn in schools of other descriptions; but all the witnesses agreed that the number is extremely small. In forming a judgment on these figures it is necessary to remember that a very considerable proportion of the parents of the scholars attending public elementary schools know and care very little about the characteristic doctrines and observances of different churches, and have no anxiety that their children should receive one kind of religious instruction rather than another; very many would be quite contented if they received no religious instruction at all. These may be dismissed from consideration. But from the evidence which has come before us, even if we had no other sources of information, it is certain that large numbers of the working classes have strong religious preferences. The Rev. J. Atkinson, for example, informed us that the Primitive Methodists have more than 5,000 churches in England and Wales, with attendance numbering close upon half a million. These churches with their ministers, Sunday schools, missions at home and abroad, and other church institutions are supported by the contributions of the working classes; they have practically no support from the wealthy. Other Nonconformist communities have to rely to a considerable extent, though not so exclusively, upon the contributions of the same classes of the community. That the working people contribute so largely to the support of Nonconformist churches is a decisive proof of the strength of their religious convictions. And yet it is certain from the evidence submitted to us by school managers and teachers, as well as by the Nonconformist ministers, that large numbers of the members of Nonconformist churches and congregations send their children to Church of England day schools without claiming the protection of
[page 385]
the conscience clause. A Baptist parent who believes that infant baptism is invalid, and contrary to the mind of Christ, and that, even when the rite is administered to adults it conveys no grace, sends his child to a day school during the week, where he is taught that by baptism an infant is "made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven". Primitive Methodists, Congregationalists, and other Nonconformists who baptise infants, regard the teaching of the Church of England on the efficacy of baptism, and on some other subjects with strong hostility; and yet their children receive religious instruction in Church of England day schools. This becomes the more remarkable, when we remember, that if a child attends school from the time he is seven to the time he is thirteen, a whole year of his school-time is spent in taking part in religious observances and receiving instruction in religion. It might have been assumed - we believe that it was assumed when the Act of 1870 was passed - that parents who object to the religious instruction given in schools to which they send their children would avail themselves of the conscience clause. But it is demonstrated, by the evidence which has reached us from all kinds of sources, that the clause is practically inoperative. About the reasons which make it inoperative there are differences of opinion, but we believe that the evidence sustains the following conclusions:
1. To large numbers of parents the existence of the right to withdraw their children from the religious instruction is unknown. The Act of 1870 requires that a copy of the regulations in the seventh section, popularly described as the conscience clause, "shall be conspicuously put up" in every public elementary school. But comparatively few parents have occasion to visit the schools; when they do visit them it is on business connected with their children, and they are very unlikely to read an extract from an Act of Parliament even if they happen to be near that part of the wall of the room where it is exhibited. The children, for the most part, are likely neither to read nor to understand it. Mr. Fitch informed us that parents who are indifferent to "specific religious instruction" accept it for their children "as a necessary condition of the school life". We believe that this is also true of large numbers of parents who have definite religious convictions, and whose religious convictions are out of harmony with the religious instruction which their children are receiving at school.
2. Some parents who know of the existence of the clause are unwilling to appeal to it, because they fear that children who are withdrawn from religious instruction will be regarded with some disfavour by the teachers and managers, and may have to endure petty annoyances as "black sheep" from their fellow-scholars. Parents may also fear that to isolate a child from any part of the school life may have an unhealthy influence on the child's character.
3. In the rural districts of England the social ascendancy of the clergy and of the adherents of the Church of England creates a serious apprehension on the part of Nonconformists that, if they withdraw their children from religious teaching given in a Church of England school, both they and their children are likely to suffer annoyance and loss.
4. Some parents feel that, since the clergyman and his friends contribute to the support of the school in which their children are educated, there would be something dishonourable in withdrawing their children from the religious instruction, for the sake of which the school is maintained. As one of our witnesses put it, the impression may be given to the parents that it is "a shabby thing to send their children to a day school, and not to the same Sunday school"; and it would seem still more "shabby" to withdraw the child from the religious instruction given in the day school itself. This kind of feeling was suggested in an answer given by Mr. Fitch when under examination. It had been put to him that, instead of the present conscience clause, which requires the parent to ask that his child should receive no religious instruction, another might be adopted under which "special religious instruction" should be given to those children only whose parents requested it. This is the practice of the Liverpool School Board. Mr. Fitch objected to the change. He did not see the hardship of requiring the parent to make the objection; "he is sufficiently protected by the existing law, " and he is availing himself to a great extent of the subscriptions and of the religious supervision, and of all the moral influences with which voluntary managers try to surround the schools. I think it is very reasonable that, unless he makes special objection, his child should share with others in instruction." We think that the knowledge that "he is availing himself to a great extent of the subscriptions" of the managers of a church school prevents many a Nonconformist
[page 386]
parent from availing himself of the right - which Mr. Fitch would not desire to take away - of withdrawing his children from religious instruction which he disapproves. It should be remembered, however, that under our present educational system large numbers of Nonconformist parents are compelled by law to send their children to schools supported in part by the subscriptions of members of the Church of England.
There was another serious grievance urged by Nonconformist witnesses. The Rev. J. Atkinson stated that, owing to our present organisation of education, there are large districts in the country in which young people who are members of Primitive Methodist churches cannot enter the teaching profession unless they separate them- selves from the Primitive Methodist Connexion, and become members of the Church of England. The Rev. Dr. Crosskey also complained that, in large districts of the country, the children of Nonconformists generally are excluded from the teaching profession unless they become members of the Church of England. In explanation of this statement the witness said,
In many agricultural districts, where the population is very sparse, there can be only one school. In others, where the population, though more numerous, is still inconsiderable, there ought to be only one school. Two schools, near to each other, with only 60 or 70 children in each, would be less efficient than one school with 120 or 130 children in it. As a matter of fact, in such districts there is, in a very large number of cases, no public elementary school except that which is connected with the Church of England. For example, in the diocese of Oxford, consisting of the three counties of Oxon, Berks, and Bucks, there were, in 1885, the following denominational public schools:
Church of England, National, Parochial, and Endowed Schools | 604 |
Roman Catholic | 12 |
Wesleyan | 13 |
Total | 629 |
But only 72 board and 34 British schools. But in the villages and smaller towns there are large numbers of Nonconformists. If they are to enter the teaching profession under present conditions they must become pupil-teachers. They cannot be sent away to a distance from home to be apprenticed in a board school; and their only way into the profession is through the church school in their neighbourhood. This school is expressly maintained for educating children in the principles of the English Church. The managers have a clear right to refuse to appoint a teacher, whether pupil-teacher, head-master, or assistant, who declines to promote the object for which the school exists. They, therefore, decline to appoint Dissenters as pupil-teachers, and, if a Dissenting young person wishes to enter the teaching profession in these districts, he is obliged, in the first instance, to conform.
The witness, having alleged a case in which a monitor, who did her work with considerable credit, was dismissed from a National School when the managers discovered that she was a Nonconformist, went on to say that the conscience clause "gives no relief in such districts (districts in which there are only church schools). It is professedly for the protection of scholars, not of teachers; and, from the nature of the case, it is impossible that any conscience clause should open a denominational school to teachers of another faith."
It was also urged by some Nonconformist witnesses that Nonconformist pupil-teachers who have been trained in board schools find it difficult to obtain entrance into a training college, as most of the training colleges are in connexion with the Church of England; but we have dealt with the whole question of training colleges in another chapter, and need not recur to it here.
As to the reality of the general, though not, perhaps, universal, exclusion of Nonconformists from appointments as pupil-teachers in Church of England schools there is no dispute. And, since it is also proved by our evidence that there are large districts of country in which schools connected with the Church of England are the only schools accessible to the population, it is apparent that, throughout these districts, the entrance into the teaching profession is practically closed against Nonconformists. The grievance, in our opinion, is a very serious one, and calls for a prompt and efficient remedy.
The complete remedy proposed by many Nonconformists for the two principal grievances with which we have dealt in this chapter - (1) the inefficiency of the conscience clause, as the result of which children are compelled by law to attend schools where they receive religious instruction which their parents disapprove; and
[page 387]
(2) the exclusion of young persons connected with the Nonconformist churches in large districts of England from entrance into the teaching profession - is that all public elementary schools receiving parliamentary grants should be placed under the direct control of the representatives of the ratepayers. This proposal in substance is supported in a large number of resolutions passed by Nonconformist Associations representing various Nonconformist denominations, and laid on our table by Dr. Crosskey. Memorials have also been sent to the Commission, some of which appear in our Appendix, in which the representatives of important Nonconformist communities express a strong desire for the general establishment of schools under the management of representatives of the ratepayers.
But in a Resolution adopted at a meeting of the General Committee of the Congregational Union of England and Wales, held on January 17th, 1888, there occurs the following passage, which suggests a more moderate and more practicable remedy: "The Committee renews its protest against the compulsory attendance of the children of Nonconformists at schools conducted in the interests of the Church of England or other denominations, and affirms the necessity of providing, in all parts of the kingdom, elementary schools under the control of the representatives of the public, and free from sectarian influence in regard to both management and teaching." (Appendix No. 26, pp. 15, 16.) In this Resolution it is not affirmed that all grants to denominational schools should be withdrawn, but that schools "under the control of the representatives of the public, and free from sectarian influence", shall be provided "in all parts of the kingdom".
This is substantially the recommendation adopted by the Wesleyan Methodist Conference in 1873. In December, 1872, a special committee appointed by the Conference to consider the education question met in London and passed the following Resolution: "That this Committee, while resolving to maintain in full vigour and efficiency our connexional day schools and training colleges, is of opinion that, due regard being had to existing interests, future legislation for primary education at the public cost should provide for such education only on the principle of unsectarian schools under the school board." The Committee recommended "the division of the whole country into school districts, and the formation of school boards in every district, and that in every school district one or two board schools, under undenominational management and Government inspection, should be so placed, as that as far as possible at least one such school should not be further distant than three miles from any family in the district." In the summer of 1873 the Conference resolved as follows: "The Conference adopts the Report of the Special Committee on Primary Education appointed by the last Conference. In adopting this Report the Conference expresses its regret that the essential recommendations of the Committee have not been adopted by the Government in their measure for the amendment of the Elementary Education Act of 1870, and records its deliberate conviction that, in justice to the interests of national education in the broadest sense, and to the different religious denominations of the country, school boards should be established everywhere, and an undenominational school placed within reasonable distance of every family."
This proposal seems to us reasonable and just. In districts where there can be only one efficient school, that school should be under public management, and ought not to be used as an agency for maintaining the religious faith of any particular denomination.
If this proposal were adopted, the present exclusion from the teaching profession of young persons living in country districts, and belonging to Nonconformist denominations, would cease.
But we do not propose that religious instruction should be excluded from board schools, and as in districts where there is only a board school, the religious instruction may be unacceptable to many of the parents, a conscience clause will still be necessary. It will also be necessary in other districts where there are schools of several kinds; for the religious teaching given in all of them may, to some parents, be unsatisfactory, and therefore we think it necessary that the conscience clause should be made more effective.
We therefore recommend -
That a plain printed statement, in a form to be drawn up by the Department, should be placed in the hands of the parent of every child attending any public elementary school in which any part of the school time is appropriated to religious observances and instruction, informing him that, if he wishes it, the child can be
[page 388]
withdrawn from these observances and this instruction, and that the withdrawal will subject the child to no disadvantage.
That in schools where there is a class-room and more than one teacher, the time-table shall provide, during the hour appropriated to religious observances and instruction, for the secular instruction of children withdrawn from them.
That in schools where there is no class-room or only one teacher, children withdrawn from the religious observances and instruction shall not be required to attend till the time for secular instruction begins, and shall be dismissed when it is over.
That no child shall be charged a higher fee because it does not attend the Sunday school connected with the day school; or because it does not receive the religious instruction given in the day school.
NOTE TO CHAPTER ON GRIEVANCES OF NONCONFORMISTS
While we accept the statements contained in this chapter as an accurate expression of a grievance keenly felt by many Nonconformists, and assent to the recommendation for increasing the efficiency of the conscience clause, we desire to record our opinion that the smallness of the number of persons who have availed themselves of it, is due partly to the fairness with which the religious instruction has been conducted by the great majority of the teachers, and that many of the parents care comparatively little about the precise religious shade of the teaching, so long as they can obtain a good practical education for their children.
We are further of opinion that no conscience clause, however stringent, and however largely used, would meet the case of those whose grievances are stated in this chapter, and that nothing short of popular representative management will secure that the teaching shall be thoroughly satisfactory to the community for whom any school should be maintained.
THOMAS EDMUND HELLER.
