<< Return to page 3	Custom Search

In August, 1886, Miss Esther Collings resigned as Mistress and the school's first Master, Mr Alexander Bradley – Certificated Teacher – took her place. The staff now comprised Mr Bradley, Master; his sister Miss C. Bradley – Certificated Mistress, and Miss L. Cann, Certificated Assistant. In addition Miss Kate Eley, pupil-teacher in her third year served at the school.

The need for the training of teachers had been recognised very early in the 18th century, but it was not until the beginning of the 19th that there was any definite move to provide such training. A teacher training institution was opened at Borough Rd. School, London, by its founder, Joseph Lancaster, in 1805, where students were trained in his system of teaching. By 1812 Dr Andrew Bell had opened a training establishment at Baldwins Gardens, London, for the same purpose but for the National Society. There was a steady attempt to improve the intellectual attainments of the students in the years following. Good contributions in this respect came from David Stowe's Academy in Scotland, 1838; instructors from English Training Colleges attended the Scottish Academy and many Scottish teachers came south to act as organising masters and college tutors. The Home and Colonial Society, which was founded in 1836, broke away from the monitorial system prevailing in both Joseph Lancaster's and Dr Andrew Bell's Schools and attempted to put the teaching of infants on a better footing. Teachers of both sexes and married couples were trained by this Society for periods of not less than twelve weeks. The entrants to training college were young adults, the best being those who had been Sunday School teachers. The chief attribute for admission to these early training colleges was the strength of the candidates' religious beliefs. There was utmost difficulty in finding sufficient candidates for training at one time, which led to the introduction of a system of pupil-teacher training. In every school receiving state aid, one or more of the brightest scholars may be apprenticed to the headteacher for five years, from the age of thirteen. These had to be examined annually and at the end of the five years sat for the Queen's Scholar-ship Examination, which if passed successfully, enabled them to enter a Teacher Training College for three years. Meanwhile the two religious societies, the British and Foreign School Society and the National Society, were building training establishments with their government grants received for this purpose. Although the first of the pupil-teachers were expected to enter training colleges for three years, most were prepared to give one year of their time, so in order to fill the places available the Queen's Scholar-ship Examination was made open to anyone over the age of eighteen years whether they had been apprenticed to a headmaster or not. Various monetary inducements were offered to make teaching attractive and by the time Tiptree Heath Church school was opened the training college system was working fully and often there were more candidates than places. The superiority of the trained over the untrained teacher was admitted by H.M.I.s in their reports of the period, which bear testimony to the work of the pupil-teacher system and the training colleges. In order to prevent unscrupulous managers using the pupil-teacher system as a means of supplying cheap labour to their schools, the staffing ratio of pupil-teachers to children was based on one pupil-teacher to forty children with a maximum of four to any one headteacher. Various other changes were made to improve the standard of entrants to the system, the age of entry was raised from 13 years to 14 years; pupil-teacher training centres were opened in1881 and from 1884 pupil-teachers were not expected to teach more than half-time, so that they may attend the centres for instruction. The increasing number of candidates for training college places enabled the College authorities to be more critical and demanding, hence raising standards among the applicants. The curricula of the colleges too, were widened considerably and included Science, Art, Languages and Political Science.

It had been laid down in the Code of 1862 that to receive grant aid a school must be in the charge of a Certificated teacher and the Church School of Tiptree Heath had been compelled to employ such a teacher from 1872, when it was decided to apply for and accept State aid to enlarge the school at that time. The school had come a long way by 1886 as it now had three members of its teaching staff properly trained and certificated.

There were now 131 boys and girls and 72 infants on roll, so on 24th January, 1887, the school was divided into two distinct sections. The boys over six were in the charge of the Master, while the girls and the infants came under the care of Miss Bradley. Separate log books were kept in the two departments, but it is clear that very close co-operation existed between the two head-teachers. Mr Bradley was assisted by two monitors, Miss Bradley had the Assistant Teacher and the pupil teacher to help her.

It may be helpful to set out a brief outline of the legislation relating to school attendance at this point. The Education Act of 1870 brought in compulsory attendance at school for all children between five and twelve years of age; although there had been indirect compulsion in certain cases from as early as 1833. The Factory Act, 1833, laid down that no child was to be employed between the ages of eight years-thirteen years, unless there was part attendance at school; the Mines Act, 1860, insisted that children of 10-11 years could only be employed if they possessed a certificate of proficiency in reading, writing and arithmetic. This method was incorporated into the Factory Act, 1874. The Act of 1873 made it obligatory for parents who were receiving Poor Law Relief to send their children to school. Lord Sandon, in 1876, introduced a bill to improve school attendance. This Act declared it was the duty of every parent to see that his child received adequate instruction in and became efficient in the skills of reading, writing and arithmetic. Penalties were provided for those that failed in this duty. Further no child under the age of ten years, nor any child between the age of ten years and fourteen years, unless he had a certificate from Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools to show that he had passed Standard IV in reading, writing and arithmetic, or having made 250 attendances for each of five years, was to be given employment. These certificates were called “Labour Certificates”, while the attendance certificates were called “The Dunce's Certificate”. The Act of 1880 stated that no child under thirteen was to be absent from school, even half time, without a certificate from the H.M.I.. The “Dunce's Certificate” was restricted to children over thirteen, who were compelled to attend school half time for a further year. Thus by 1886 children were expected to be in school full time up to the age of 10 years' could be absent from school after that age only with a certificate of proficiency in the three “Rs” between 10 years and thirteen years; and had to attend school half time for one year if excused full time education after the age of thirteen on the “Dunce's Certificate”. From the log book it can be seen that there had been classes called Standard IV, nine to ten years; Standard V, ten to eleven years; Standard VI, eleven to twelve years of age.

