.
Efforts are under way to preserve the historic Green School on East Main Street in Middleborough. Recently threatened with demolition and situated upon soil contaminated by a leaky oil tank, the 1871 schoolhouse has been structurally stabilized and the contaminated soil removed. Spearheading the effort is the Green School Preservation Group headed by former Selectman Lincoln Andrews.
While the building remains in relatively sound structural condition, one corner required rebuilding at a cost of $3,500 and will need further structural work at an additional cost of $3,500. The work will be funded through donations towards the preservation effort. Further structural work is planned at cost of $6,000. Mr. Andrews plans on making a presentation before the Board of Selectmen on August 10 to provide an update on the progress thus far. No future use has been determined for the school, though suggestions have included a polling place and a museum on Middleborough's educational history.
.
Tax-deductible donations are still needed and are being collected by the Middleborough Rotary Club. To contribute, please mail a check in any amount made payable to: "Middleboro Rotary". Please notate "Green School Preservation" on the memo line in order to direct your contribution to the preservation of the school. Checks may be mailed directly to Lincoln Andrews, 28 Sachem Street, Middleborough, MA, 02346. For more information, please call 508-947-7071 or email Lincoln at lincolnandrews@hotmail.com.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Green School Items Wanted
.
Part of the goal of this website is to collect copies of items related to the Green School in order to create an archive of material related to the school and its history which can be posted on-line for everyone to enjoy. Copies or scans of photographs of the school and the children who attended it, class pictures, report cards, school work, and any other item with a Green School connection is sought. Also, recollections by parents and grandparents who may have attended the school are equally welcome. If you think you have an item or a recollection which you feel is appropriate, please
e-mail me.
Part of the goal of this website is to collect copies of items related to the Green School in order to create an archive of material related to the school and its history which can be posted on-line for everyone to enjoy. Copies or scans of photographs of the school and the children who attended it, class pictures, report cards, school work, and any other item with a Green School connection is sought. Also, recollections by parents and grandparents who may have attended the school are equally welcome. If you think you have an item or a recollection which you feel is appropriate, please
e-mail me.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Flag
.
The Green School, like others, was marked by the American flag which floated from the building. However, a flag may not have been an original feature of the Green School. The Fifth Street School in New Bedford is believed to have been the first school in America to fly the flag daily beginning May 11, 1861, and only gradually thereafter did other schools begin to adopt the practice. In the late 1880s, The Youth's Companion, a national children's magazine published in Boston, inaugurated the schoolhouse flag movement, encouraging all public schools to fly the American flag. Renewed impetus was provided the movement in October, 1892, with the 400th anniversary of the landing of Columbus, an event The Youth's Companion urged schools to recognize by flying a flag. The Green School certainly had a flag by 1894, the year in which all Middleborough schools which lacked one were finally outfitted.
In 1902, the Middleborough School Committee and Superintendent drafted a list of 28 so-called “flag days” for the use of the local schools. “On these days it is expected that the flag will be displayed and lessons appropriate to the occasion given”, with the first half hour of each day designated for these lessons. “A deeper impression, it is believed, will be made upon the pupil and more significance be given to the occasion than if the flag is displayed every day.” Accompanying these exercises was the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1892, and probably introduced into Middleborough Schools shortly afterwards.
Though Massachusetts state law in 1935 required the display of the American flag in all schoolrooms and weekly conduct of the Pledge of Allegiance, Middleborough schools were unaffected as for many years prior they had fulfilled these guidelines and performed the Pledge on a daily basis.
Middleborough School Curriculum, 1885
.
Source: Annual Report of the Officers of Middleborough. 1885. (Middleborough, MA: Town of Middleborough, 1886).
Source: Annual Report of the Officers of Middleborough. 1885. (Middleborough, MA: Town of Middleborough, 1886).Cost of Instruction, Green School 1871-1926
.
The costs for instruction (teacher's salaries), fuel and care of the Green School are listed below. The figures for 1895 and subsequent years are for instruction only. Figures were not published following 1926.
