[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]



And also what part of speech "downwards” is, in the following sentence : :-"From the conquest downwards.” I am, &c.,

XON. [In parsing such expressions the choice lies between taking the words separately; or together as phrases. If the former mode be adopted, we must supply the ellipsis. “General” is originally an adjective qualifying " understood. general,” on the other hand, is an adrerb phrase. The same remark applies to the phrase in common.” In example (3) as regards is a loose and doubtful expression for as it regards," where the verb properly agrees with its object " it." But as before, there would be no great impropriety in considering as regards a preposition phrase, equivalent to“ regarding, “ concerning.”

- Hence” is an aŭverb, equivalent to "from this time,'' and the word "from" in "from hence" is redundant, but where it occurs, the words may be taken together as before, adverbially. In the last example, "downwards is an adverb, qualifying a participle or verb understood. From the conquest downwards (traced,) the same results are seen.”—ED.]

British Schools, N. A., Nov. 22nd, 1858. SIR, -If you can spare room in your December number, will you kindly insert the following queries for the expression of the opinions of my fellow-teachers, or your direct replies would be esteemed a farour, as time would be gained, and waiting for the January number would probably cause the delay of what ought to have been done ere this—the preparation of plans.

I am recently come to these schools, and find them in the most wretched condition, and the children's attainments very low. It is intended to refit the room, and I would ask :

1. What is the best kind of fittings for a room 40ft. by 20ft. ? There is one pupil teacher, and I hope to raise the attendance to claim another. There are * four classes, and the stages of mental development require this quadripartite division to be maintained for all the ordinary subjects of school instruction, and to unite any two of them would only debar some pupils to advance others. To my mind the tripartite system of fittings is not best adapted where the attendance ranges about 80 or 100, to secure the greatest progress of all the children,

From Mr. Alderson's report for the last year, pages 582-3, it appears that his views, if I rightly understand them, are not favourable to the tripartite arrangement, and that smaller groups ranged parellel with the side walls of the building"? are more compatible with good discipline, and, I think, with gradational and individual progression.

2. Have any of my fellow-teachers ever felt the disadvantages arising from the inadequate teaching power they have as contrasted with that at the command of teachers who may be fortunate enough to have from 200 to 300 scholars ?

In this latter case it is evident that the staff of responsible assistants is sufficient to allow the school to be broken up into six or more parts, each presenting a uniformity of attainment it is impossible to keep up, eren if ever obtained, in the former. The facility with which the one is taught and the expenditure of energy requisite, are both in favour of the larger school. Any teacher who has had much experience knows it is far more difficult to keep the minds of from 70 to 80 children, or half the number (varying in age and mental status as they invariably do in any country school) all employed for any length of time, than to teach the same or even a greater number of about one uniform grade.

3. Do not the gradations always met with in ordinary country schools necessitate sectionizing at least into four? If so, ought there not to be a greater number of pupil teachers allowed to such schools than 1 to 40 scholars ?

4. As a consequence of this necessitated division, would not a different style of fittings be better adapted for sueh schools than the tripartite ? I am, Sir, yours very respectfully,


• They are united for moral and religious training ; but I feel that some sectional arrangement would be preferable, if I had means at band, and teachers often hesitate (wisely I think) to allow crude, inexperienced Pupil Teachers to take this most important part.

H. E says:

Sir, When I submitted my questions to A. E. I certainly had no intention of being abrupt, much less of appearing as one “who will not see that Drawing can be of the least service to the industrious classes.” If I am wrong he ought to rejoice at the opportunity of proving it, and further, I could not forbear a suspicion (which is not yet wholly removed) that those elaborite and liberally distributed specimens owe more to an Art Master than a Schoolmaster, as I am informed that a gentleman whose name bears the initial H. E. is connected with the department. But to the question.

H, E at once concedes the danger of attempting too much. This saves me much trouble. But why does he compare Drawing with Botany, Physical Science, Mechanics, etc., instead of good reading made better-expertness in arithmetic made more practical, and indifferent writing, such that it shall be no barrier to a boy's securing a good situation, etc., but for the mere purpose of preferring it.

