The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-08-22 00:00:00

THE DYNAMITE GUN AND SHELL.

SMALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND
THEIR DISADVANTAGES.

(From the Times.)

There is a remark occurring twice in the recently
issued Education Report for 1884-5 which deserves
to lee disinterred from its present two-fold grave and
brought out into all the prominence possible to be
given to it. At page 13, in the paragraph on the
working of the merit grant in infant schools, a double
set of figures is given, which may be thus briefly
summarised: Of every 100 schools or classes of
infants seven have failed to get any merit grant, 33
were awarded the "fair " or 2s. grant, 48 the "good"
or 4s. grant, and 12 the "excellent" or 6s. grant;
while of every 100 infants in attendance four earned
no merit grant, 23 were classed "fair," 51 "good,"
and 22 "excellent." At the first glance cast upon
these figures as ordinary reader of the report
would observe only that, as GO per cent. of the
schools and 73 per cent. of the scholars are classed
as "good" or "excellent," the result must be
„taken
as eminently satisfactory. But what was the average
size of the schools which earned each of these several
grades of merit? If large schools and small schools
were equally fortunate with respect to this particular
item of grant, the answer would, of course, be found
by dividing the gross average attendance by the
total number of schools or classes, which would give
roughly the number 70. But what says the report?
"The average number for payment' in each school
or class graded as excellent was 124; as good,
76; as fair, 48; and where the grant has been
refused, 38." And then comes in the first insertion
of the remark referred to above: "It thus appears
that as a general rule the larger the infant school the
higher is its merit."
The remark is repeated in the next page, where
the statistics are given relating to the merit mark in
schools for cider scholars. It is first pointed out
that "the average number for payment' in each
(such) school graded as excellent was 140; as good,
112; as fair, 87; and where the grant was refused,
77;" and then is added the significant comment,
"Thi again, shows that the larger the school the
better the quality of the work? Here, then, is a most
important text to ponder over. As a general rule, the
larger the school the higher is the quality of the wcrk
done in it.

A closer inspection of the facts set forth in the
report will show that this is true of other items of
grant besides the merit grant. For example, take the
case of the "fixed grant " for infant scholars. When
the infants are taught by a certificated teacher, or (in
the ease of there being less than GO infants in average
attendance) by a female teacher over 18 years of age,
the "flied grant" is Os. a head; in all other cases it
is 7s. a head. But what is the average size of the
schools or classes to which were awarded respectively
the 9s. grant, the 7s. grant, or nothing? The average
"number for payment in schools which earned the
Os. grant was 158 and in classes 38, while the average
"number for payment" in the classes which earned
the 7s. grant was 20, and where the grant was refused
25. Again the remark twice quoted above would be
pertinent—the smaller the school the lower is the
order of its paying results, and by consequence the
lower is the rate of grant awarded.

Singing, again, follows the same rule. The average
"number for payment" in each of the schools or
classes which were awarded the is. grant was 123;
the sixpenny grant, 55; and no grant at all, 27.
The sewing grant, too, may be easily shown to have
been awardedaccording to the self-same rule, although
in the report the large number of infant boys who
did not take sewing in the schools or classes that
earned the grant has been inadvertently made to swell
the gross total of infants apparently in attendance at
the 612 schools or classes whore the grant was
refused. But by leaving the boys altogether out of
account it is found that the average " number for
payment of girls in the schools or classes where the
sewing grant was allowed was 33, and where refused
16."

In the case of infants, therefore, every item of
grant tells the same tale—success varies in direct
proportion to the average attendance; and, as the
grants are graduated according to the degree of
success attained, the rate of grant earned per head is,
as a rule, greatest in the large schools and least in
the small infant classes. And SO it comes to pass
that, while in a thoroughly satisfactory large infant
school the grant earned will reach 17s. a head, in
most of the smaller infant classes the grant averages
less than 10s. a head, reducing the general average of
earnings per head to less than 14s.
But what is true of infants is shown in the report
now under review to be equally true of older scholars.
It has already been pointed out that in the C£l3o of
the merit grant, " excellent " was awarded in those
schools where on the average the "number for pay-
ment" was 146; " good " for an average of 112;
" fair " for 87; and no grant for 77.
In singing, again, the shilling grant went to schools
where the average "number for payment " was 169,
the sixpenny grant for 87, and no grant for 47. The
grants for needlework showed similar results; the
average " number for payment" in each school
being, for the 2s. grant, 95; the is. grant, 46; and
no grant, 35. In the case of the so-called "class
subjects" the results are even still more instructive.
For the average size of the school in which each child
was examined in two class subjects is represented by
an average attendance of 12.5; where the full grant
was awarded in English, 129; the half grant in
English, 97; where the grant was refused, 65; and
no class subject taken, 49.
It is more difficult to trace the operation of the
same law in respect of the "three It's,' for the report
now being dealt with fails to separate the large from
the small schools in tabulating the results for the ele-
mentary subjects. But that the law holds here as
elsewhere may readily be inferred from the following
facts: (1) The highest percentage (87.8) of passes in
the "three It's" was obtained in London, where the
average size of a department is represented by an
average attendance of 200; the lowest (7809) was
gained in Huntingdonshire, where the average size of
each school is 70; (2)Board schools as a class secured
the highest percentage (85.21), the average size being
141; Church schools stand lowest (8117), but their
average size is 86.
In schools, therefore, for senior scholars, as well as
in infant schools, the several items of grant vary in
amount per head almost in direct proportion to the
size of the schools; accordingly, while large schools
in many cases earned over 21s. a head, and the
average earnings of all such schools exceeded 175.,
many small schools were scarcely able to claim 10s. a
head.