E. LYULPH STANLEY.
CHAPTER 19
ON VARIOUS SYSTEMS OF EDUCATION ON THE CONTINENT, IN SOME OF OUR COLONIES, AND IN THE UNITED STATES
We have received answers to a schedule of questions from a large number of Foreign countries, and from many of our Colonies, and from some of the states of the United States.
An examination of the returns from the European countries shows that education is compulsory in nearly all.
It is not compulsory in Holland and in Belgium; and in Italy it is said to be compulsory only between the ages of 6 and 9.
In other countries, education, as a rule, is compulsory up to the age of 14; though, in Bavaria and in France, compulsion ceases at 13, and in Hungary at 12.
The usual age at which compulsion begins is 6. In Prussia it may begin at 5. In Sweden, Neuchâtel, Vaud, and Wurtemberg, it begins at 7, and in Norway at 8.
In reference to the question of fees, education is generally free. Thus, in France, Norway, Sweden, Geneva, Neuchâtel, Ticino, Vaud, Zurich, education is free.
In Austria it is free, except in Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia; in Italy it is free, but in some communes an entrance fee is charged of from 2s 8d to 8s 4d. In Bavaria, education is generally free, some communes charge 2s 6d a head a year. In Belgium, 499,699 scholars are free, 89,105 pay fees. In Hungary, parents pay 3s 8d a year. In Prussia, by the constitution, the schools should be free, but the practice varies. Where fees are charged, they cover 12 per cent of the cost.
In Berne the schools are generally free, but 1s 8d a year may be charged. In Holland, there is a mixed system; some schools are free, in some fees are charged.
[page 389]
In Wurtemberg the schools are rarely free. In the country the fees are 2s a year; in the larger towns they go up to 3s 6d a year. In Saxony there are fees, ranging in the country districts from ¾d to 1¾d a week, in towns from 12s to 25s or 36s a year, according to place and grade of school. In Dresden the elementary school fees are 2½d to 3¾d a week.
As to schools being under public management or not, in Austria all the schools receiving public support are under public management.
In Bavaria, the system is a state system, and the schools are maintained from public funds.
In Belgium, 429,724 children were in the communal schools, and 170,725 pupils in the schools under voluntary management accepted by the communes.
In France there were 3,453,071 children in 1886, in public schools, and 1,067,857 in schools under private or voluntary management.
In Holland there are returned 373,265 children in public schools, and 134,172 children in private or voluntary schools.
In Hungary, figures are only given for the public schools.
In Italy there are returned 1,914,400 children in public, and 172,304 children in private schools.
In Norway nearly all the children are in public schools.
In Prussia, out of 4,725,210 children, 4,339,729 are returned in public schools.
In Saxony nearly all the children are in public schools.
In Sweden the same is the case.
In the Swiss Cantons and in Wurtemberg, the mass of the children are in public schools.
France, Holland, and Belgium are the three countries in which a large number of children are in schools not under public management. In France and in Holland the voluntary schools are not only voluntary in their management, but also in their resources. In Belgium the schools nominally voluntary may, under recent legislation, be subsidized by the commune.
As to religious instruction in the public schools, it is not given in France, in Holland, and in Italy (but in Italy religious instruction may be given, if asked for, outside of school hours). In Geneva and Neuchâtel the instruction is secular. In Berne and Zurich religious instruction is given. In Vaud religious teaching is said to be given from a historical point of view. In Ticino, religious instruction is not compulsory, but in all the schools of the canton the priest of the parish teaches the catechism of the Roman Catholic church in the ordinary school hours.
In Belgium the communes may give religious teaching at the commencement or at the end of the school hours, but children are exempted at the request of their parents from attending such instruction.
In Austria the religious teaching is under the supervision of the church authorities.
In Bavaria religious instruction is part of the curriculum, and is given by the parish priest.
In Holland the school premises may be used, out of school hours, for religious instruction, and in 1885, 620 school premises were used for that purpose.
In Hungary religious instruction is given according to the denomination, the members of the denomination providing it.
In Norway the evangelic Lutheran religion is taught.
In Prussia religious instruction is compulsory.
In Saxony religion is taught to Protestants by the master, in Catholic schools by the priest.
In Sweden religion is taught, but children of parents who profess a foreign faith may be exempted.
In Wurtemberg, we are told that a third of the whole school time is devoted to religious instruction.
The hours of work vary frequently with the ages of the children, and, in some countries, there is a difference between summer and winter; as a whole, the hours are probably not longer than ours, but they are distributed differently, and appear by these reports to be often much shorter for the young, and longer for the highest classes; the number of days in the year during which the school is open, does not seem to differ much from our practice.
There is a practice in some foreign countries, in the interest of economy, to make many village schools half-time schools, so that the single master may teach in relays as many as 100 scholars.
[page 390]
Classes are large in many of the countries that have made returns. Thus, in Austria, the law assigns 80 scholars on the roll to one teacher. In Belgium the aim is to have a teacher to 50 or 60 scholars, but there are still cases where he has a class of 70, 80, or even more children.
In France the maximum is 50.
In Holland the law fixes the class of a teacher at 40.
In Hungary the law says not more than 80; practice gives 64 or 65 pupils to a teacher.
In Italy by law the classes are of 60, or even 70 scholars; in practice the superior classes are of 25, the lower classes 50 or 60.
In Norway the classes in towns may not exceed 60; there is no law for the rural districts.
In Prussia the classes are generally of 80 scholars. The law of 1883 has assigned, in towns, 54 scholars to one teacher, 73 to a teacher where there are two teachers, 64 to a teacher where there are several classes; in the country, 73, 78, and 85, according as there are one, two, or several teachers.
In Saxony there may not be more than 60, 40, or 30 scholars in one class in the three ranks of schools respectively. One teacher may not have more than two classes.
In Sweden there is no law as to the size of a class; the number generally taught simultaneously is 30 in a primary school and 40 in an elementary school.
In Berne the legal maximum is 80; in practice the number varies from 30 to 70.
In Geneva the legal maximum is 50; in practice there are never fewer than 40.
In Ticino the law lays down 60; in practice the classes run from 20 to 55.
In Vaud the maximum is 60; in practice the classes range from 45 to 50.
In Zurich the law permits 100 to a teacher; 80 is rarely exceeded in actual practice.
In Wurtemberg, where there are more than 90 scholars, there must be two teachers.
As to juvenile labour, no child in Germany may be employed under 12 in manufactories or other paid labour; from 12 to 14 children may work six hours a day, but must be instructed in school three hours a day.
There is said to be no half time in Belgium.
In France no child under 15 may be admitted to work in a factory or workshop more than six hours a day, unless he has a certificate that he has acquired sufficient primary instruction.
In Holland there is said to be no half-time law.
In Hungary no child under 12 can be employed in any handicraft or factory.
In Italy no child may work till nine years old, nor underground till 10 years old. After these ages a medical certificate of physical fitness is required. Children from 9 to 12 may not be made to work more than eight hours a day.
In Norway there is no half time.
In Switzerland children under 14 may not work in factories.
We may generally say that the curriculum in most European countries is fuller than the present legal requirements in England, but not fuller than that which we have recommended. Of course the value of a curriculum depends largely on the care and thoroughness with which it is taught. Drawing is very commonly compulsory for both sexes, and the curriculum of a school of several classes is generally fuller than that of the small one class school of rural districts. The scholars seem generally to be promoted by classes once a year.
The teachers are always adults. In Holland, where there seems to be an exception, the pupil-teachers are not reckoned on the staff, but used as apprentices to be taught.
The practice as to mixed schools varies. In France, as far as possible, the sexes are separate; in Italy they must be separate; in Holland, Prussia, Austria, many schools are mixed; in Hungary they are separate; generally the larger schools in the towns on the Continent are separate.
As a rule, the teachers are trained. The training colleges are places of special professional education, and most of the students have previously been educated in secondary schools. In France the students are boarded in the training colleges. In Germany, both systems of day students and of boarders exist; generally, neither system has the preponderance. In Germany the great mass of the teachers, even for girls and for mixed schools in the country, are men.
There is everywhere a public system of secondary education, rarely gratuitous, but always very cheap.
In summing up the impression made by the Continental returns, we may say that abroad, as a rule, the State interferes more directly, and is more responsible for
[page 391]
the curriculum, the organization, and the inspection of the schools than in England. It trains the teachers, who are civil servants, and it bears the bulk of the cost; though, in saying the State, we must be understood as including in the term the locality. France is the country in which the central authority interferes most directly and pays most liberally; elsewhere, nearly all the cost falls on the commune and on the province or district.
In many of the countries of the Continent, education has long been recognised as a matter of national concern and of public enforcement, and, therefore, the obligation of educating their children has been more deeply impressed on parents. The range of education too, has been wider, and the training of teachers has been more thorough and scientific than in this country. Foreign countries, moreover, have relied on adult and on trained teachers for the work of teaching; whereas, in England, the great expansion of education in the last 18 years has led our authorities to be rather indulgent in dispensing with full qualifications in those whom they have recognised as teachers.
But we may fairly hope and require that, now that we have got beyond the stage of rapid expansion, and have more settled conditions of educational work, we may set a higher standard of performance before us. It is not fair to test by its results a system under which the first generation of children educated under the Act of 1870 is only now entering upon active life. Till lately, the board schools and the newly-opened voluntary schools have been filled with children who had not previously been under any systematic school discipline, though they may from time to time have drifted from school to school. With a more liberal curriculum and an improved staff of teachers - the latter, perhaps, the most urgent need of our present education - we may look to 10 years hence to show that, though late in the race, we may overtake and go beyond those whose longer established and more fully organised system we have examined.
If we turn from the Continent to the English speaking communities, whether in our colonies or in the United States, though we find generally a very keen desire to promote popular education, and large sums of public money expended for that purpose, yet the methods and organisation of public education differ materially from those prevailing in the continental countries, of whose educational systems we have made the above short summary.
As to compulsion, education is said to be compulsory in British Columbia from 7 to 12; in Ontario from 7 to 13; in Prince Edward Island from 8 to 13; in South Australia from 7 to 13; and in Tasmania from 7 to 13, It is compulsory for the districts that choose to adopt compulsion in New Zealand and in Nova Scotia; in the former from 7 to 13, in the latter from 7 to 12. In Manitoba it is said to be universally compulsory, but it has never been necessary to enforce the law. In Quebec, Queensland, and the Cape of Good Hope, school attendance is not compulsory. It may be noticed that where attendance is compulsory, a very short attendance satisfies the law. In the United States we are told that school attendance is not compulsory, in Alabama. Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Dakota, Iowa, and Missouri; it is compulsory in California, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington Territory, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. In these States, from 12 weeks to 4 months attendance seems to satisfy the law, and no doubt compulsion is not a very serious thing in many parts of these States.
In reference to the payment of fees, the rule is for schools to be free; this is the case in all the States of the United States making returns. In our own colonies, schools are free in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Manitoba. In Quebec a school fee is levied on all children of school age, whether they go to school or not, so that this is rather a poll tax proportioned to the number of children of school age, than a school fee. At the Cape of Good Hope, and in South Australia and Tasmania there are school fees. In Tasmania the fees are heavy, amounting to 9d a week for a single child.
Practically throughout the colonies the school system is a public one, and voluntary schools under private management are not aided, except to some slight extent at the Cape of Good Hope. In some of the colonies a small proportion of scholars attending voluntary schools is returned. The highest is in Tasmania, where there are nearly 16,000 children in the State schools, and nearly 5,500 children in voluntary schools. In the United States the system throughout is a public system of schools, locally managed by elected bodies.
[page 392]
As to religious instruction, the system in the United States is in most cases returned as one of secular schools. In some cases the penalties for breaking the law are severe. Thus in Illinois any appropriation or grant of any school fund in aid of any church or sectarian purpose is prohibited under penalty of double the amount, and imprisonment for not less than one month or more than 12 months.
In Montana all sectarian publications are prohibited, and if any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, the school forfeits its right to any portion of the county school money. It may be noted that though the teaching in Dakota is said to be secular, the Bible may be read for ten minutes without comment.
In the district of Columbia, short devotional exercises of a non-sectarian character are used for opening the schools, though the schools give none but secular instruction. In Maine the schools give general religious but not sectarian teaching. In Michigan, it is stated that public schools do give religious instruction, but the answers to the other questions seem to show that "not" has been omitted by a clerical error, and that the schools of Michigan only give secular instruction. In New Hampshire, teachers are required to give religious teaching in their schools, but it must be non-sectarian. In New Jersey the Lord's prayer is recited, and a portion of scripture is read without comment. In Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Vermont, the schools are secular, but the Bible is read without comment, and the Lord's prayer is commonly used. In Virginia the State does not require religious teaching, but teachers usually give moral and religious but not sectarian instruction.