1871-72 $241.45
1872-73 $269.25
1873-74 $250.20
1874-75 $286.71
1875-76 $284.75
1876-77 $301.87
1877 $304.50
1878 $263.62
1879 $261.00
1880 $307.88
1881 $302.68
1882 $284.12
1883 $293.69
1884 $314.99
1885 $229.50
1886 $318.95
1887 $306.22
1888 $314.00
1889 $319.60
1890 $320.30
1891 $318.20
1892 $363.70
1893 $371.30
1894 $343.80
1895 $330.50
1896 $304.08
1897 $312.20
1898 $312.00
1899 $296.00
1900 $356.70
1901 $378.80
1902 $334.00
1903 $334.00
1904 $379.60
1905 $379.60
1906 $380.00
1907 $380.00
1908 $380.00
1909 $380.00
1910 $406.00
1911 $448.00
1912 $486.00
1913 $494.00
1914 $494.00
1915 $570.00
1916 $585.00
1917 $620.00
1918 $650.00
1919 $670.00
1920 not listed
1921 $1,200
1922 $1,200
1923 $1,200
1924 $1,200
1925 not listed
1926 $1,200
During the early years of the Green School’s operation, Middleborough stood very low on the list of Massachusetts towns relative to the amount of money appropriated for each pupil. In 1875, Middleborough, in fact, was 305th on the list, with smaller surrounding communities including Lakeville, Halifax, Carver, Rochester and Plympton spending greater amounts. “There is no excuse for these facts. Our town cannot plead poverty, nor excessive taxation”. Largely, the circumstance was attributable to teacher salaries which in Middleborough were “considerably less” than the state average.
The dramatic increase in the cost of instruction following 1909 was due to concerted efforts at raising local teacher salaries to meet the state average in order to retain and attract qualified candidates.
The costs for instruction (teacher's salaries), fuel and care of the Green School are listed below. The figures for 1895 and subsequent years are for instruction only. Figures were not published following 1926.
1871-72 $241.45
1872-73 $269.25
1873-74 $250.20
1874-75 $286.71
1875-76 $284.75
1876-77 $301.87
1877 $304.50
1878 $263.62
1879 $261.00
1880 $307.88
1881 $302.68
1882 $284.12
1883 $293.69
1884 $314.99
1885 $229.50
1886 $318.95
1887 $306.22
1888 $314.00
1889 $319.60
1890 $320.30
1891 $318.20
1892 $363.70
1893 $371.30
1894 $343.80
1895 $330.50
1896 $304.08
1897 $312.20
1898 $312.00
1899 $296.00
1900 $356.70
1901 $378.80
1902 $334.00
1903 $334.00
1904 $379.60
1905 $379.60
1906 $380.00
1907 $380.00
1908 $380.00
1909 $380.00
1910 $406.00
1911 $448.00
1912 $486.00
1913 $494.00
1914 $494.00
1915 $570.00
1916 $585.00
1917 $620.00
1918 $650.00
1919 $670.00
1920 not listed
1921 $1,200
1922 $1,200
1923 $1,200
1924 $1,200
1925 not listed
1926 $1,200
During the early years of the Green School’s operation, Middleborough stood very low on the list of Massachusetts towns relative to the amount of money appropriated for each pupil. In 1875, Middleborough, in fact, was 305th on the list, with smaller surrounding communities including Lakeville, Halifax, Carver, Rochester and Plympton spending greater amounts. “There is no excuse for these facts. Our town cannot plead poverty, nor excessive taxation”. Largely, the circumstance was attributable to teacher salaries which in Middleborough were “considerably less” than the state average.
The dramatic increase in the cost of instruction following 1909 was due to concerted efforts at raising local teacher salaries to meet the state average in order to retain and attract qualified candidates.
Daily Routine
.
Teachers in Middleborough were required to be present at least fifteen minutes prior to the commencement of school, both morning and afternoon. In the late 1800s, this requirement was shortened to ten minutes. Lessons for the day would have been prepared the previous afternoon or evening. Children arrived either on foot or, if lucky, by means of the farm wagon destined for town if “the trip might coincide with the time the children were to go to school.”