The syllabus was approved annually by the H.M.I. And detail of the work covered in Poetry and Geography was entered in the log. Evidently the Inspector thought that the children's ability was lower than normal, or was adversely affected by poor attendance, as he states in 1886 that Standards IV, V and VI should do the Geography laid down for Standard IV; the older boys were to do map drawing in addition.

Despite the devices used to encourage better attendance, the problem was still a source of frustration and irritation to the staff. Mr Bradley, the Master, writes bitterly and to some length in the log of the waste of time and effort the irregular attendance caused. In addition to the usual pattern of excuses offered for absence, he records the following which reflect the conditions prevailing at that time:- (a) unable to pay school pence. (b) no boots. (c) bad eye-sight.

The children who could not pay the school pence created a special problem, one can imagine the difficulty the Master must have had to solve this. He did for a time allow these poor children to come to school without payment, but very soon the number of children without school pence became so great that he was forced to send home all those who failed to produced the correct amount. In order to encourage better attendance, each child was offered the refund of one penny per week for each week fully attended.

In 1888 (May), there is the first and only record of a parent being prosecuted for failing to send children to school; the magistrate adjourned the case for a month while the matter was being investigated., and the Essex Standard of that year records the subsequent hearing when the parents were fined five shillings. Evidently the Master was dissatisfied with the efforts made by the authorities to solve the problem of absence from school, because he expresses himself forcibly in the log on August 9th 1889 by writing that no less than 105 children had been reported to the attendance officer and nothing had been done. “There are at least forty children of seven and eight years who have never attended school....some of these children are brought to school for the first time at that age, with consequent loss of time and effort as they have to be accommodated in the same classroom as children of five and so creating innumerable difficulties.”

It is during these years that parents are first reported as attending the school to hear the children sing and recite and to watch the prize giving after the annual inspection.

The reports of H.M.I.s during Mr Bradley's term of office, speak highly of the standards attained. The school is “Good”, which when it is remembered the schools of that day were rated on a scale of “Excellent” “Good” “Fair” or “Bad” and that 80% of the schools of the country were usually rated “Fair”, this was no mean achievement.

In April, 1891, the Bradleys left the school, their place being taken by Mr and Mrs George H. Gillies, who re-arranged the school so that the boys and girls over six were mixed in the charge of Mr Gillies and the infants in the charge of Mrs Gillies. The mixed department, boys and girls, had a staff comprising the Master, an Assistant Mistress, who had formerly been a Pupil-teacher in the school and three pupil teachers.

The school was to pass through a very difficult time, with frequent changes of staff. Mr Gillies left after only two months in office, leaving the work of the mixed school in the hands of the Assistant Mistress. Mrs Gillies, who remained in charge of the Infant department only till the end of the term in which her husband departed, was replaced by Mr James Neville. He transferred the Assistant Mistress to the Infants while he took charge of the mixed school. The Inspector's report for this period showed that the children's attainments had fallen below a satisfactory standard in the mixed department, but the work in the infant room was shown to be making “good progress, but the seats in the gallery should have backs on them.” When it is remembered that this gallery was installed in 1872, without backs, it has taken twenty years for someone to realise this significant point. Because of the lowered standard, the Managers asked for the advice of the Diocesan Organising Master who visited the school and made a report. Mr Neville resigned his post in October 1892, his place being taken by Mr William E. George, Certificated Master.

Mr George was so disturbed by the children's low attainments that he recorded the results of his test in the school log. Unfortunately he did not also include the details of the test he gave – these would have been of great interest today. He found for example, that Standard I obtained only 21 sums right out of 84; whereas Standard II had only 31 right out of 140. These are significant indications of the importance of sums and the quantity quite young children were expected to be able to do. Within a few weeks of taking over the school the new Master introduced the boys to Military Drill, which he thought would have a good effect upon the general discipline of the school. In January 1893, Mrs George, Certificated Mistress, took charge of the Infant school from the Assistant Mistress and also became responsible for the older girls' needlework. To show how far below the George standard the girls' needlework had fallen, Mr George writes, “There have been only 26 garments attempted while there are 85 girls in the school.”

Under the care of the Georges, the school again became efficient according to H.M.I. Reports. But the bogey of poor attendance still persisted and many children of mature age were coming into school for the first time, creating problems for the staff. On wet days attendance was at its lowest. During the summer months the children stayed away from school to work in the fields, but a wet summer day would improve attendance as field work became impossible. This is illustrated by the entry in the log regarding a child who had come back to school after a long absence because it was too wet to work in the fields.