In our colonies the schools are as a rule described as secular, but in British Columbia though no religious instruction is given, the Lord's Prayer may be used in opening and closing school, upon the permission of the board of trustees. In New Brunswick the trustees may use the school house after school hours for religious instruction, and advantage is in some instances taken of this option; the teachers are required to instruct the children in the principles of christian morality.
In New Zealand, where the school teaching is secular, the building may be used out of school hours for religious instruction, by permission of the school committee.
In Ontario there is permissive religious teaching; and the instructions of the Education Department prescribe that the religious exercises should be conducted without haste, and with the utmost reverence and decorum.
In Quebec and in Manitoba the schools are divided into Catholic and Protestant. In Quebec, in Catholic schools, the Catholic catechism is taught. In Protestant schools, scripture history, and the gospels are taught, and the schools are opened with Bible reading and prayer. In Manitoba a somewhat similar plan exists. There the board of education is divided into a Protestant and Catholic section. In Tasmania, ministers of religion are allowed to instruct during a stated period of half-an-hour morning and afternoon.
In the United States, and in our colonies the sexes are very generally mixed in the schools, and as a rule, the children are taught by adults.
The sparseness of the population, and the newness of most of these countries, with the rapidity of their development and the popular nature of their institutions, make the organisation of their school system less methodical and less exact than on the Continent. The art of teaching and the systematic training of teachers, have been more studied and more exactly enforced on the Continent with its highly organised bureaucratic system than in the English speaking communities which we have reviewed. But the tendency to free schools limited to secular teaching under popular local control, is very marked in the states and provinces where the English race is expanding, and is free from the institutions inherited from the past which exist in the mother country.
All these conclusions we humbly submit to Your Majesty in the hope that they may tend to the further improvement of National Education, the development and extension of which by State aid and under public direction have been almost entirely included within the limits of Your Majesty's long and happy reign.
(Signed)
E. LYULPH STANLEY.
R. W. DALE.
THOMAS EDMUND HELLER.*
HENRY RICHARD.
GEORGE SHIPTON.
*Subject to the reservation bearing his signature.
[page 393]
RESERVATION
While signing this report, I desire to record my strong conviction that it would not be desirable to interfere with the right of the teacher to give religious and moral instruction, but that he should be at liberty at all times to support moral lessons by references to religious sanctions. The experience of the past shows that, as a rule, teachers are persons to whom this liberty may be safely granted, and that they make the religious teaching of children a basis for moral training, rather than a means of dogmatic or sectarian teaching. I also think that if the teacher ceased to be regarded as a centre of religious and moral influence, his power of governing his school would be weakened, and his professional status would be degraded.
I agree with the majority of the Commission in thinking it desirable, in the interests of education, that some scheme of retiring pensions should be devised for teachers in elementary schools. I think, however, that the maximum amount of the supplementary pension which they recommend (£15) is too low, and should be substantially increased. I further think that the conditions laid down in Art. 134 of the Code should be so modified as to include in their operation all who were pupil teachers before August 1862, and completely to fulfil the promises contained in the Minutes of Council dated December 21st, 1846, and August 6th, 1851.
I desire to recommend that the practice of making annual endorsements on the parchment certificates of teachers should at once be abolished, and I am of opinion that the irregularities and evils connected with the practice which were disclosed by the evidence fully justify such a recommendation.
I am further of opinion that greater security should be given to the teacher in respect of his "tenure of office". I think that no certificated teacher who properly performs his duty, and is of good moral character, should be liable to dismissal at the instance of an individual manager, or because he declines to undertake duties not connected with the school. As the Education Department practically approves the appointment of teachers, it might be advisable to give the Department some veto in cases of tyrannical, capricious, or improper dismissal, if it be appealed to by the teacher aggrieved.
THOMAS EDMUND HELLER.
[pages 395-488]
[These pages, which contain a Summary of the Statistical Report and a List of the Recorded Divisions of the Commission, are not included here. Readers who wish to see them will find the full report on the Internet Archive website.]
[page 489]
APPENDIX
I
INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED TO HER MAJESTY'S INSPECTORS UNDER THE CODE OF 1882
(VICE-PRESIDENT THE RIGHT HON. A. G. MUNDELLA)
(1) EXAMINATION AND INSPECTION OF SCHOOLS GENERALLY
Circular No. 212.
Education Department, Whitehall,
9th August 1882.
SIR,
The changes which have recently been introduced into the Code, and the proposed re-organisation of the work of inspection, entail a review of the instructions given in some previous circulars for the guidance of Inspectors in their inspection and examination of schools.
2. Before entering into details of principles and methods of examination, my Lords would especially call your attention to the general principle, that all hurry or undue haste on the day of examination is incompatible with the proper discharge of your main duty - that of ascertaining, verifying, and reporting the facts on which the parliamentary grant is administered. Their Lordships gladly acknowledge the great courtesy, patience, and industry with which the Inspectors have, as a body, discharged the difficult duty of collecting the numerous particulars required for an accurate judgment of each scholar's work in detail, and of the school as a whole. But instances have occurred in which managers have complained of unpunctuality, haste, and impatience, and of a want of due consideration in the treatment of teachers and scholars. It may be fairly inferred that such complaints would not arise if sufficient time were given to each inspection. An early attendance at the school is absolutely indispensable, not only on account of the greater length of time available for work, but in the interests of the children, who are far more capable of sustained exertion in the early part of the day. A hurried inspection probably necessitates some evils, which are much to be deprecated - the attempt to do two things at once, e.g., to give out dictation or sums while hearing the reading of another class; keeping classes unemployed instead of dismissing them to play; retaining children in school in the dinner hour and thereby not allowing sufficient time for the meal; prolonging the examination to a late hour in the afternoon; and embarrassing young scholars by want of clearness in dictation or in asking questions.
3. It is not necessary in this circular to enter into minute details as to the rules to be observed in examining schools. It may be expected that practical uniformity will be obtained by the arrangements recently made for conference and agreement on the part of the senior Inspectors, whose duty it will be to see that the rules approved by the Department are uniformly observed by the district Inspectors in their respective divisions. My Lords do not propose to interfere with the methods by which each Inspector may prefer to arrive at results, but will expect that the standard obtained by the mutual agreement of the senior Inspectors and approved by their Lordships shall be faithfully observed in each district. For this purpose occasional conferences will be held in each division with a view to compare sums set and passages dictated in each standard, questions asked in class or specific subjects, and the methods and results of inspection generally. Uniformity of standard will also be further secured by the proposed special training of all Inspectors who may hereafter be appointed.
4. Appeals from the reports and recommendations of Inspectors have not been frequent in the past and will probably be even less frequent in future, when a uniform standard of examination is applied throughout the districts. But if any complaint of real or apparent hardship should be laid before the Department, the case will be referred by their Lordships to the senior Inspector of the division for personal inquiry and report, wherever the facts alleged seem to justify such a reference.
5. Under Article 106 of the Code the entire grant to an infant school or class will be computed on the average attendance, and not as heretofore, in part, on the number of children present on the day of inspection and on the number of passes obtained in the standard examination. The children, apparently above six, should, however, be individually examined, and a sufficient number of the others to satisfy you that the elements of reading, writing, and arithmetic are properly taught. The Code assumes that, besides suitable instruction in these elements, and in needlework and singing, a good infant school should provide a regular course of simple conversational lessons on objects and on the facts of natural history, and a proper variety of physical exercises and interesting employments. In the best schools the list of collective lessons is prepared by the head teacher three months in advance, and is entered in the log-book. The managers of a school in two or three departments are at liberty to place the scholars of the First Standard - usually between seven and eight years of age - either in the infant department or with the older children; but when the former plan is preferred, the course of lessons should include simple recitation and lessons in geography or elementary science to correspond to the class-subjects intended to be taken up in the boys' or girls' school. It should be borne in mind that it is of little service to adopt the "gifts" and mechanical occupations of the Kindergarten unless they are so used as to furnish real training in accuracy of hand and eye, in intelligence, and in obedience.
6. An infant school or class may be deemed "Fair" when more than half of the scholars examined proved to have been satisfactorily taught in reading, writing, and arithmetic; when discipline and singing are fairly good; and when one of the requirements specified under (2) and (3) in Article 106b*, is fairly fulfilled. When both of these requirements are fairly fulfilled; when not less than three-fourths pass the individual examination well; and when discipline and singing are satisfactory, the mark "Good" should be awarded. A school or department should not be called "Excellent" unless all three requirements of the Article are thoroughly well satisfied. No merit grant should be given in any case in which the infant class is left in the sole charge of a monitor. The time-table should show what portion of the daily instruction is given by the head or some other adult teacher.
7. The Code requires that in all standards higher than the second, three reading books shall be provided. More than three sets of books are not necessary in any standard; an ordinary reading book will provide a sufficient amount of good literature for exercises in the art of reading and for all the purposes of teaching "English" if taken as a class subject; in the third and higher standards the second reading book will be a historical reader; the third book will be a geographical or scientific reader to correspond to the second class subject. In schools in which no second class subject is taken, the third book may be like the first, an ordinary reader. In Standards I and II two ordinary reading books may be used, unless the managers prefer that the second book should be a geographical or scientific reader, to suit the second class subject. In Standards V, VI, and VII books of extracts from standard authors may be taken, though such works as Robinson Crusoe, voyages and travels, or biographies of eminent men (if of suitable length) are to be preferred. In Standards VI and VII a single play of Shakespeare, or a single book of one of Milton's longer poems, or a selection of extracts from either poet equal in length to the foregoing, may be accepted. As a rule, ordinary text-books or manuals should not be accepted as readers.
8. In Standards I and II intelligent reading will probably suffice to justify a pass without much examination into the matter of the book; but it should be considered a grave fault if children have been allowed to read the same lesson so often as to learn it by heart, and to repeat it without any but occasional glimpses at the book. The mechanical difficulties of reading, which are to be found in the shorter words of irregular notation, should be mastered before the Third Standard is reached. As a general rule, but especially in the lower standards, the examiner should be careful rather to ask
*Art. 106(b) "A merit grant of 2s, 4s, or 6s, if the Inspector reports the school or class to be fair, good, or excellent, allowing for the special circumstances of the case and having regard to the provision made for (1) suitable instruction in the elementary subjects, (2) simple lessons on objects and on the phenomena of nature and of common life, and (3) appropriate and varied occupations."
[page 490]
for the meaning of short sentences and phrases than to require explanations of single words by definitions or synonyms.
9. In Standard I the writing exercises should, as a rule, be done on slates, and should be regarded chiefly as a test of handwriting, i.e., of the child's power of making and combining script letters (small and capital), and accurately transcribing print. My Lords do not pledge themselves to any particular style of writing or method of teaching it, but it should at least be bold and legible, and the text adopted should be sufficiently large to show that the child is acquainted with the proper forms and proportions of letters. In dictation none but the easiest and most familiar words, and those chiefly monosyllables, should be given out, and a pass should not be withheld if six out of the prescribed ten are correctly spelt and written. In Standard II the exercises should be on slates, security for writing on paper being provided by the exhibition of copybooks. The same qualities of writing should be required as in Standard I, but greater importance should be attached to evenness and uniformity, and to proper spaces between the words. Capitals should be required to be put without direction after full stops and at the beginning of proper names. The passage for dictation should be carefully selected as being of average difficulty, and free from puzzling words. As children may generally be expected to pass easily in the mechanical art of writing in this stage, five mistakes in spelling ought, as a rule - if the passage selected be sufficiently easy - to involve a failure. In Standard III, and those above it, the examination should always be on paper. Greater readiness should be expected in writing, but two or three words only should be dictated at once. As a rule more than four errors in spelling should involve failure, but if the handwriting be very fair, and not more than four errors in spelling occur in the six lines, the child should pass. Correct spelling should not in any case obtain a pass if the writing is below fair. In Standard IV, and those above it, writing should be running, free, and symmetrical, as well as legible and clear. If poetry is selected for dictation, the scholars should be made clearly to understand before beginning to write where each line commences and ends. A pass should not be withheld if the writing is fair, and the errors in spelling do not exceed three.
