Creating Childhoods: Ideas of Child and School in London 1870 – 1914 Imogen Claire Lee Goldsmiths College, University of London PhD History 1 DECLARATION I declare that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Imogen Lee November 2015 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis was possible because of the AHRC’s doctorial award and the Scouloudi Foundation’s IHR Junior Research Fellowship. Their funding provided the space to research and the time to think. The staff at the London Metropolitan Archives (LMA) and Southwark Local History Library have all helped me as I uncovered and deciphered my sources. To Sally Alexander, my patient and provoking supervisor, I owe my academic life. She taught me that to be a historian I have to be a writer first. Her feminism has shown me how to believe in my ideas and myself. Her painstaking skill as an editor allows a subject to breath. Because of her I want to listen to History rather than merely judge it. When this research was in its infancy Howard Caygill’s insightful passion for Cultural and Medical History honed my interests. And when lost in a thicket of redrafts and administration Vivienne Richmond helped cut me out. Ellen Ross gave me the confidence to tackle the LMA with a focused but open mind. Anna Davin has always been impossibly generous with her knowledge and enthusiasm, every conversation with her has inspired. At Goldsmiths the creativity of the Postgraduate History Workshops was essential. Beyond that forum conversations with Chris Bischof were an insightful delight, filled with discovery and generosity. Because of him Crichton-Browne’s Report took half as long to find and was made twice as interesting. Similarly Kate Bradley, Daniel Grey and Mike Mantin have always been on virtual-hand with their encyclopaedic knowledge of historiography, kind words and essential advice. Academia is a richer place because of the passion and commitment of Tom Ardill, Kate Murphy, Sara Peres, Chris Roberts, Emily Robinson and Chris Wheeldon. Their companionship throughout this process has teased thoughts into yarns, weaving them into chapters. The unwavering friendships of Rob Priest and Becky Gilmore have been essential to my development as a historian. Rob’s sharp observations and readiness to read an erratic stream of drafts and applications over the past decade showed me how to make a life in writing a practical ambition. Becky’s holistic and generous approach to teaching 3 London History shaped my own. Moreover sharing the triumphs and tragedies of writing, life and Buffy the Vampire Slayer with her, showed me when to stop and when to keep going. The expertise of my life-long friends, Rosa Wright, Emma Driscoll and Alex Jackson gave me insight into modern pedagogy, care and disability practices. More importantly they have been there for me when I have not. To all my friends you have made becoming a woman a little more adventurous and a lot less lonely. The thesis could not exist without my family. The stories of my Gran and Nan and their enquiring minds shaped my historical imagination. My Mum’s quiet determination, her teaching experiences and love of London fostered my sensibility as a historian. My Brother’s achievements inspired me to carve my own. The genuine interest he has shown in my work, despite being one of life’s natural cynics, has given me the confidence to take myself seriously when I least expected it. My Dad introduced me to Orange Street School in the form of Jerwood Space. His thirst for knowledge has driven my own, while his ear for dialogue has shown me the theatre in the everyday. They and my extended family - Sandra, Steven and Kate, who have shown me so much love when I needed it most - all believed in me when I could not. It is, however, my husband Jake who I must thank above all. He demonstrated the importance of this history before I found the words. His work in disability and the conversations he encourages inspire me to research, to question, to live. He has found me when my mind and body are lost, reflecting my frailties back at me as strengths. His patience focused me. Because of him the dry phrase ‘social model of disability’ was shown to be about life, love and equality. Equal allies. Thank you Jake. 4 ABSTRACT This thesis provides the first comprehensive examination of how children’s abilities were ‘classified’ and managed in London, following the creation of school places under the 1870 Elementary Education Act. It explores how new schools (known as Board Schools), shaped and were shaped by the diverse social, physical and mental capabilities of London’s children. I argue it was only through administering the 1870 Education Act across such a diverse city that a right to schooling was shown to be not enough, children needed a right to learn. Yet learning was not uniform and different authorities could not agree on how and what children needed for successful learning. The idea of the Board School and its students would become increasingly pluralistic. In 1874 the School Board for London (SBL) described it as its ‘duty’ to educate London’s near half a million child-population. In order to realise this duty ideas of school and child were