“Most people know from experience how lamentably deficient working men are in comprehendidg a drawing Of course they do. Substitute read. ing, writing, casting accounts, or even epistolatory correspondence for comprehending a drawing, and what becomes of the argument. Often have I met with painters who could not measure their own work; masons and carpenters who could not find the contents of a block of marble or a piece of timber, etc. Drawing would no doubt be useful to such men, but would it be the most useful?

Most people know also (and teachers especially) how often boys lose situations and are doomed to be hewers of wood and drawers of water all their lives, because they are deficient in the elementary branches of instruction. But who ever heard of boys losing situations because they could not draw? Here I would direct attention to Mr. Brookfield's (H. M. I.) lecture on reading. Its creating

a taste for the beautiful," and the marvels it is to perform for masons, carpenters, etc., is very taking as a thcory, but the fact is we want something more practical. What with the theory of physiology, social and political economy, common things, etc., we find, like the ass in the fable, in trying to please everybody we please nobody, and risk losing our reputation as teachers in the bargain. But the hue and cry is now for drawing, which of course according to the law of progress will have to surrender to the next crotchet of some one who is thirsting for a niche in the educational temple of fame.

Let not H, E. misunderstand me. My objection lies in its creating a false standard of measurement. Many of our best teachers are placed in the lowest rounds of the ladder of merit, because they don't teach enough of the favourite subject of the person who constitutes himself a judge without "sneering" at first principles. I still assert that boys are not with us long enough to profit by it. It supposes the foundation at school and the superstructure afterwards. Has not this always ended in disappointment? Right lines, curved lines, and spiral lines are no doubt all right in a school of art, but I am looking at it through the medium of our elementary schools. An occasional one may profit by a rigid adherence to it I grant, but the mass get a distaste for it before they get through the first stage. H. E. thinks bythis

am sneering at first principles in arithmetic, &c. Happily my jury is counted by thousands, of which H. E. is but a solitary unit. The truth is I want the time for the principles of arithmetic, etc.

Please to read my question 6 and 7, and then read the following reply

The latter two queries (6 and 7) are already partially answered. (Where.) Because he who teaches drawing has no more work than his neighbour, and can meet the Inspector with as high a standard (some would say higher in the special subject of writing) and as good order and discipline. To his interest we may balance £8, whilst he neither introduces nor skims more subjects than his fellow schoolmasters, and can teach as thorougnly in the bargain.”

H. £. unfortunately proves too much. Can anything be clearer than that he who teaches drawing has not so much work (in other subjects) as his neighbour by just the amount devoted to drawing. Then how can he meet the Inspector with as high a standard ? The standard will be shorter by just the amount devoted to drawing. Yet H. E. says he neither introduces nor ekims more subjects than his fellow schoolmasters. Then the £8 a-year is poor compensation to those who don't get it,

ani those who do have little to boast, as their drawing is not taken in lieu of the possible short comings of other subjects.

The rem ırk abo'it writing I understand to refer to something said in the catalogue of the department, viz., that boys who dra iv learn more in three writing lessons than bors who don't draw learn in five ; but who I would ask believes this? That drawing does aid writing there can be no doubt, but I cannot believe teachers of experience will endorse this. Often have I felt surprised that this absurdity should remain so long unchallenged.

In question 2 I ask “ If we are to purchase time by giving up reading, writing, etc., will he say which " Why invent an extra subj·ct to meet it. Let us have an answer. Surely the majority of schools have not an hour and half more than they know what to do with. I now view it in relation to the teacher, and I reiterate that whatever advantage it may be to boys, it is not only no advantage but a positive disadvantage to him, inasmuch as their other work is measured by as high a standard as his neighbours, who teaches no drawing at all. The truth is the Privy Council don't recognize drawing as an absolutely necessary part of our work. If any one doubts this, let him teach drawing at the expense of other subjects, (and he must if he teaches at all.) He will very soon discover which has the more influence. the Department or Privy Council. În a word we have nothing to gain, and we risk our reputation as teachers in getting it

Then as regards our apprentices. Why don't they in towns where Schools of Art exist avail themselves of art teaching? The same answer will satisfy again. The master cannot afford the time, and the lads cannot make it. It arises from no disinclination on the part of either. The work of each is the same as thugh no time was given to drawing at all. Now it is not very pleasant to have your secretary reading a letter once a year from Downing-street, reminding you that Brown must work up in his cyphering, Jones is cautioned he must improve his writing, while Robinson gets a threat that his name is in danger of erasure for general inefficiency. Masters feel this. Happily I have not suffered in this respect, but I cannot but feel I am tempting it.