10. In Standard V the passage selected for writing from memory should be an anecdote occupying from 10 to 15 lines of ordinary length, and containing some sufficiently obvious point, or simple moral. The passage may, if the teacher desires, be read aloud by him. Neither accuracy in spelling nor excellence in writing should secure a pass, unless the exercise is an intelligent reproduction of the story. The writing exercise prescribed for Standard V may be altogether, and must be to a certain extent, an effort of memory: that for Standard VI is the earliest exercise in composition required in the Code as part of the writing exercise; and no child ought to pass who does not show the power to put together in grammatical language, correctly expressed, and, if required, in the form of a letter, a few simple observations on some easy subject of common and familiar experience. In Standard VII in order to warrant a pass the theme should exhibit something more of structural character and arrangement, the sense should be clear, the expressions fairly well chosen, and the writing, spelling, and grammar free from ordinary faults.
11. In all cases, where a dictation exercise is given, the teacher may be permitted, if he desires, to read the passage over to the children before it is dictated by the inspector. In Welsh speaking districts the teacher may be allowed to give out the whole of the dictation.
12. Little change has been made in Schedule I in regard to the requirements under the head of Arithmetic. You will probably continue the usual practice of setting, in all standards above the first, four sums, of which not more than one should be a problem, and of permitting a scholar to pass who has two correct answers. Right method and arrangement, and good figures may excuse slight error in one of the answers. In Standard V the "rule of three by the method of unity" has been prescribed in order to avoid at that stage the difficulties of the theory of proportion, and to suggest a simpler method of solving ordinary problems by a combination of the four simple and compound rules. But if the answers are correct, and have been intelligently worked by either method, you will of course accept them.
13. Mental arithmetic is a new requirement, but is not intended to form an addition to the individual examination for the purpose of recording the "passes" in the Schedule. It is a class exercise, and may often be satisfactorily tested by requiring the teacher of the class to give a few questions in your presence, and by adding at discretion some questions of your own. The object of this exercise is to encourage dexterity, quickness, and accuracy in dealing with figures, and to anticipate, by means of rapid and varied oral practice with small numbers, the longer problems which have afterwards to be worked out in writing. It is obvious that this general object cannot be attained if the exercises are confined to a few rules for computing "dozens" and "scores", such as are often supposed to be specially suited for mental calculation. Practice should be given in all the ordinary processes of arithmetic, e.g., in Standard I addition, subtraction, and multiplication, with numbers up to 50 and money up to 2s: in Standard II all the four rules, with numbers up to 144, and with money to 10s: in Standard III easy reductions: and in Standard IV simple exercises in fractions founded on the multiplication table, and on the aliquot parts of £1, of a yard, and of a pound avoirdupois. It is often found a help in calculation if the dimensions of the schoolroom, the playground, and the desks, and the weight of a few familiar objects are accurately known and recorded, and occasionally referred to as standards of measurement.
14. In reporting on the subjects of grammar, geography, and history, you have been required hitherto simply to state whether the whole grant ought to be awarded or disallowed. You will, in future, report whether a grant should be made, and if so, whether the results of the instruction are "fair" or "good". The mode of examining is left to your discretion, and may be usefully varied from year to year. It is often advisable to invite the teacher of the class to put a few questions in order that you may know what plan he has adopted before proceeding to propose questions of your own. In standards above the third the knowledge of the scholars may sometimes be tested by written answers which you will carry home and examine; but you will generally be able to satisfy yourself by means of oral questions addressed separately to a sufficient number of the scholars whether the class has been properly taught. The quality of the answers, as well as the number, will have to be considered, and the knowledge of the subject should be fairly distributed throughout the various standards. But, subject to these considerations, it is a safe general rule that the result maybe marked "good" when three-fourths of those examined are found to have been well taught, and "fair" when one-half of them prove to have been so taught. If this latter condition be not fulfilled, no grant should be recommended under Article 109f.
15. Both in class and in specific subjects the Code permits a certain liberty of choice to managers, and it is no part of your duty to restrict this liberty. But if your advice is asked, it will be well in giving it to have regard to the special qualifications of the teacher, and to the opportunities and means at hand for scientific or other instruction. Other conditions being equal, any teacher will be likely to teach best the particular subject of which he knows most, and in which he takes the strongest interest.
16. When the numbers in the upper division of the school, as defined in Article 109f. iii, do not exceed 30 at the beginning of the school year, the children of that division may be treated as one class for instruction in class subjects. When the numbers exceed 30, the upper division should be divided into two groups at least. The grouping of standards is intended to work as follows: Supposing the 4th and 5th Standards to form one group, and the 6th and 7th another, the former group will be required to take the work of the 4th and 5th Standards in alternate years, the latter, that of the 6th and 7th Standards in alternate years. If the four standards - IV-VII - are placed in one group, they will take the subjects of each standard in turn.
17. The examination in this subject is not, as you will observe, limited to technical grammar, although parsing and analysis still form an important part of the requirements. The general object of lessons in English should be to enlarge the learner's vocabulary, and to make him familiar with the meaning, the structure, the grammatical and logical relations, and the right use of words. Elementary exercises of this kind have an important practical bearing on everything else which a child learns. The recitation of a few verses of poetry
[page 491]
has been prescribed in every standard, and it will be the duty of the teacher to submit to you for approval on the day of inspection a list of the pieces chosen for the ensuing year. It is not necessary that the required number of lines should be taken from one poem; they may be made up from two or more, provided that each extract learned by heart has a completeness and value of its own, and is understood in relation of the story or description of which it forms a part. The extracts should be simple enough to be pleasing and intelligible to children, yet in Standard III and upwards sufficiently advanced to furnish material for thought and explanation, to improve the taste, and to add to the scholar's store of words. In testing the memory lesson, it may suffice to call on a few of the children - not less than one-fourth in each class - to recite each a few lines in succession, and occasionally it may be useful to require the verses to be written down from recollection.
18. From the first, the teaching of English should be supplemented by simple exercises in composition: e.g., when a word is defined, the scholar should be called on to use it in a sentence of his own; when a grammatical principle is explained, he should be asked to frame a sentence, showing how it is to be applied: and examples of the way in which adjectives are formed from nouns, or nouns from verbs, by the addition of syllables, should be supplied or selected by the scholars themselves. Mere instruction in the terminology of grammar, unless followed up by practical exercises in the use of language, yields very unsatisfactory results.
19. The Code recognises as the means of instruction in geography and elementary science, reading books, oral lessons, and visible illustrations. But it does not prescribe the exact proportions in which these means should be employed for each standard, and for each subject. Those proportions should be determined partly by the special plans and aptitude of the teacher, and partly by other considerations. In Standards I and II it will not be necessary for you to insist on the use of a reading book, if provision is made for meeting the requirements of the Code by a systematic course of collective lessons, of which the heads are duly entered in the log-book. The best reading books for higher standards are those which are descriptive and explanatory, are well written, and suitably illustrated, and contain a sufficient amount and variety of interesting matter. When these conditions are fulfilled, and the reading lessons are so supplemented by good oral teaching, as to enable the scholars to pass the prescribed examination well, the requirements of the Code will be satisfied, even though the course of lessons in the reading book does not correspond, in all respects, to the year's work of a particular standard.
20. In teaching geography, good maps, both of the county and of the parish, or immediate neighbourhood in which the school is situated, should be affixed to the walls, and the exact distances of a few near and familiar places should be known. It is useful to mark on the floor of the schoolroom the meridian line, in order that the points of the compass should be known in relation to the school itself, as well as on a map.
21. The full grant for singing is not now to be claimed unless the scholars are so taught as to be able to "sing by note". You will be furnished in subsequent instructions with some simple testing exercises, by which to determine whether this condition has been properly fulfilled. The regulations under which a grant has hitherto been given for singing will still apply in cases in which the children have been taught by ear only. A list of six or eight pieces should be presented, from which you will select one or more, in order to judge whether the children have been "satisfactorily taught" or not.
22. It will be seen that considerable reductions have been made in the amount of work required in needlework, and that the obligatory parts of Schedule III now contain no more work than can be fairly mastered by any girls' school in which four hours weekly have been devoted to this subject. If any school fails to earn the grant, it will probably be found that such failure is due to bad teaching in the lower standards, or that the subject has not been taught (as all the other subjects are taught, and as needlework should be taught) to classes as well as to individuals.
23. No just progress can be made in the general teaching of needlework in a school without effective simultaneous teaching throughout the classes, and it will be the duty of the Inspector specially to inquire into the needlework of infants, and of the lowest standards in other schools.
24. Where any uniform failure in the teaching of these classes occurs, you will report, even when a grant is not claimed for needlework, that the subject is not properly taught; and it may be well to point out to the managers that a few specimens of garments from the best children do not compensate for imperfect teaching in the lower classes.
25. You will in all cases, as heretofore, examine the articles which the children have made during the year; and will satisfy yourself of the genuineness of the specimens by requiring some of the scholars to perform a simple exercise on the day of examination, whether a grant is claimed for needlework under Art. 109c or not. In order to ascertain that the teaching has been in accordance with the schedule, it will be needful to require a sufficient number of the scholars in two or more standards to work specimens of sewing or knitting in your presence. Detailed rules for the conduct of this part of the examination will be found in Appendix I. When needlework is selected as a class subject, you will not recommend the higher grant of 2s unless the results of the teaching are clearly "good". The lower grant of 1s may be obtained by the same degree of proficiency as will be required for the grant of 1s under Art. 109c.
26. You will observe that specific subjects cannot be taken up before a scholar has passed the 4th Standard; and that English, geography, including physical geography, history, and elementary science are recognised as class subjects. If these subjects are simply and thoroughly taught, the scholars will form those habits of exact observation, reasoning and statement, which are needed for the intelligent conduct of life. In ordinary circumstances the scheme of elementary education as now laid down by the Code may be considered complete without the addition of specific subjects. It is not desirable, as a general rule, that specific subjects should be attempted where the staff of the school is small, or the scholars in Standards V-VII do not form a class large enough to justify the withdrawal of the principal teacher from the teaching of the rest of the school: in this latter case they would derive more benefit by being grouped with the 4th Standard for class subjects. The pecuniary loss entailed by the exclusion of a few boys from the study of specific subjects will be abundantly compensated by the greater success in other subjects, and especially by the higher merit grant reserved for more thorough teaching generally.
27. In large schools, however, and those which are in favourable circumstances, the scholars of Standard V and upwards may be encouraged to attempt one or more specific subjects, which the managers may deem most appropriate to the industrial and other needs of the district. It is not the intention of my Lords to encourage a pretentious or unreal pursuit of higher studies, or to encroach in any way on the province of secondary education. The course suited to an elementary school is practically determined by the age limit of 14 years; and may properly include whatever subjects can be effectively taught within that limit. It may be hoped that, year by year, a larger proportion of the children will remain in the elementary schools until the age of 14; and a scholar who has attended regularly and possesses fair ability may reasonably be expected to acquire in that time not only a good knowledge of reading, writing, and arithmetic, of English, and of geography, but also enough of the rudiments of two higher subjects to furnish a stable foundation for further improvement either by his own exertion, or in a secondary school.
28. In cases in which it is proposed to teach specific subjects, it will be desirable for you to ascertain that the teacher has given proof of his fitness to teach them by having acquitted himself creditably at a training college or at some other public examination. You will often find that these subjects are most thoroughly taught when a special teacher is engaged by a group of schools to give instruction in such subjects once or twice a week, his teaching being supplemented in the intervals by the teachers of the school. You will judge of all schemes of elementary science which may be submitted to you for approval by their applicability to the school stay of the bulk of scholars, remembering that the whole course of study is primarily designed for those children who go to labour after they have reached the full time standard.
29. There is no graver or more difficult task imposed upon Her Majesty's Inspectors by the amended Code than that of assessing the merit grant. Your own experience must often have led you to conclude that
[page 492]
the full value of a school's work is not accurately measured by the results of individual examination, as tabulated in a schedule; and that two schools, in which the ratio of "passes" attained is the same, often differ materially in the quality of those passes, and in general efficiency as places of education. It is in order that these differences may be duly recognised in calculating the grant that my Lords have caused the award of a substantial part of that sum to be dependent on the estimate you form of the merit of the school as a whole. Article 109b specifies three particulars: (1) the organisation and discipline; (2) the intelligence employed in instruction; and (3) the general quality of the work, especially in elementary subjects. Thus the award of the merit grant will be the result of several factors of judgment. The quality as well as the number of the passes will necessarily rank as the most important of these factors; but inferences derived from them alone may be modified by taking into account the skill and spirit of the teaching, the neatness of the schoolroom and its appliances, the accuracy and trustworthiness of the registers, the fitness of the classification in regard to age and capacity, the behaviour of the children, especially their honesty under examination, and the interest they evince in their work. The Code also instructs you to make reasonable allowance for "special circumstances". A shifting, scattered, very poor, or ignorant population; any circumstance which makes regular attendance exceptionally difficult; failure of health, or unforeseen changes among the teaching staff, will necessarily and rightly affect your judgment. It is needful, however, in all such cases, to have regard not only to the existence of special difficulties, but also to the degree of success with which those difficulties have been overcome.
