§ 64. Mr. W. THORNEasked the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that the London County Council are about to appoint 100 unqualified women teachers to teach children in compulsory schools, and who are to be designated infants' assistants; that the commencing salary to be paid is:£110 per annum rising by annual increments of £7 10s. to a maximum of £155 per annum; and, in view of the insufficiency of this salary for such teachers, will he take action in the matter?
§ Mr. FISHERThe answer to the first and second parts of the question are in the affirmative. The proposals of the London County Council, which affect children under five years of age only, will 1263 receive my very careful attention. I cannot accept the hon. Member's suggestion that the proposed salary is insufficient; indeed, the commencing salary exceeds that which the Board would be prepared to recognise this year in the ease of a newly-appointed uncertificated teacher, on Scale IV of the Burnham Committee.
§ Mr. THORNEDoes the right hon. Gentleman think that when these unqualified teachers have reached the maximum of £155 per annum, which is about £3 per week, they can clothe and feed themselves decently on that amount?
§ Viscountess ASTORDoes the right hon. Gentleman really think that it is wise to have unqualified women to teach the children?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEEIs it not a fact that £155 a year is a great deal more than other teachers dealing with children under five years of age get outside the London County Council?
§ Mr. FISHERThe answer to the second question is in the affirmative. With regard to the first question, other things being equal, a trained teacher is better than an untrained teacher. I understand that the London County Council propose to put these women through a short course of training. The experience of the infant classes during the War leads one to suppose that suitable women of the required temperament, after a short training, can deal very satisfactorily with infant classes.