Because like most schools the Green School lacked a bell, the teacher rang a hand bell at the start of the day to call scholars to school. (The bell used at the Green from before 1861 through 1941 is now in the collections of the Middleborough Historical Museum). Students filed into the building using separate entrances. Hooks for coats and shelves for tin lunch pails were likely located immediately inside the entrance. “Clothing, that is outer garments such as coats, mufflers and leggings were hung on hooks outside the classroom door. Rubbers and rainboots or overshoes were placed at each side of your desk and under the metal leg support of the desk”, recalled one later Middleborough resident. Once inside the schoolroom, the children (at least in the early years of the school) were likely to have remained segregated by sex, the boys occupying one side of the schoolhouse and the girls the other.
Children were seated, sharing a double desk at the Green until 1904 when they were replaced with individual desks. Desks had “a slant top in which were kept the school books and any personal belongings [such as a pencil box]. Frequently the desks were made of oak and until the third grade there was a hole in the upper right corner. But when you entered the third grade you ‘grew up’ slightly” for at that stage students were permitted to write with pen and ink on paper and an inkwell filled the hole. (The inkwell could be a dangerous object. Frequently girls who wore their hair in pigtails might find them dipped into an inkwell by the mischievous boy behind her).
Typically, at the start of the day, an older boy would be delegated the responsibility of filling a water pail from either the Church of the Green or a willing neighbor which would be brought inside and left near the sink in the rear of the building. In winter, another would ensure that enough wood had been brought in to fuel the stove throughout the course of the day.
The first order of business was attendance. “The Roll shall be punctually called at the opening of each session, and each absentee shall be recorded at the time …”, stipulated the Middleborough School Committee in 1873.
“The morning services of the school shall commence with reading the Bible, and it is recommended that the reading be followed by some devotional service.” Like most schools of the era, those in Middleborough included a strong religious component, and the sessions were frequently referred to as “services” as in the foregoing quote. Moral instruction remained an important aspect of childhood education and the fact that Bible readings and moral lessons started off the day was an indication of their primacy within the school. Because of the importance of these services, pupils who were tardy were not permitted to enter the building at this time in order to avoid interrupting the “devotions.”
Following this, work by all ability levels commenced simultaneously. While some students read, others might work on copy books, while still others would perform blackboard work.
In order to reduce the chaos which could easily result in a classroom with so many students of varying abilities, teachers were urged to unite students in groups based upon their skill levels in each subject. “By the use of supplementary reading matter, and by the topical method in other subjects, classes representing different grades may be brought together.” Additionally, educators frequently urged alternation between oral and written recitations for students, partly in order to ground students in the fundamentals of each, partly to avoid monotony on the students part, and partly because written recitation work freed the teacher to concentrate on other students.
All students were provided with a 15 minute morning and a 15 minute afternoon recess, while primary pupils received an extra recess each half day. Teachers were barred from withholding recess from students as punishment. Though students might be detained in the classroom during regular recess, they were to be provided with the same length recess apart from the other students.”
Lunch was promptly at noon. Undoubtedly, the teacher ensured that each student had clean hands, and for this purpose soap and a rough washcloth would have been kept by the sink. In winter, lunch pails might be placed upon the heating stove in order to warm lunches.
The afternoon session mirrored that of the morning in regard to class work, lasting until 3.30 or 4 or in the afternoon.
Teachers in Middleborough were required to be present at least fifteen minutes prior to the commencement of school, both morning and afternoon. In the late 1800s, this requirement was shortened to ten minutes. Lessons for the day would have been prepared the previous afternoon or evening. Children arrived either on foot or, if lucky, by means of the farm wagon destined for town if “the trip might coincide with the time the children were to go to school.”