30. From bad or unsatisfactory schools it is manifest that the merit grant should be withheld altogether. The cases which you dealt with under Article 32b of the former Code, and in which a deduction of one or more tenths was made for "faults of instruction or discipline", or in which you have not recommended the grant for "discipline and organisation", would, of course, fall under this head. Other cases will occur which are not serious enough to justify actual deduction; but in which you observe that there is a preponderance of indifferent passes, preventible disorder, dulness, or irregularity; or that the teacher is satisfied with a low standard of duty. To schools of this class no merit grant should be awarded. But a school of humble aims, which passes only a moderately successful examination, may properly be designated "Fair", if its work is conscientiously done, and is sound as far it goes; and if the school is free from any conspicuous fault.
31. Generally, a school may be expected to receive the mark "Good", when both the number and the quality of the passes are satisfactory; when the scholars pass well in such class subjects as are taken up; and when the organisation, discipline, tone, and general intelligence are such as to deserve commendation.
32. It is the intention of their Lordships that the mark "Excellent" should be reserved for cases of distinguished merit. A thoroughly good school in favourable conditions is characterised by cheerful and yet exact discipline, maintained without harshness and without noisy demonstration of authority. Its premises are cleanly and well-ordered; its time-table provides a proper variety of mental employment and of physical exercise; its organisation is such as to distribute the teaching power judiciously, and to secure for every scholar - whether he is likely to bring credit to the school by examination or not - a fair share of instruction and of attention. The teaching is animated and interesting, and yet thorough and accurate. The reading is fluent, careful, and expressive, and the children are helped by questioning and explanation to follow the meaning of what they read. Arithmetic is so taught as to enable the scholars not only to obtain correct answers to sums, but also to understand the reason of the processes employed. If higher subjects are attempted, the lessons are not confined to memory work and to the learning of technical terms, but are designed to give a clear knowledge of facts, and to train the learner in the practice of thinking and observing. Besides fulfilling these conditions, which are all expressed or implied in the Code, such a school seeks by other means to be of service to the children who attend it. It provides for the upper classes a regular system of home-exercises, and arrangements for correcting them expeditiously and thoroughly. Where circumstances permit, it has also its lending library, its savings bank, and an orderly collection of simple objects and apparatus adapted to illustrate the school lessons, and formed in part by the co-operation of the scholars themselves. Above all, its teaching and discipline are such as to exert a right influence on the manners, the conduct, and the character of the children, to awaken in them a love of reading, and such an interest in their own mental improvement as may reasonably be expected to last beyond the period of school life.*
33. It is hardly to be expected that any one school will completely satisfy all these conditions, and it is impossible that in the course of a single visit of inspection your attention should be directed to so many particulars. But it will be well to keep all of them in view in forming your own standard of what the best schools should aim at: and my Lords do not wish the mark "excellent" to be given to any school which falls short of that standard in any important respects, or which is not, in some of them at least, entitled to special praise.
34. The responsibility of recommending the merit grant will in every case rest upon the Inspector, and should not be delegated to an assistant. My Lords do not require that you should state in fuller detail than you think desirable in your report on a school, your reason for designating it as "fair", "good", or "excellent"; but in all cases in which you recommend that the grant should be withheld, the grounds on which you do so should be briefly stated for the information and guidance of the managers.
35. My Lords regret to receive frequent complaints of the excessive use of corporal punishment in schools, and of its occasional infliction by assistants and pupil-teachers, and even by managers. The subject is one on which your own observation is necessarily incomplete, since children are not likely to be punished in your presence on the day of inspection. But you will not fail in your intercourse with teachers and managers to impress upon them that the more thoroughly a teacher is qualified for his position, by skill, character, and personal influence, the less necessary it is for him to resort to corporal chastisement at all. When, however, the necessity arises, the punishment should be administered by the head teacher; and an entry of the fact should, in their Lordships' opinion, be made in the log-book.
36. In view of the fact that the grant made to a school is mainly calculated on the average attendance, accurate registration of admission, progress, and attendance continues to be of essential importance, and will require special care on the part of managers and watchfulness on your own. In Appendix II you will find a revised edition of the official rules, which have been long in force for the proper keeping of registers, and it will be well to call the special attention of managers and teachers, especially in new schools, to the details set forth in that Appendix.
37. It must be clearly understood that irregularity of attendance, unless it is produced by some of the causes which constitute a reasonable excuse for absence, cannot be accepted as an excuse for the want of progress of any scholar. It has now become the interest of all concerned in the pecuniary results of the annual examination to increase the average yearly attendance by diminishing daily irregularities; but it may be hoped that higher motives will prompt all interested in education to press upon those entrusted with the execution of the law the actual legal obligation by which all parents are bound to present their children at the beginning of each meeting of the school. Cases of gross neglect on the part of the authorities, if brought to your notice, should form the subject of a special report to the Department. In your general judgment of the school, you will be careful to make allowances for all such neglect if the managers and teachers cannot be held responsible for it.
38. The Code requires -
I. That all scholars whose names are on the registers of the school must be present at the inspection, unless there is a reasonable excuse for their absence.
*Your attention may be usefully recalled to the following extract from the Code of 1881:
"The Inspector will bear in mind, in reporting on the organisation and discipline, the results of any visits without notice made in the course of the school year; and will not interfere with any method of organisation adopted in a training college under inspection if it is satisfactorily carried out in the school. To meet the requirements respecting discipline, the managers and teachers will be expected to satisfy the Inspector that all reasonable care is taken, in the ordinary management of the school, to bring up the children in habits of punctuality, of good manners and language, of cleanliness and neatness, and also to impress upon the children the importance of cheerful obedience to duty, of consideration and respect for others, and of honour and truthfulness in word and act."
[page 493]
II. That all such scholars whose names have at the end of the school year been on the register for the last 22 weeks during which the school has been open must be presented to the Inspector for examination.
39. Hitherto, since part of the grant was based upon the individual payment for the successful examination of all scholars who had attended 250 times in the course of the year, managers were interested in getting together all such scholars on the day of inspection. As the grant is now based upon the average attendance of ail the scholars, and will be adversely affected by the failure in examination of backward scholars, it will be your duty to see that every child, who is liable to be presented for examination, is present, unless there is a reasonable excuse on the day of examination, and to record the absent scholars on the schedule as if they had been present and had failed. If the number of absentees be large, the absences should be a positive disqualification for the mark "good" or "excellent" in assessing the merit grant. Among reasonable excuses, probably the most general will be found to be infectious disease in the home, storms, unavoidable absence from home, a death in the family, or the scholar's having left the neighbourhood. Beyond these it is not probable that many reasonable excuses will be found, though cases of an exceptional character may arise, and can only be decided on the day of inspection.
40. Many well-founded complaints have been made of undue pressure on backward scholars by keeping them in after school, by long home lessons, or by an injudicious use of emulation. The fact that a reasonable allowance may now be made for exceptional cases under Article 109e. iii, will, it may be hoped, diminish this evil. Irregularity of attendance cannot be considered as a valid reason for withholding a child from examination; and managers of schools should refuse to countenance this plea, and should co-operate with all concerned in promoting greater regularity of attendance. The following excuses may, however, be reasonably accepted for withholding a scholar: delicate health or prolonged illness; obvious dulness or defective intellect; temporary deprivation, by accident or otherwise, of the use of eye or hand. But in order that all scholars, whom it is proposed to withhold, may not be neglected by a teacher, it will be your duty to look carefully through the list of such scholars, and to form a personal judgment as to the reasonableness of the excuses.
41. As a general rule, all scholars who have failed at the previous examination in any standard in two subjects may be presented a second time in that standard. The fact of such failure can be attested in the case of scholars who were in the school at the previous examination by means of last year's schedule, which will be before you. In the case of children coming from other schools there may be difficulty in obtaining evidence of the highest standard previously passed; but, as a general rule, it should be presumed that such children, if above 10 years of age, have passed Standard III, and all exceptions to this rule should be held to require explanation.
42. In all schools the grant for cookery, §109(g) ix, should be conditional on the provision of special, adequate, and suitable arrangements for the practical instruction of the girls by a duly qualified teacher, in a room (which may be an ordinary class-room) fitted up with the necessary appliances. In schools, the circumstances of which admit of it, demonstration lessons in cookery should be given at frequent intervals by a professional person.
43. It is a fact deplored by all connected with the examination of candidates for admission to training colleges, and by all who have to instruct our future teachers in these colleges, that many pupil-teachers, at the close of their engagement, should possess so scanty a knowledge of arithmetic, geography, grammar, and history. Unless it is supposed that the great bulk of their teachers have neglected their instruction, the school work must obviously have pressed so heavily upon these young persons as to leave very little time for their improvement. It is admitted that boys and girls of 16 or 17 years of age should not spend more than eight hours daily in intellectual labour, and it cannot be thought an unnecessary requirement that out of this weekly maximum of 40 hours (allowing for two half-holidays), ten hours should be reserved for the private studies of the pupil-teachers, over and above the five hours already prescribed for their instruction or examination by the teacher of the school. The new form of Memorandum of Agreement (Schedule VI) requires no more than 25 hours per week of actual service in teaching. When the work of the school is carried on for more than 25 hours, the time-table should be so arranged as to give the pupil-teacher the remaining time for private study in the school or class-room, under the direction of the head teacher. In this way the necessary work of preparing lessons out of school hours may be somewhat reduced.
44. Article 113 has been designed to encourage more advanced and varied teaching in the evening school, and at the same time to indicate clearly its character as a supplement to the day school rather than as a substitute for it. It may be hoped that ere long no scholar will leave the day school for labour who has not passed the full-time Standard; but exceptional cases will arise in which a night scholar may not have reached this standard, or, having reached it, may have forgotten much of what he has learned, and may require to go back and recapitulate. For such cases, the Code provides that examination may be as low as the 3rd Standard; and there need be no objection, when a scholar has for some time been employed, to allowing him to repeat the examination for the last standard which he has previously passed. In all such cases satisfactory explanation should be furnished by the managers. If, in any instance, it is proposed to put a scholar back two standards, sufficient reasons should be assigned. The managers should take reasonable pains to procure evidence at each scholar's admission of the standard in which he has previously been presented, and of the standard for which he is fitted.
45. In framing the Code, my Lords have desired - while retaining as of prime importance the individual examination in reading, writing, and arithmetic - to give greater freedom of choice to good teachers in regard to other subjects, to attach increased weight to intelligence and to the quality of instruction, and to bring the mode of computing the grant into closer correspondence with the various conditions which determine the efficiency of a school. The full attainment of these objects depends largely on your personal exertions and influence, and on the spirit in which you co-operate with the best efforts of voluntary managers, school boards, and other local bodies interested in promoting education. Their Lordships are aware that some of the new duties which are imposed upon you by the Code of 1882 are delicate and onerous, and will call for the exercise, in a higher degree than ever, of carefulness, insight, and sympathy. But they rely with much confidence on the discretion and ability of Her Majesty's Inspectors, and on their willingness to give effect to any measure designed to improve the character of elementary schools, and to increase the public usefulness of the Education Department.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
F. R. SANDFORD.
[page 494]
II
INSTRUCTIONS TO INSPECTORS, 1878
VICE-PRESIDENT LORD SANDON, NOW LORD HARROWBY
COPY of "CIRCULAR Letter issued on the 16th day of January 1878, by Viscount Sandon, then Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, to Her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools, containing his Instructions and Views respecting the Inspection and Examination of the Schools, the Maintenance of their Moral Training, the Character and Aim of the Teaching of the Schools, the Position and Character of the Teachers, and the Objects sought to be obtained by the Provisions of the Code, as bearing upon the Changes proposed to be made next Year by the Committee of Council on Education in the Code and REGULATIONS for PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS."
CIRCULAR TO HER MAJESTY'S INSPECTORS - ENGLAND AND WALES
Education Department, Whitehall,
January 16, 1878.
SIR,
As it has now become evident that, by the operation of recent legislation, the great majority of the labouring classes will be virtually compelled to send their children to public elementary schools, which are aided, and therefore to a large extent regulated, by the State, a heavy additional responsibility is imposed upon the Government with respect to the character of the schools in which these children will be obliged to spend all their school life.
