EDUCATION BOARD INQUIRIES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7087, 1 May 1901, Page 3

EDUCATION BOARD INQUIRIES.

INVESTIGATIONS AT DOEIE AND

SEFTON.

TEACHERS AND PARENTS

THE TEACHERS EXONERATED.

At the North Canterbury Board of Education meeting this morning the committees of inquiry appointed to investigate affairs at Doric and Sefton schools made, their reports. , In the case of the Doric School, the Chairman and) Secretary of the Board toad visited the school, and had 'heard the complaints of the Chairman and other members of the Doric School Committee, one or two other persons, and, lastly, of <tthe school teacher, Miss Stewart. Messrs Harrison and Richards, parents in the district, had desired that their children should be permitted to forsake Doric andi attend; the aided school at Awaroa, because of. Miss Stewart's alleged unkind, if not cruel, treatment to two of their children, namely, Thomas Harrison and. Lily Richards, and because, also, of her alleged inability to teach arithmetic. The report stated that the correspondence received by the Board might have led members to think, that the treatment complained' of had been practised throughout Miss Stewart's charge of nearly two years. It appeared at the investigation that the "whippings" Uhat constituted the - so-called ill-treatment 'occurred in September, 1899. The lad's behaviour to Miss Stewart ihad been exceedingly and persistently rude, and such as, if tolerated, must have demoralised the children generally. His parents, now complaining, had then supported the mistress, for Mrs Harrison had written, stating, that the boy was to apologise before the school children for his unmanly rudeness. The girl, Lily Richards, had been strapped for balking, and had then stubbornly refused to proceed with her school' work. The strap was then administered over the shoulders until obedience was secured. As a general rule it was, of course, inadvisable for a teacher to strap girls except upon the hand. Order in a school should be kept under all circumstances, and the committee was of opinion that the teacher was quite justified in her method of dealing with the two ■ -children-,, and, further, that ■ they were justly, and i not too severely, whipped. The evidence showed that Miss Stewart was kindly and considerate, and in every way desirous of bringing on the children committed to her care. The evidence of the chairman of the school committee, and of Messrs Lochhead, Smith, Boyce, and Carruthers, was complimentary to Miss. Stewart, who holds a' D certificate, and it confirmatory of the inspector's report upon the efficiericv of Miss Stewapt as a teacher. In conclusion, the report exonerated Miss Stewart from all blame, and stated that she was in every way ' entitled to retain the confidence, of the Board, and there was no reason for allowing the children/referred to to attend the Awaroa school. The report was adopted by the Board, and it was uesolved that the Board could not entertain Messrs Harrison's and Richards's request to be allowed to send their ohildr ren to the Awaroa school. A vote of thanks was accorded .the Chairman and Secretary for their trouble. In the case of the inquiry at Sefton, the inquiry committee reported that with respect to the charge of undue severity in administering corporal punishment, which formed the most serious complaint, the committee regretted that the boys, whose punishment had been questioned, were not present and some of th« parents had not thonght it necessary to attend. Mr H. Owen Brooks, the chairman of the school committee, and another member of the committee had given evidence to the effect that the legs of the t boy Huqfh Coughey, had been bruised and marked by the strap, but the master-, though admitting having given the boy reasonable DUnishment, denied having, bruised him. There was no confirmatory evidence on either side, and -both the father and the boy being absent, the committee was of opinion that the charge was not sustained. The committee considered the charge of severely punishing the boy Ritchie should not have been made, the parents having laid no complaint against the master. In the remaining case, that of the chairman's own son, it had transpired that the punishment complained of was administered early in 1900, and that the minutes of the committee contained -•no reference to the matter.' In reference to the alleged discourtesy on the part of the master in not accompanying the children to the Exhibition, a>« no material facts further than those previously known had been disclosed, the committee thought it unnecessary to make any recommen-dations except that the Boord should express the hope that even at some little personal. inconvenience, the tea-chors would bo ever ready to advance the interests of the children. With recratrd to the complnint. that the master did not accompany Mr Pain's son home at the time he hnd broken, hw arm, the com-, mifcbee tihoncht the explanation of Mr Thomson that he had no idea the 'injury was anytfhincr more than a. sprain-. su'RcientIv satisfjiotorv to oxen prate Mm from all charge of nesrjicrence. With respect to the master's omission- to send the committee his monthly rmort. it. appeared that Mr Thomson's usual practice was to leave the report on the school table. The committee 1 had ma-dc n<* o-biecHoTv fr> this practice, but ns the previous ■report lwd b°eTK£Pj>t in to tl:p chairman it tonk it as neErlocb on Mr Thornton V part that he did not- co^t timie. to adopt- a. similar course. Although but the outcome o! the .master's laudablennxietv to nay liis respects to the memory of a. hicfhly-ePtPfaTed old colonist, the committee thought- Mr Thomson erred in rot- obta-inincr -his? commit t-c's sanction to what (really amounted to a. change of school hours nn the- occasion of the late. Mr" F.nsor's fimera 1 . Though feeling that the exorcise of a. little more commotisense on Mr Thomson's part- wr-nlrl. T»rrhnps. have prevented the misunderstandings, the committee rpsrretted that the school committee should have considered- it necessary to recommend his removal, as but f/5r the absence of sympathy between tbe school comm'ttee and the mnster.no complaints would have been made. The committee hoped the little differences' would be foreotton, and that master ;and committe? would loyally co-opeTate with the Board in the endeavour to further the interests of the children, which would tinquestionably suffer unless all parties were determined to work amicably in future.

This report was also adopted . una<ni-