Forum 2.3
| 1. The other side in 1950? | |
|
|
I found this article interesting, not necessarily the content, but for other considerations: Were these interviews on an individual basis, or were the parents all invited to attend this particular meeting of the Governors? Reading other reports it is clear that this was a pet 'beef' of Mr. Hamilton - children wishing to leave early. We as pupils, never realised it was a problem. To go to such lengths as to call parents to interview, in public, so to speak, seems a strong measure. I'm also surprised that these parents attended. I can understand them being interviewed by R.W.H. in private, in his office. I also never realised the Governors were in a position to prevent children leaving school at 15. Geoff Govier |
| After interviewing the parents of seven pupils, Governors of Hemsworth Grammar School on Friday refused their applications for the children to leave school at the age of 15. The chairman of the Governors told the parents that they ought to think of their children's after-school life. Education gave them a better opportunity of facing the world. The better their education the more good they could do for the nation. A father told the Governors that his lad was determined to leave school when he was 15. "He is absolutely fed up with school", he said, "and has lost all interest in it since he went to Leeds Infirmary for an operation on his eyes." Asked what plans he had for the boy when he left school, the father said he had no idea what work the lad would take up, but he wanted to join the R.A.F. The Divisional Education Officer remarked that the best thing he could do before joining the R.A.F. was to take his School Certificate. A mother said her daughter was "fed up" with school and wanted to leave. "I have had four children at the Grammar School," she added, "and they are doing now what a girl could do who had been to an ordinary school. My daughter wants to leave to take up work as a nursery help." The Education Officer pointed out that there would not be any chance of a girl getting a nursery assistant's job for the next seven months. "We have far more than we ought to have, and they are going to be reduced." he added. The Chairman asked the mother to give the matter serious consideration, but the parent said she had done so. "To keep four children at the Grammar School has not been a picnic." she declared. As a parent of six children she said she could not afford to keep her daughter at school, while another mother remarked: "I have been working three or four years and am going to pack it up. My girl can start work." Asked what sort of job she would get, the mother replied: "There are factories. It isn't my idea that she should leave but money is tight." Another mother told the Governors that she wanted her daughter to help her at home. The girl was not taking any interest in the school. The Education Officer said he could quote hundreds of examples where parents had made sacrifices to keep their children at school. Every parent had a moral obligation to keep their children at school until they were 16. A father said that because of his health he could not afford to keep his son at the school. Another Governor asked if that were not a case where some assistance could be given, and the chairman replied that it all depended upon the family's income. The Governor said "If you could get a suitable grant would you try to keep the boy at school?" The father: "No, I have got a good job for him in a colliery office." A father said that his daughter wanted to leave at the end of the Easter term. She had lost a lot of interest in the school and wanted to help with the household expenses. The girl had been absent several times owing to illness and was afraid that because of that she would not be able to sit for her School Certificate. She wanted to work in a shop. The father added that he had told her he wished he had had the same chance when he was her age. The Chairman of the Governors said the parents were responsible for the children until they were 21. If the children were going to tell their parents what they were going to do when they were 15, it would be a bad outlook for the nation. Another Governor said they should not allow the parents to leave without impressing upon them the fact that the Governors took a serious view of the matter. "If you have a promising child in your family, it isn't sufficient for you to say that it should go and earn money," he added. "These brilliant brains will be lost if you let the child have its own way. A child should be of some use to the community. It would be a tragedy if these children were to leave at present, and I appeal to you to allow them to have this chance in life. The Governors have no right to let the children go and the parents have even less right to say that they shall go." The parents left the meeting after having been asked by the Chairman to think seriously before taking action, and later in the evening when the discussion was resumed, a Governor remarked: "Isn't it a case of the children bringing up the parents." Another Governor suggested that before children were admitted to the School, parents should be asked to agree that they would take the School Certificate. The Chairman of the Governors agreed that they ought to have some undertaking. If parents intended that their children should leave when they were 15, they should go to a Modern School. Mr. R. W. Hamilton, Headmaster, said he had already been notified of 11 children who wanted to leave when they were 15 and there were more to come. A large number of children didn't like school when they reached the age of 15. "They see their pals from the Modern Schools getting jobs and know that they get pocket money," he said. "They wouldn't mind coming to school from 9.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. if they had nothing more to do and could go to a dance or the pictures or listen to the radio." | |