It becomes, therefore, more than ever the duty of the Education Department to do all in their power to secure both that the most suitable and useful instruction, and such as is mostly desired by their parents, is furnished for the children, and that their moral training is fully provided for during the years which they will be compelled to spend in public elementary schools. To enable the Department to fulfil this duty, the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education must principally rely upon the action and influence of Her Majesty's inspectors in their respective districts; and from their knowledge of the zeal and public spirit of their officers, they feel that they may rely with confidence upon their cordial co-operation. Considering, however, the great increase in the staff of inspectors since 1870, and the large number of recent appointments,* and looking also to the increased responsibility now cast upon the inspectors by the important changes in the educational system which have been made in the last three years, both by legislation and by the codes, further directions appear to be desirable.
In conveying to you the following instructions from their Lordships, I am desired to inform you that, in arriving at the conclusions which are herein embodied, they have carefully considered the reports of the most experienced inspectors during the last four years, as well as the many representations made to them during that period by managers of schools, and by other persons of knowledge and experience in educational matters.
With regard to your action respecting the recent Education Acts, detailed directions are not needed, as their Lordships have no cause for doubting that you will, as heretofore, do all in your power to promote their successful working, being careful to maintain an entire impartiality between schools under different kinds of management, and to avoid even the appearance of using your influence in favour of either voluntary or board schools, or of taking a part in local differences on these matters.
There are, however, some general instructions with regard to these Acts to which I am desired to call your attention.
While their Lordships are most anxious that you should afford to any local authorities that may apply to yon the benefit of such advice, on matters covered by your instructions, as may assist them in bringing into full and satisfactory operation the important powers with which they have been entrusted, it is necessary that you should bear in mind, in the case of school attendance committers appointed by boards of guardians, that they are mainly responsible to the Local Government Board, and are assisted and advised in the discharge of their duties by the inspectors of that Board. You will, therefore, be very careful in your communications with such committees to show that you have no authority to dictate to them, or, unless specially directed to do so by this Department under section 27 or 43 of the Act of 1876, to ask for an account of any of their proceedings.
I should inform you, at the same time, that during the present year, yon will probably be specially directed, under the Act of 1876, to report to their Lordships any parts of your district in which the local authorities are not thoroughly fulfilling the duties imposed upon them by those Acts, in respect of the education, the school attendance, and the employment of the children of their districts.
If any cases are brought before you, or come to your knowledge, of an infraction of the 7th section of the Act of 1870, i.e., the time table conscience clause, you will not fail, acting in the spirit of the Act of 1876 (section 7), forthwith to communicate with their Lordships on the subject; and you will take special care to point out to school managers and teachers the importance of the strictest adherence, in letter and spirit, to the provisions of that conscience clause, and to remind them, where necessary, of the total forfeiture of grant which their Lordships would at once inflict, should those provisions be persistently evaded or neglected. It should never be forgotten that a. child withdrawn from the whole or part of the religious teaching or observances of a school, should in no way be subjected to disparaging treatment on account of his parent having thought fit to avail himself of his statutory right in this matter. But, on the other hand, in your communications respecting the arrangements of the time tables. you will remember that you have no right to interfere in any way with the liberty allowed by statute to managers of providing for religious teaching and observances at the beginning and end of the two daily school meetings. In your allusions to this subject and to the conscience clause, you will be most careful not to lead managers or teachers to suppose that the complete provision which has now been made by the Legislature for protecting the rights of conscience, as an essential part of a system of compulsory attendance, and the limitation of the necessary examination by Her Majesty's Inspectors to secular subjects, imply that the State is indifferent to the moral character of the schools, or in any way unfriendly to religious teaching.
In connexion with this subject, as affected by the Code, and your own action as a representative of the Department, I have to direct your attention to their Lordships' views respecting the moral character of the schools, and the character and condition of the teachers.
My Lords are anxious that you should lose no suitable opportunity of impressing upon both managers and teachers the great responsibility which rests upon them, over and above the intellectual teaching, in regard to the moral training, of the children committed to their charge. You will express your special approbation of all schools where, from knowledge which yon have gained by repeated visits, yon observe that a high moral tone is maintained; you will not fail to enlarge upon the Article (19A)† in the Code respecting discipline as showing the interest taken by Parliament and by their
*The staff of inspectors has risen from 73 in 1870, to 120 in 1877.
†"The inspector will bear in mind, in reporting on the organisation and discipline, the results of any visits without notice (Article 12) made in the course of the school year; and will not interfere with any method of organisation adopted in a training college under inspection if it is satisfactorily carried out in the school. To meet the requirements respecting discipline, the managers and teachers will be expected to satisfy the inspector that ail reasonable care is taken, in the ordinary management of the school, to bring up the children in habits of punctuality, of good manners and language, of cleanliness and neatness, and also to impress upon the children the importance of cheerful obedience to duty, of consideration and respect for others, and of honour and truthfulness in word and act."
[page 495]
Lordships in this all-important subject; and, where it is not satisfactorily attended to, you will not hesitate to recommend a reduction of the grant. You will, in the spirit of that Article, urge the managers to do all in their power to secure that the teachers maintain a high standard of honesty, truth, and honour in their schools, and that they not only inculcate upon the children the general duty of consideration and respect for others, but also the special duty of obedience to, and reference for, their parents.
Their Lordships have observed with great regret the large number of cases of falsification by teachers of the registers of attendance which have been brought to their notice. They have felt it their duty to visit in the severest manner all cases of deliberate fraud, as it is obvious that persons who are guilty of such fraudulent acts, are unfit for the care of children. You will therefore be careful to remind teachers, at proper times, of the very serious nature of such offences. The reduction of the grant which is made in many of these cases will, it is hoped, lead managers to see that it is their interest, as well as their duty, to give close attention to the details of the daily working of the schools under their control. The experience of many years has shown that the best schools have generally been those where the managers exercise a personal supervision over them, and are in constant friendly intercourse with the teachers and the children. My Lords have been sorry to find that many of the largest schools have in the last few years been deficient in this great element of usefulness, and that accordingly a much lower tone has prevailed amongst teachers and children in these cases. My Lords trust that you will lose no opportunity of endeavouring to secure for all the children of your district the advantage of this supervision, by informing the managers of the importance which their Lordships attach to their personal influence over the schools for which they have accepted the responsibility, as a most valuable part of the educational system of the country; and you will do all in your power to support the authority of the managers over their schools. The friendly interest and supervision of the managers is particularly needed in the case of the young teachers of both sexes in large towns, who being often strangers to the place and living alone in lodgings, without friends or relations, should be the object of their special care. You will therefore inquire from time to time, whether the managers take a personal interest in the conduct, comfort and well-being of these young persons, as my Lords consider this matter to be of great importance, not only to the teachers themselves, but to the children who are entrusted to their care, and who must be much affected by the characters and example of their instructors.
It is needless to remind you that the condition of the pupil teachers of your district should receive your very careful consideration. My Lords have reason to fear that sufficient care has not been bestowed upon them in many cases, either by managers or teachers. You will do well, therefore, to bespeak the special attention of the managers to this important subject. You will oppose the appointment of sickly precocious children as pupil teachers, and you will insist upon good health as an essential qualification for those who aspire to the teacher's office. You should warn the managers and teachers against allowing teachers of this tender age to be overworked, and should point out to them that under the revised memorandum of agreement, arrangements can be made, with great general advantage to the school, by which the pupil teachers may be allowed a portion of the school hours for their own instruction or preparation of lessons, provided that the time so employed, is devoted exclusively, like their five hours of special instruction, to the subjects prescribed by the Code. You should discourage the habit of sacrificing to the preparation of their lessons the times allotted for meals, and you should specially warn teachers of the serious effect upon the health of the female pupil teachers, girls of 14 to 18 years of age, of being kept standing all day at work in their schools. You should endeavour to secure that the pupil teachers receive a regular course of systematic instruction from their teachers, instead of a mere "cram" preparation for examination, and you should do all you can to maintain in the teachers and managers a sense of responsibility for the formation of the character, as well as the attainments of their pupil teachers.
I pass on to call your attention to the large changes made in the Code during the last two years, to the objects their Lordships had in view by those changes, and to the manner in which they desire you to work them. You will probably have observed that their Lordships' object throughout has been, over and above the acquisition by every child of the bare ordinary rudiments of education, to promote the development of the general intelligence of the scholars rather than to seek to burden their memories with subjects which, considering the early age at which the majority of children leave school, would not be likely to be of use to them; and also to encourage such training in school, in matters affecting their daily life, as may help to improve and raise the character of their homes. With respect to the ordinary rudiments, you will urge the teachers, as far as they are concerned, not to be satisfied with just enabling the children to pass the standard examinations which set them free from compulsory attendance, but to endeavour to provide that all children before they leave school, shall at least have acquired the power of writing with facility, of using the simple rules of arithmetic without difficulty, and of reading without exertion and with pleasure to themselves. As regards history and geography, you will encourage, as for as you can, such teaching as is likely to awaken the sympathies of the children. Their attention should be specially directed to the interesting stories of history, to the lives of noble characters, and to incidents which tend to create a patriotic feeling of regard for their country and its position in the world; and while they should be made acquainted with the leading historical incidents that have taken place in their own neighbourhood, and with its special geographical features, an interest should be excited in the colonial and foreign possessions of the British Crown.
Though their Lordships always decline to interfere respecting the choice of the books used in the schools, it will be well that you should point out the great value of using, in the reading lessons, interesting books on such subjects as natural history, the wonders of creation, or the like, which do not form part of the ordinary school course; and with regard to the poetry which the children are required in the higher standards to learn by heart, while you will discourage foolish and trifling songs, and pieces above their comprehension, you will call attention to the value of learning by heart generally, as a means of storing the children's memories with noble and elevated sentiments. Though their Lordships have found it necessary to reduce the number of songs to be learned from 12 to 8, they desire to give every encouragement to singing in schools as a most valuable element in the education of children.
You will not fail to inform the managers and teachers of the importance which their Lordships attach to good instruction in needlework, in domestic economy, as described in the new Code,* and in the knowledge of "common things", and to such teaching as is likely to promote habits of thrift. You will encourage any well-considered schemes, such as are being adopted in various parts of the country, for teaching practical cookery to the elder girls; while, on proper occasions, you win call attention to the facilities which now exist for the establishment of school penny savings' banks, and to the great success which has attended their introduction in many schools in the poorest districts.
You will bear in mind, and will urge upon managers and teachers, that though certain subjects only are paid for under the Code, and certain subjects only are obligatory, it is in their power to give instruction to children in any other useful and suitable branches of knowledge for which the parents show a liking, or which the character and habits of the population seem specially to require. It cannot be too strongly impressed upon you, that uniformity in the school course, as far as the non-essential subjects are concerned, is not the object their Lordships have in view in their administration, but that, on the contrary, they consider it advantageous to the country generally that there should be a variety in the teaching of the schools, so as to meet the varying and very different requirements of different localities and conditions of life. It is with this view that a great variety of optional subjects, both in elementary science and literature, has recently been added by their Lordships to the Code. From no good school, however, or conscientious teacher, will you ever hear the plea urged that only "paying" subjects can be attended to. The schools which pass best in such subjects are not those which confine themselves solely to the work of the standards, which are necessarily fixed with an eye to
*1. Food and its preparation. Clothing and materials. 2. The dwelling: warming, cleaning, and ventilation. Washing materials and their use. 3. Rules for health; the management of a sick room. Cottage income, expenditure, and savings.
[page 496]
the capacities of ordinary children, or even to the others enumerated in the Code. Regularity of attendance, which is increasing daily, under the action of recent legislation, will probably give ample time for the more advanced instruction of the better scholars, and of those who remain at school longer than the early age at which compulsion ceases, while the honour certificates of the Act of 1876, which are in fact exhibitions for the best scholars, will, it is to be hoped, judging from the value which already appears to be attached to them, work in the same direction.
Some changes made in the Code, with a view to encourage night schools, will not have escaped your notice. Experience has shown their usefulness, both in the manufacturing and rural districts, in supplementing the work of day schools. The early age of leaving school, and the large number of young men who have either received no instruction at all, or have forgotten what they have learned, will, at any rate for the present, make these schools of much value. As they call for considerable personal sacrifices, on the part both of teachers and scholars, they are likely to be maintained only where a genuine and meritorious zeal for education exists on both sides. Owing, however, to the small numbers of which, in most cases, these schools must necessarily consist, they can hardly be carried on without encouragement and support from this Department. My Lords, therefore, desire you to give every encouragement in your power to local efforts for the establishment of night schools, under circumstances which promise that they will be judiciously conducted, and actively maintained.
I have now to convey to you some directions respecting the examination of schools, and your inspection generally.
