§ MR. BARTLEYI beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education whether his attention has been drawn to the case of the Waltham St. Lawrence, Sherlock Street, School, by which a deduction of £6 8s. 4d., or of one-ninth of the total grant to the school, has been made because one of the teachers was only provisionally recognised under Article 68 of the Code; whether he is aware that the Inspector, in his Report on the infant class taught by this teacher, stated that the reading is pretty good, arithmetic good on the whole, and recitation nicely said; and whether, under these circumstances, he will re-consider the withdrawal of the grant to a small agricultural village school?
§ MR. ACLANDThe teacher in question was not recognised at all under Article 68, as Her Majesty's Inspector was unable to approve her. A deduction was accordingly made from the grant for insufficiency of staff, according to the universal practice of the Department, under Article 108 of the Code. Her Majesty's Inspector also stated in his Report that the object lessons were very poorly given, and the other occupations of the infants so treated as to have little educational value.
§ MR. BARTLEYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the same teacher was successful in another place, and received the Inspector's approval? Does he know that this is a very small place: that by accident the additional teacher was not returned, and that a heavy loss falls upon the school, which seems to be very hard upon it?
§ MR. ACLANDI did not know that the teacher had been employed and approved elsewhere. I did know an additional teacher was missed out. If any facts are laid before me I will consider them.