Because like most schools the Green School lacked a bell, the teacher rang a hand bell at the start of the day to call scholars to school. (The bell used at the Green from before 1861 through 1941 is now in the collections of the Middleborough Historical Museum). Students filed into the building using separate entrances. Hooks for coats and shelves for tin lunch pails were likely located immediately inside the entrance. “Clothing, that is outer garments such as coats, mufflers and leggings were hung on hooks outside the classroom door. Rubbers and rainboots or overshoes were placed at each side of your desk and under the metal leg support of the desk”, recalled one later Middleborough resident. Once inside the schoolroom, the children (at least in the early years of the school) were likely to have remained segregated by sex, the boys occupying one side of the schoolhouse and the girls the other.
Children were seated, sharing a double desk at the Green until 1904 when they were replaced with individual desks. Desks had “a slant top in which were kept the school books and any personal belongings [such as a pencil box]. Frequently the desks were made of oak and until the third grade there was a hole in the upper right corner. But when you entered the third grade you ‘grew up’ slightly” for at that stage students were permitted to write with pen and ink on paper and an inkwell filled the hole. (The inkwell could be a dangerous object. Frequently girls who wore their hair in pigtails might find them dipped into an inkwell by the mischievous boy behind her).
Typically, at the start of the day, an older boy would be delegated the responsibility of filling a water pail from either the Church of the Green or a willing neighbor which would be brought inside and left near the sink in the rear of the building. In winter, another would ensure that enough wood had been brought in to fuel the stove throughout the course of the day.
The first order of business was attendance. “The Roll shall be punctually called at the opening of each session, and each absentee shall be recorded at the time …”, stipulated the Middleborough School Committee in 1873.
“The morning services of the school shall commence with reading the Bible, and it is recommended that the reading be followed by some devotional service.” Like most schools of the era, those in Middleborough included a strong religious component, and the sessions were frequently referred to as “services” as in the foregoing quote. Moral instruction remained an important aspect of childhood education and the fact that Bible readings and moral lessons started off the day was an indication of their primacy within the school. Because of the importance of these services, pupils who were tardy were not permitted to enter the building at this time in order to avoid interrupting the “devotions.”
Following this, work by all ability levels commenced simultaneously. While some students read, others might work on copy books, while still others would perform blackboard work.
In order to reduce the chaos which could easily result in a classroom with so many students of varying abilities, teachers were urged to unite students in groups based upon their skill levels in each subject. “By the use of supplementary reading matter, and by the topical method in other subjects, classes representing different grades may be brought together.” Additionally, educators frequently urged alternation between oral and written recitations for students, partly in order to ground students in the fundamentals of each, partly to avoid monotony on the students part, and partly because written recitation work freed the teacher to concentrate on other students.
All students were provided with a 15 minute morning and a 15 minute afternoon recess, while primary pupils received an extra recess each half day. Teachers were barred from withholding recess from students as punishment. Though students might be detained in the classroom during regular recess, they were to be provided with the same length recess apart from the other students.”
Lunch was promptly at noon. Undoubtedly, the teacher ensured that each student had clean hands, and for this purpose soap and a rough washcloth would have been kept by the sink. In winter, lunch pails might be placed upon the heating stove in order to warm lunches.
The afternoon session mirrored that of the morning in regard to class work, lasting until 3.30 or 4 or in the afternoon.
Enrollment, Green School 1871-1941
Below are enrollment figures for the Green School taken from the Annual Town Reports. Various methods of reporting were used over the years, including total enrollment, average mebership and whole number of students attending, but the figures represented here provide a good picture of the number of students educated in the building.