I have no doubt those who only hear about “ Art teaching" are sometimes lost in lofty imaginings as to what it really is. Well, subtracting all the redundant adjuncts it is this. A youth comes into your school one hour weekly to take the place of yourself. Be it understood the art master never comes to teach when he has pupil teachers. unless the teacher objects, which is sometimes the case.

That portion of his letter which is not to the purpose —its interference with the order-how far 100 can be taught in one class profitably, and how such marvels are to be performed upon two lessons of three quarters of an hour each week, I am quite content to leave to the judgment and experience of those who can think for themselves.

I cannot conclude without thanking H. E. for his reply. He has not convinced me that drawing is worth other subjects. It is not likely I shall convince hi.n. Your readers can judge for_themselves. I am, Şir, yours obediently,



JULY, 1838.

By the Lords of the Committee on Education of Her Majesty's Most Honourable

Privy Council. Their Lordships bad under consideration1. The state of schools in small rural parishes. 2. The conditions of age, attainments, and stipend attached to the several

years of a pupil teacher's apprenticeship. 3. The position oocupied by teachers between the end of their period of

training and the time of their becoming certificated. 4 The means of providing further, by means of night schools, for the con

tinuince of instruction beyond the age at wbich labour must be commenc.d.

Their Lordships resolved 1. 'To cancel so much of the Minute dated 29 April, 1854, as excludes mixed

schools under mistresses, in paris'ies where the population exceeds 600,

from receiving capitation grants. 2. To cancel the minute of 23 July, 1852, in regard to all pupil teachers who

may be apprenticed after 31 December 1859. 3. To allow candidates who are not less than sixteen years old to enter upon

the office of pupil teacher with the standing of the fourth year of apprenticeship, provided that they can pass the examination for the end of the third year. Such candidates will be apprenticed as pupil teachers for two years, and will be paid at the rate of £17 10s. for the first, and £20 for the second; but in their case the particular kind of probationary service, which is mentioned in the next clause, and which is optional to other can

didates, will be compulsory, before they can become certificated teachers. 4. To grant a stipend of £25 per annum to male, and £20 to female teachers,

during the probationary period (Minute, 20 August 1853, § xi.) of two years following the date at which they have passed the examination now required for a certificate, including The Schedule, on condition that such period be passed either

(a) as principal teacher in a rural school not containing more than

1,200 square feet of superficial area in its schoolrooms and class. rooms, or which can be certified as not needing, nor likely, to be

attended by more than 100 scholars. (5) as second teacher under a certificated, or registered, head teacher

in a school with an annual average attendance not less than

seventy-five. The certificates of probationers who have passed the College examination wiil

be fixed in this, as in other cases, after two years service; whereupon they will cease to be entitled to any ailowances except thvee now made 10

certificated teachers, and upon the same conditions. Scheduled students may serve as teachers pursuant to this clause for three years;

but, at the end of ihat period, they will cease to be entitled to any public payments whatever, unless they have previonsly passed the examination for a certificate ; for which purpose they will not be required to return into residence at college, but may attend the first year's examination from their own schools. In the meantime, they will 20ť be admissible to take charge of apprentices. Their certificates, when fised, will carry the same con

ditions as in other cases. 5 To leave all pecuniary conditions, beyond the public grants of £25 or £20,

to be setuled in these cases between the teachers and the managers according

to agreement. 6. To modify the ordinary rate of apprentices admissible at the public expense,

viz, one for every forty scholars, so far as to reckon a second teacher under section 4, as sufficient (with the head teacher) for seventy-five scholars, after which number, the allowance of apprentices (in addition to a second teacher) will be one for the next twenty-five scholars, and one for every forty

beyond. No adưitional teacher under section 4,(6.) will be admitted after the first,

except in consideration of seventy-five additional scholars for whom no

pupil teachers are provided at the public expense. Night scholars may be reckoned with day scholars in making up seventy-five. The numbers are to be reckoned on the average attendance of the year pre.

ceding the date fixed for inspection, except in the case of newly established schools, and then on ihe present average attendance,

(To be continued.)

« ForrigeFortsett »