The changes in the Code have been so considerable, and the requirements of it have been so largely raised, that my Lords think it most desirable that, in your examinations, the new Code should be worked very gradually and cautiously, so as not to discourage either the teacher or the children, by expecting too much from them at first under a change of system. These remarks will, of course, be particularly applicable to new schools, and to those where many rough and untaught children have been recently introduced by means of compulsion. My Lords wish it to be understood that they do not approve of the examination being taken on paper under Article 19C of the Code,* except in special cases, respecting which, of course, you must use your own discretion. It has long been the practice of the most experienced inspectors, in consideration of the obligation upon girls to learn needlework, while boys have no corresponding obligatory claim upon their school hours, not to apply to girls, in the examination in arithmetic, exactly the same standard of proficiency as to boys. My Lords are of opinion that this practice should be adopted by Her Majesty's Inspectors generally.
Their Lordships further direct me to say that they attach great importance to a second visit (without notice) being made, as far as possible, to every school in the year, with a view to the general encouragement of the teachers and the children, and to enable you to exercise a larger influence upon the general conduct of the school than is possible where only one visit for the purpose of examination takes place; and they would strongly impress upon you their desire that you should endeavour to make all your visits, as far as lies in your power, an encouragement and assistance to managers and teachers in their difficult work.
You will bear in mind that anything like dictation to teachers, as if they were in any sense officers of the Department, or responsible to any one save the managers of their schools, should be very carefully avoided. It is no part of an inspector's duty either to find fault with, or to reprove a teacher. If he thinks it either necessary, or a kindly act, to give advice or warning to a teacher, it should not be done in the hearing of the scholars or pupil teachers.
But above all, it is incumbent on an inspector to show by his manner in examining, and dealing with the classes and with individual scholars, that the main object of his visit to a school is to elicit what the children know, and not to prove their ignorance. That object is entirely defeated, if by a harsh, impatient, or indistinct manner of questioning the scholars, he frightens or confuses them, or if he puzzles them by fanciful and unreasonable questions.
With regard to your assistant, you will not delegate the inspection of a school to him, except in a case of absolute necessity, arising from illness or some such cause. When you have been compelled to do so, you will notify the fact to the Department, and will make a point of making a visit yourself to that school in the same year. You will, as far as possible, confine your assistant's action to the individual examination of scholars. You should, however, always take enough of this work yourself to enable you to report, from your personal knowledge, upon the efficiency of every department. The main duty of the assistant is to collect for you sufficient facts, as to the children's reading, writing, &c., on which you can form a judgment as to the merits of the schools under your inspection; and their Lordships cannot accept any reference to the opinion of an inspector's assistant, as part of the official report on a school. For everything of the nature of inspection, the inspector alone is responsible; and the interests of schools depend so materially upon the results of the yearly official visit, that it is necessary to insist that more time should be devoted by the inspector to an examination into the actual work done in every school on his list, than is frequently given to this duty at present. The increase in the staff of many of the districts, and the reduction in the size of others, will remove some of the difficulties which formerly existed in connexion with this part of the inspector's duties.
In the official reports which you are called upon to make to this Department, from time to time, respecting the condition of your district, my Lords will be glad that you should generally notice the subjects to which your attention has been directed by this special Circular.
My Lords are fully aware that that no little tact and judgment are required to fulfil the duties of your office, especially in your relations to the managers of the schools. The standard of duty which they place before you is undoubtedly a high one; but they are of opinion that the object of Parliament, and of successive Administrations, in maintaining the present large staff of officers of the highest standing, has been, not merely to certify the Department respecting the rudimentary instruction given in the schools, but that Her Majesty's Inspectors should still take a leading part, as so many distinguished members of their body have done, in developing and raising the character of our elementary schools, so that the country might derive the greatest possible benefit from their institution. Their Lordships have, therefore, felt it their duty, at a period of considerable change in the educational system of the country, to state somewhat fully their views respecting the action and responsibilities of Her Majesty's Inspectors, and also respecting the instruction, training, and management of the schools which are subject to their supervision, so as both to assist and encourage their inspectors, and also to remove doubts which have been expressed by those connected with schools on the various matters which are alluded to in this Circular.
While, from their knowledge of the past and present work of Her Majesty's Inspectors, my Lords rely with confidence upon having their continued zealous assistance, they as confidently rely upon the friendly and public spirited co-operation of the local educational authorities, and of the managers and teachers of schools, in carrying on the great work of national education in the manner and with the results which the large sacrifices of the country give it a right to expect.
I have, &c.
(Signed) F. R. SANDFORD.
To H.M.'s Inspector of Schools.
*19C. 1. The sum of 4s per scholar, according to the average number of children, above seven years of age, in attendance throughout the year (Article 26), if the classes from which the children are examined in standards II-VI, or in specific subjects (Article 21b), pass a creditable examination in any two of the following subjects, viz., grammar, history, elementary geography, and plain needlework.
5. The mode of examination (whether oral or on paper)† is left to the discretion of the inspector.
†Examination on paper will, as a rule, be confined to scholars in Standard VI.
[page 497]
III
SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON
SYLLABUS OF RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION FOR THE YEAR 1885
SCHOLARS
"In the schools provided by the Board the Bible shall be read, and there shall be given such explanations and such instructions therefrom in the principles of morality and religion as are suited to the capacities of the children." Extract from Code of the Board, Art. 91.
STANDARD I
Learn the Ten Commandments, Exodus xx, verses 1-17 (the substance only will be required); the Lord's Prayer, St. Matthew vi, verses 9-13.
Brief account of the early lives of Samuel and David.
Leading facts in the Life of Christ told in simple language.
STANDARD II
Repeat the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer.
Learn: St. Matthew v, 1-12; and St. Matthew xxii, 35-40.
The Life of Abraham.
Simple outline of the Life of Christ.
STANDARD III
Memory work, as in Standards I. and II.
Learn Psalm xxiii.
The Life of Joseph.
Fuller outline of the Life of Christ, with lessons drawn from the following parables:
The Two Debtors.
The Good Samaritan.
The Prodigal Son.
The Merciless Servant.
The Lost Sheep.
The Pharisee and the Publican.
STANDARD IV
Memory work, as in Standard III.
Learn St. John xiv., verses 15 - 31.
The Life of Moses.
The Life of Christ [1st part] as gathered from the
Gospels of St. Matthew down to chapter xiv, 36, inclusive; St. Mark, to chapter vi, 56; St. Luke, to chapter ix, 17; St. John, to chapter vii, 1: viz., to Third Passover; with lessons from the following parables:
The Sower.
The Mustard Seed.
The Wheat and the Tares.
The Pearl of Great Price.
Brief account of Bethlehem, Nazareth, Sea of Galilee, Bethany, and Jerusalem.
STANDARD V
Memory work, as in Standard IV.
Learn Ephesians vi., verses 1 - 18.
The lives of Samuel, Saul, and David.
The Life of Christ continued [2nd part], from Third Passover to end of Gospels.
Acts of the Apostles, first two chapters.
STANDARD VI
Memory work, as in Standard V.
Learn Isaiah liii and Ephesians iv, verses 25-32.
The lives of Elijah and Daniel.
Recapitulation of the Life of Christ, together with an account of His discourses as given in St. John, chapters iii, vi, 1-40, and x; Acts of the Apostles, to chapter viii.
STANDARD VII
Memory work, as in Standard VI.
Learn I Corinthians, xiii.
Recapitulation of the lives of Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Saul, David, and Daniel.
Recapitulation of the Life of Christ, as in Standard VI.
Acts of the Apostles, with especial reference to the life and missionary journeys of St. Paul.
General Instruction - The teachers are desired to make the lessons as practical as possible, and not to give attention to unnecessary details.
CANDIDATES AND PUPIL TEACHERS
The course at the pupil teachers' schools should afford a general acquaintance with the Old and New Testaments, with especial reference to those portions which are included in the syllabus of instruction for children.
This course should include, not merely a general outline of the history and literature of the different periods as contained in the Bible and the circumstances of the time, but also special attention should be given to the teaching contained therein.
CANDIDATES
Candidates will be examined in the course appointed for Standard VII.
PUPIL TEACHERS
First Year
Study of the Old Testament* to the death of Moses. Study of the Gospels down to the Third Passover.*
Second Year
Study of the Old Testament to the death of Saul.* Study of the Four Gospels.*
Third Year
Study of the Old Testament to the division of the kingdom after the death of Solomon, with a general knowledge of the Books of Psalms and Proverbs.* Study of the New Testament to the close of the Acts of the Apostles.*
Fourth Year
Study of the Old Testament.* Study of the New Testament to the close of the Acts of the Apostles,* together with some knowledge of the Epistles.
APPENDIX II
QUESTIONS
STANDARD IV
(One question only in each Section to be attempted.)
SECTION I
1. From what point did Moses view the Promised Land? Why was he not allowed to enter it?
2. Why had the children of Israel to wander forty years in the wilderness?
SECTION II
1. "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Write out these two commandments.
*It is intended that in each year, after the first, the work of the previous years should be shortly recapitulated and the new work should be taught in fuller detail.
[page 498]
2. What did Christ say about "the peacemakers", "the merciful", "the pure in heart", "the meek"?
SECTION III
1. Give an account of the healing of the Centurion's servant.
2. Relate the incident of the healing of the "impotent man".
SECTION IV
1. "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile?" About whom and on what occasion were these words spoken? Explain the words "no guile".
2. What did our Lord say when asked the question, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days?"
SECTION V
1. Write out and explain the parable of the mustard seed.
2. Explain the following:
(a) "A sower went forth to sow".
(b) "Goodly pearls".
(c) "The thorns sprung up and choked them".
(d) "Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them".
3. Mention any buildings or places in or near Jerusalem connected with the Life of our Lord.
SECTION VI
How are children taught in the Bible to behave:
(a) At home?
(b) At school?
(c) With their companions?
STANDARD V
(Only three questions are to be attempted from each of the first two sections.)
SECTION I
1. What led to the death of Eli, and what were his chief faults?
2. What qualities of Saul fitted him for the kingship, and what other qualities led to his rejection by God?
3. Give instances of generosity, domestic affection, and piety from the life of David.
4. "There is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few." Describe briefly the occasion on which these words were uttered.
5. State, in a few words, who were Abimelech, Ishbosheth, Abner, Hiram, and Absalom.
6. Write out the verses from the 14th chapter of St. John, beginning with "If ye love me", and ending with "I will love him, and will manifest myself to him."
SECTION II
1. Relate the parable by which our Lord taught Peter how oft he should forgive his brother.
2. Quote texts in which our Lord teaches -
(a) Humility.
(b) The dangers of wealth.
(c) Self-sacrifice.
3. What attempt was made by the Pharisees and Herodians to entrap Jesus by a crafty question, and how did he answer them?
4. Write a short account of how our Lord kept His last Passover.
5. In what words does our Lord show that all the commandments can be fulfilled by love of God and man.
6. Show, from the introductions to St. Luke's Gospel and to the Acts of the Apostles that St. Luke probably wrote the latter.
SECTION III
(All should attempt this question)
How are children taught in the Bible to behave:
(a) At home?
(b) At school?
(c) With their companions?
STANDARD VI
SECTION I
(One question only may be answered)
1. Quote any verses from Isaiah 53 which give a picture of -
(a) The humble life of the Messiah.
(b) The manner of His death.
2. Write the verse beginning, "Be ye kind one to another", and mention any similar words used by Christ Himself.
SECTION II
(Two questions only may be answered)
1. "And Ahab said to Elijah, Hast thou found me, O mine enemy? And he answered, I have found thee because thou hast sold thyself to work evil in the sight of the Lord." Explain these words of Elijah, and relate the incident which gave rise to them.
2. Describe the final parting between Elijah and Elisha.
3. What is told us of the early life and training of Daniel in Babylon?
4. What points in Daniel's character are most worthy of imitation?
SECTION III
(Three questions only may be answered, of which the last must be one)
1. How did Jesus deal with little children? What warning and advice did He give His disciples on these occasions?
2. Relate the story of Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
3. What does our Lord teach with reference to the way in which we ought to worship God?
4. Relate the story of Christ's sufferings in the garden of Gethsemane.
5. "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me." Explain this passage.
6. Give any incidents from the Acts of the Apostles which show that the Christians rejoiced even under persecution, and what was the result of the persecution to which they were subjected.
7. How are children taught in the Bible to behave:
(a) At home?
(b) At school?
(c) With their companions?
STANDARD VII
SECTION I
(One question only may be answered)
1. Write out St. Paul's description of Charity. Give the meaning of the word "Charity" as he uses it.
2. On which clause of the Lord's Prayer did Christ lay special stress? What parable did He give to teach the same lesson?