1877 spring term 26
1877 fall term 31
1878 winter term 35
1878 spring term 31
1878 fall term 37
1879 winter term 33
1879 spring term 25
1879 fall term 26
1880 winter term 26
1880 winter term 28
1880 fall term 33
1881 winter term 32
1881 1st term 39
1881 2nd term 39
1881 3rd term 34
1882 1st term 25
1882 2nd term 29
1882 3rd term 25
1883 1st term 28
1883 2nd term 26
1883 3rd term 29
1884 1st term 27.9 (average)
1884 2nd term
1885 3rd term 36.8 (average)
1885 1st term 24
2nd term 26
3rd term 31
1886 1st term 27
2nd term 28
3rd term 29
1887 1st term 23
2nd term 29
3rd term 35
1888 1st term 26
2nd term 32
3rd term 27
1889 1st term 20
2nd term 30
3rd term 40
1890 1st term 27
2nd term 35
3rd term 36
1891 38
1892 43
1893 36
1894 44
1895 54
1896 52
1897 48
1898 38
1899 38
1900 36
1901 37
1902 39
1903 48
1904 44
1905 34
1906 44
1907 40
1908 30
1909 47
1910 47
1911 45
1912 44
1912 n/a
1912-13 n/a
1913 47
1913-14 51
1914-15 58
1915-16 58
1917 66
1918 60
1919 n/a
1920 37
1921 n/a
1922 n/a
1923 45
1923-24 47
1924-25 48
1925-26 52
1926-27 37
1927-28 n/a
1928-29 36
1929-30 37
1930-31 37
1931-32 39
1932-33 33
1933-34 27
1934 24
1934-35 22
1935-36 24
1936-37 22
1937-38 21
1938-39 28
1939-40 28
1940-41 15
1877 spring term 26
1877 fall term 31
1878 winter term 35
1878 spring term 31
1878 fall term 37
1879 winter term 33
1879 spring term 25
1879 fall term 26
1880 winter term 26
1880 winter term 28
1880 fall term 33
1881 winter term 32
1881 1st term 39
1881 2nd term 39
1881 3rd term 34
1882 1st term 25
1882 2nd term 29
1882 3rd term 25
1883 1st term 28
1883 2nd term 26
1883 3rd term 29
1884 1st term 27.9 (average)
1884 2nd term
1885 3rd term 36.8 (average)
1885 1st term 24
2nd term 26
3rd term 31
1886 1st term 27
2nd term 28
3rd term 29
1887 1st term 23
2nd term 29
3rd term 35
1888 1st term 26
2nd term 32
3rd term 27
1889 1st term 20
2nd term 30
3rd term 40
1890 1st term 27
2nd term 35
3rd term 36
1891 38
1892 43
1893 36
1894 44
1895 54
1896 52
1897 48
1898 38
1899 38
1900 36
1901 37
1902 39
1903 48
1904 44
1905 34
1906 44
1907 40
1908 30
1909 47
1910 47
1911 45
1912 44
1912 n/a
1912-13 n/a
1913 47
1913-14 51
1914-15 58
1915-16 58
1917 66
1918 60
1919 n/a
1920 37
1921 n/a
1922 n/a
1923 45
1923-24 47
1924-25 48
1925-26 52
1926-27 37
1927-28 n/a
1928-29 36
1929-30 37
1930-31 37
1931-32 39
1932-33 33
1933-34 27
1934 24
1934-35 22
1935-36 24
1936-37 22
1937-38 21
1938-39 28
1939-40 28
1940-41 15
By-Laws Concerning Truant Children and Absentees from School, 1885
.
Source: Annual Report of the School Committee (Middleborough, MA: Middleborough School Committee, February 1, 1877), p. 6.
The Road to Consolidation
.
Like all Middleborough school districts, District 3 (the Green) covered a wide area stretching west to the Wading Place at East Main Street and the Nemasket River, north to Thompson, Fuller and Plympton Streets, east along Plymouth Street to and including Short Street, and south along Wood Street nearly to Sachem Street. For the education of all children residing in this area, the Green School was responsible.
The Green, as a one-room schoolhouse, operated as an “ungraded” or “mixed” grade school, where students ranging in age from 5 to 15 and older were organized by ability rather than age or grade. Because these one-room schoolhouses existed only outside Middleborough center following the early 1850s, they also came to be known in local parlance as “suburban schools.”
Typically these schools had a higher proportion of girls and younger children as older children and boys were frequently needed to help with the operation of the family farm. In its first full year of operation (1872-73), however, the Green School was an anomaly for the class that year consisted solely of boys. Perhaps because of this, it was reported that there was “great room for improvement.”