challenged. This thesis examines how these ideas developed from the implementation of the Education Act in 1870 to the Mental Deficiency Act of 1913 prior to the Great War. I unpick how children and their learning began to be classified by teachers, inspectors, doctors and local and national government bodies. In so doing I demonstrate how children’s abilities and disabilities, their origins and impact, could be both challenged and reinforced by the education system. Legislation and reports of Royal Commissions and government departments provide some of the voices and context for this study, but it is only by focusing on individual schools within The Capital that the day-to-day realities of classification emerges. Such focus reveals how and why the identification and treatment of children with perceived physical and mental ‘defects’ is a history which must be seen as part, not set apart, from the development of elementary schooling. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF IMAGES 9 ABREEVIATIONS AND GLOSSARY 13 CHAPTER ONE: THE IDEA OF THE CHILD IN HISTORY 15 THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE CHILD 15 THE CLASSROOM: CONTROL THROUGH CLASSIFICATION? 19 ROMANTICISM 24 THE SCHOOL SYSTEM (1802-1870) 26 THE 1870 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACT 34 THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON 38 DIFFERENT SCHOOLS FOR DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT TYPES 48 MATERIAL CULTURE 53 WOMEN OF THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON 62 CLASSIFYING THE CHILD: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL SCHOOLS 68 THE LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL 77 THESIS STRUCTURE 79 CHAPTER TWO: THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL BOARD SCHOOLS: PRIORITIES AND EXPERIENCES 1871 - 1914 85 THE ELEMENTARY BOARD SCHOOL: THREE TYPES 86 VISUALISING THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (1870-1873) 97 GROUP IDENTITY AND ARCHITECTURAL LIMITS 108 BUILDING A SCHOOL AND SHAPING A NEIGHBOURHOOD: ORANGE STREET 112 RIGHTS AND CHOICES: PARENT-TEACHER RELATIONS (1874-1914) 120 ENGAGING WITH PARENTS, COMPETING WITH SCHOOLS 127 SHARING GRIEF 133 LESSONS IN LOCAL WORK 135 SUMMARY 140 6 CHAPTER THREE: CURRICULUM AND FUNDING: THE EVOLUTION OF SPECIAL DIFFICULTY AND HIGHER GRADE SCHOOLS 1870 - 1914 143 ORANGE STREET SPECIAL DIFFICULTY SCHOOL: THE IMPACT OF FUNDING 158 LANT STREET SCHOOL AND THE LIMITING OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS 170 HIGHER GRADE SCHOOLS AND SPECIFIC SUBJECTS 179 SPECIFIC LANGUAGES FOR SPECIFIC SCHOOLS 185 ENGLISH 189 SUMMARY 201 TABLE 3.1 204 ‘STANDARDS TABLE’ IN LMA: SBL/1500, LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL, REPORT OF SCHOOL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF THE LATE SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON, (1904) P. VIII TABLE 3.2 205 ‘RETURN SHOWING [SIC] THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN ON THE ROLL IN EACH STANDARD AND ACCORDING TO AGES ON THE 25TH 880 6721 MARCH 1888’, PP. 386-425 IN 22.05 SBL: SCHOOL BOARD FOR LONDON SCHOOL, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT (1888) CHAPTER FOUR: OVERPRESSURE AND CLASSIFICATION 206 PARLIAMENTARY IDEAS OF OVERPRESSURE (1882-1884) 216 MEDICAL VS. EDUCATIONAL OPINION 231 OVERPRESSURE AND THE SBL (1885-1886) 241 THE CROSS COMMISSION (1886-1888) 255 EXEMPTIONS AND CLASSIFICATION 264 SUMMARY 268 CHAPTER FIVE: LONDON’S SPECIAL SCHOOLS 1870-1904 273 THE SBL AND THE EGERTON COMMISSION 275 THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT’S COMMITTEE ON DEFECTIVE AND EPILEPTIC CHILDREN 286 DR. FRANCIS WARNER AND CLASSIFICATION OF DEFECTS 288 THE BEGINNINGS OF SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS (1872-1876) 293 BLIND INSTRUCTION (1876-1899) 298 DEAF AND DUMB INSTRUCTION (1874-1899) 303 THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE DEAF AND DUMB CENTRE 314 THE DEVELOPMENT OF CLASSIFICATION 319 THE IMPACT OF CLASSIFICATION 329 SUMMARY 333 7 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION 335 CHAPTER SUMMARIES 336 POWIS STREET SCHOOL: UNIQUE AND UNIVERSAL 341 APPENDIX: APPENDIX MAPS 348 APPENDIX SCHOOL PHOTOS AND DESIGNS 352 BIBLIOGRAPHY 372 8 LIST OF IMAGES Chapter 1 1.1 Anonymous, ‘Instruction in Cookery for mentally defective children at Leo-street day school, Hatcham’, (photograph) in London Metropolitan Archive (LMA): SC/PPS/063/061, School Board for London Annual Report of the Special Schools Sub-Committee (1903), p. 14 352 1.2 ‘A London Street Scene During the Recent Fall of Snow,’ Nineteenth Century British Newspapers Online: The Penny Illustrated Paper, (Saturday, 4 February, 1865), p. 68 352 1.3 LMA: SC/PHL/02/0210, Anonymous, ‘Lyndhurst Grove’, photograph, (1896) 353 1.4 LMA: SC/PHL/02/0210, Anonymous, ‘Lavender Hill School’, photograph, (6.9.1906) 353 1.5 LMA: SC/PHL/02/0214, Anonymous, ‘Sidney Road School, South Hackney E.9 Group VI’, photograph, (1901-1902) 354 1.6 LMA: SC/PHL/02/0210, Cassells and Co., ‘A Board School Cookery Class, (Kilburn Lane School)’, photographic copy, (undated) 354 1.7 LMA: SC/PHL/02/0212/79/2006, J&G Taylor, ‘Orange Street Southwark Infants St.