SECTION II
(Two questions only may be answered)
1. Relate God's promises to Abraham, and show how they were fulfilled.
2. "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face." Relate any incidents in the life of Moses which illustrate this verse.
3. What worthy points are to be noticed in the character of King Saul?
4. "David, the son of Jesse, the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet Psalmist of Israel." Explain and illustrate this verse.
SECTION III
(Three questions only may be answered, of which the last must be one)
1. Mention some of the chief points of Christ's teaching in His conversation with Nicodemus.
2. Explain the following sayings of Christ, and mention the incidents which gave rise to them:
(a) "He that is not against us is for us."
[page 499]
(b) "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of."
(c) "Let the dead bury their dead."
3. What mistakes did the Pharisees make as to the observance of the Sabbath, and how did our Lord reprove them by word and deed?
4. How did Jesus, by word and deed, teach the disciples to be humble?
5. Why was St. Paul persecuted at Lystra?
6. Write a short account of what happened when St. Paul visited Jerusalem for the last time.
7. How are children taught in the Bible to behave:
(a) At home?
(b) At school?
(c) With their companions?
FOR CANDIDATES AND PRESENT FIRST YEAR PUPIL TEACHERS
SECTION I
(One question only may be answered)
1. Write out St. Paul's description of Charity. Give the meaning of the word "Charity" as he uses it.
2. On which clause of the Lord's Prayer did Christ lay special stress? What parable did he give to teach the same lesson?
SECTION II
(Two questions only may be answered)
1. Relate God's promises to Abraham, and show how they were fulfilled.
2. "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face." Relate any incidents in the life of Moses which illustrate this verse.
3. What worthy points are to be noticed in the character of King Saul?
4. "David, the son of Jesse, the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet Psalmist of Israel." Explain and illustrate this verse.
SECTION II
(Three questions only may be answered, of which the last must be one)
1. Mention some of the chief points of Christ's teaching in His conversation with Nicodemus.
2. Explain the following sayings of Christ, and mention the incidents which gave rise to them:
(a) "He that is not against us is for us."
(b) "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of."
(c) "Let the dead bury their dead."
3. What mistake did the Pharisees make as to the observance of the Sabbath, and how did our Lord reprove them by word and deed?
4. How did Jesus, by word and deed, teach the disciples to be humble?
5. Why was St. Paul persecuted at Lystra?
6. Write a short account of what happened when St. Paul visited Jerusalem for the last time.
7. How are children taught in the Bible to behave:
(a) At home?
(b) At school?
(c) With their companions?
PUPIL TEACHERS OF THE PRESENT SECOND YEAR
SECTION I
(Two questions only may be answered from the First Section)
1. "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Show from the Old Testament that this was so.
2. Write a short account of the history of Isaac; drawing from it lessons suitable for children.
3. Show in a few words how Joseph proved himself -
A good son,
A good brother,
A good servant;
and write down any texts yon may remember concerning our duties to parents, brethren, and masters.
4. Give an account of the first Passover.
SECTION II
(Four questions only may be answered from this Section, of which the last must be one)
1. Explain the following phrases:
"Enter ye in at the strait gate."
"Why take ye thought for raiment?"
"Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
"Do not sound a trumpet before thee."
"Ye are the salt of the earth."
2. Write the story of the cleansing of the leper by Christ; and draw a comparison between leprosy and sin.
3. How did Jesus answer those who complained that He made friends with sinners, and was not strict in His obedience to the law?
4. How did the people of Nazareth receive the teaching of Jesus, and what did He say of their conduct?
5. How did Jesus rebuke Simon the Pharisee? What was the great fault of the sect to which this man belonged?
6. What message did John the Baptist send to Jesus, and how was it answered?
7. What gave rise to the discourse on the Bread of Life P How is the Bread of Life superior to the manna that fell in the wilderness? What mistake did the Jews make concerning the words of Jesus about this Bread?
8. Give, in your own words, some reasons why we should love God.
PUPIL TEACHERS OF THE PRESENT THIRD YEAR
SECTION I
(Two questions only are to be answered from this Section)
1. Give one or two words in explanation (such as you would give to a class) of each of the following: Priests, High Priest, Levites, Tabernacle, Altar, Ark of the Covenant, Sacrifice, Passover, Day of Atonement, Holy of Holies.
2. "In those days there was no king in Israel." What days are here referred to? How were the people governed? What caused them to desire a King?
3. Give an account of one of the judges whom you specially admire, and give your reasons for admiring him.
4. "To love me was wonderful; passing the love of women." By whom was this said? and show the lament was justified.
SECTION II
(Four questions only may be answered from this Section, of which the last must be one)
1. Who were the Pharisees and Sadducees? Why did they oppose Jesus?
2. Who were the Publicans? Why were they despised? Why did Jesus seek their company? Name any with whom He was intimate.
3. What did Jesus say to the rich young ruler? What was the result, and what warning did it give rise to?
4. "I came not to destroy the law but to fulfil it." Prove the truth of this statement.
5. "He spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others." Write down the parable as nearly as you can in the words of the Bible.
6. Give an account of our Lord's appearances after His resurrection.
7. How did Jesus, when he was dying, show -
His forgiveness of his enemies?
His kindness to a fellow-sufferer?
His duty towards his mother?
[page 500]
8. Write short explanations of the following:
"The wind bloweth where it listeth."
"The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans."
"He should be put out of the Synagogue."
"In my father's house are many mansions."
"It is not lawful for us to put any man to death."
"There was set a vessel full of vinegar."
9. Give, in your own words, some reasons why we should love God.
PUPIL TEACHERS OF THE PRESENT FOURTH YEAR AND EX-PUPIL TEACHERS
SECTION I
(Three questions only may be answered from this Section)
1. What practical lessons would you endeavour to impress on your scholars while reading the history of Joseph and his brethren?
2. Explain the true nature of the office of the Prophets of the Old Testament. Illustrate your answer from the First Book of Samuel.
3. What are the chief lessons to be learned from the history of Eli?
4. Write the life of St. Paul between his conversion and his journey with Barnabas.
5. By whom, and on what occasions, were the following words Spoken:
(a) "Be it far from me; for they that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed."
(b) "Art thou he that troubleth Israel?"
(c) "Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee; for where thou goest I will go; and where thou lodgest I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God."
(d) "Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick."
6. Draw a sketch-map to illustrate St. Paul's first missionary journey. State, in their correct order, the chief events of the journey.
SECTION II
(Three questions only may be answered from this Section)
1. Give the substance of our Lord's replies to the special charges brought against him by the Pharisees.
2. In giving a lesson on the parable of "The Good Samaritan," what practical lessons would you deduce suitable for Standard I, and for Standard VI, respectively?
3. "And now abideth faith, hope, and charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." Explain clearly what is here meant by charity. What is the teaching of Jesus with regard to this same charity?
4. Give a concise account of our Lord's conversation with Nathaniel; or the woman of Samaria; or with Pilate.
5. Give short explanations of the following passages:
(a) "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect through your traditions."
(b) "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy."
(c) "Every tree is known by his fruit."
(d) "Some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up with it and choked it."
6. "He is despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief." Illustrate this passage from the Gospel narrative.
SECTION III
(One question only may be answered from this Section)
1. Give, in your own words, some reasons why we should love God.
2. What was the importance of the Temple, (1) in its influence on the National Life, and (2) in its influence on the Religious Life of the Jews.
[page 501]
IV
SCHOOL BOARD FOR LIVERPOOL
SYLLABUS I
RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION FOR INFANTS
i. C0URSE FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE SCHOOL YEAR
1. For the elder classes:
(a) The first part of the instruction in "Bible Epochs and Lessons", ending with the death of Samuel. Pictures should be used with these lessons, and the word "epoch " explained.
(b) The Lord's Prayer, with or without one of the school prayers, and simple texts and hymns should be known by heart.
Hymns* 12, 19, 40, 46, 48, 53, 61, 62, 63, 70, 71, 74, 76, 78, 85, 96, 99, 128, 142, 145, 162, 163, 170, 173, 179.
2. For the lowest school section - (See Syllabus III):
(a) Easy conversation lessons and very simple hymns on -
(1) God as the maker of all natural things, the sun, moon, plants, animals, &c.
(2) The difference between God's making (creating) and man's making, showing man's need of tools and materials for his work.
(3) God as our Father in heaven, loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing. (Hymn* 46)
(4) Prayer to so kind and great a Father, a privilege never to be missed.
(b) Repetition of some short prayer, hymn, or text by heart.
(c) Easy conversation lessons about some of the Scripture prints, illustrating incidents in the life of Christ - e.g.. His birth and childhood. His constant labour of doing good, His love of little children, &c.
ii. C0URSE FOR THE SECOND SIX MONTHS OF THE SCHOOL YEAR
1. For the elder children:
(a) The second part of the ''Bible Epochs and Lessons", in addition to very simple lessons on our Lord's parables of the Sower, the Good Samaritan, the Unmerciful Servant, and the Prodigal Son.
(b) The Lord's prayer, with or without one of the school prayers. Some simple hymns and texts should be known by heart, and such explanation given of the meaning as is suitable to the age of the children.
2. For the lowest school section:
(a) Easy conversation lessons, and, if possible, hymns on -
(1) The loving, truthful, and prayerful character that God desires in His children. (Hymn* 76)
(2) The displeasure God has in seeing jealousy, quarrelling, deceit, and forgetfulness of Him.
(3) The book that teaches us about God - the Bible. (Hymn* 170)
(4) God sending Jesus to teach us the way to heaven. (Hymns* 70 and 74.)
(b) Repetition of some short prayer, hymn, or text by heart.
(c) Easy conversation lessons on the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, and the Pharisee and the Publican; pictures to be used in the description.
(d) The life of Joseph should be sketched by simple description of pictures referring to it.
SYLLABUS II
RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION FOR JUNIORS' AND SENIORS' SCHOOLS
THREE YEARS' COURSES FOR SCHOLARS
NOTE. In JUNIORS' SCHOOLS, the portions of the course for the first year and the second year should be studied alternately.
FIRST YEAR - Old Testament - Book of Genesis and the Book of Exodus, chapters I to XII.
New Testament - St. Luke, I to XI.
SECOND YEAR - Old Testament - Book of Exodus, XIII to end; Joshua; Judges; 1 and 2 Samuel; and 1 Kings, I to XII.
New Testament - St. Luke, XII to end; Acts, I to VIII.
THIRD YEAR - Old Testament - 1 and 2 Kings; Daniel; Ezra; Nehemiah, and Esther, &c.
New Testament - Acts, XI to end.
TEXTS TO BE COMMITTED TO MEMORY
I - JUNIORS (Standards I and II) are to be able to repeat each year, with intelligence, 30 verses as follows, viz.:
FIRST YEAR - Psalm XXXIV 11-16; Prov. I 8-10; IV 14; XV I, 3, 9; Matthew V 3-11; VI 24; XI 28; John XV 1, 2; Rom. VIII 28; Phil. II 3; 1 Peter II 17, 18.
SECOND YEAR - Psalm CXXI; Prov. VI 6-11; XII 22-24; XVI 9; XXVII 1; Matt. XVIII 19; John V 39; Eccles. XII 13; Rom. V 8; 1 Cor. XIII 4-8; 1 Thess. IV 11, 12; 1 John III 7, 8.
THIRD YEAR - Psalm XXIII; Prov. III 5, 6; XVII 5; Eccles. IX. 10; Matt. VI 6-8; VII 21; John III 16, 17; Rom. VI 23; Ephes. VI 1-7; 1 Peter II 17; James I 12-15; Rom. XXI 4.
II - SENIORS (Standards III to VI) are to be able to repeat each year, with intelligence, in addition to the Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments, 30 verses as follows, vis.:
FIRST YEAR - Psalm I; Prov. XI 1; XXII 1; Ezekiel XVIII 21-27; Luke X 25-28; John IV 24; VII 17; Phil. II 3; 1 Peter III 8-13; James III 16-17.
SECOND YEAR - Psalm XXXII; Prov. XVI 9; Micah VI. 8; Matthew V 43-46; VII 7-14; Phil. IV 8; 1 Thess. IV 11-12; 2 Peter I 5-7.
THIRD YEAR - Psalm XV; Prov. X 12; XIV 29; Eccles. IX. 10; Lament, III 26-27; Isaiah XLIII 25; Matt. VII 21; XXVI 41; John VI 27; Ephes. VI 1-7; Colos. III 12-13; 1 Thess. V 14; James I 12-15; Rev. XXI 4.
*Huddersfield School Board Hymn Book.