In 1888, Superintendent of Schools Fitts well elaborated the challenges of the Green and other mixed grade schools in Middleborough:
…They are as deserving of honorable mention as any other, and perhaps more so when we consider the long distances that many of the pupils have to come, the oft detention at home to work, the many grades of all ages which most of them have, and the lack of enthusiasm which must needs be with small classes. Yet were you to ask me to take you to some of the most successful schools in town, it would be my privilege to take you to some of these schools.
By 1914, Massachusetts still had 800 one-room school houses, of which 13 were located in Middleborough, and the movement was for consolidation into larger more centralized schools. Not only did consolidation promote better grading; the inclusion of special branches such as drawing, music and nature study; higher retention of skilled teachers; and the conservation of resources; but it most importantly was believed to improve the overall quality of the education provided. “There is much value in such a plan and it would be practical with sufficient school accommodations at the Centre for this town to adopt,” reported Superintendent Bates at the time. As late as 1929, Middleborough still operated 12 one-room schoolhouses, the most of any town in the state, a not surprising circumstance given the physical extent of the town.
While the Middleborough School department had begun looking at the consolidation of Middleborough’s schools by closing outlying suburban schools as early as 1895, it was ultimately the overcrowding in the these schools which would initiate educational change in the early twentieth century. Ironically, despite the rapid growth of the town in the latter half of the nineteenth century, overcrowding initially was not a problem in the suburban schools. Superintendent Fitts felt in 1887 that the suburban schools, including the Green, were sufficient to well accommodate pupils. “The out-districts have plenty of room for all the pupils who attend.” Indeed, the sole school to confront crowding issues was South Middleborough.
A second factor in the eventual consolidation of Middleborough’s schools was the desire to create a shorter elementary course. Until the early 1900s, the elementary school course in Middleborough consisted of nine grades, all of which (outside Middleborough center) were housed in a single ungraded school. Superintendent Bates became increasingly dissatisfied with this arrangement and recommended an eight-year course of study for students before entering the high school. “I believe with a shorter course better application on the part of the pupils would be gained and less of dawdling would be noticeable in the schoolrooms.”
The situation at South Middleborough, coupled with the desire to establish an eight-year elementary program eventually combined in a single solution which began to see ninth graders sent to school at Middleborough center. Beginning in 1905, students from South Middleborough began attending the 9th grade at the central schools in order to reduce crowding in their school. This solution was not preferable however, as it split the 9th grade between the central schools and the suburban schools. “I wish it could be arranged,” wrote Superintendent Bates in 1906, “that all the pupils in the ninth grades could take that year in the Central School, as I think more would continue the work in the High School and a greater uniformity would result in having all the ninth grade pupils under the direct supervision of one teacher, besides giving more time to the other grades in the Suburban Schools.” Bates was still urging the eight-grade plan in 1910 both as a means of improving the general level of education and as of reducing crowding in the suburban schools and he argued that 9th grade students from the largest suburban schools, including the Green, should attend school at Middleborough Center. In 1912, Bates went one step further and formally recommended that all suburban schools be reduced to seven grades and 8th and 9th graders sent to the central schools “as soon as increased school accommodations will permit.”
Though the Green had long avoided the problem of overcrowding which had particularly troubled the South Middleborough School, by 1913 the number of scholars was so great that a temporary relief plan was required. During this period, the Green would have the largest enrollment of any suburban school and by 1917 its classes numbered more than the other three East Middleborough schools (Waterville, Soule and Thompsonville) combined. Residents of the district met on November 14, 1913, to discuss the crowded condition of the school and petitioned the School Committee for a solution. Superintendent Bates initially recommended the reduction in the number of grades at the Green to reduce crowding, but due to limited space in the central schools, this solution was not immediately practicable. Others recommended that use of the First Congregational Church’s chapel building be requested, but this solution was not financially feasible as it would have necessitated two teachers as the class would be divided between the two structures. Ultimately
this congestion problem was solved for the time by the division of the school into two sections – a grammar and a primary – on the one session plan.
The grammar section [of 25 pupils] attends in the morning from 8.20 to 12.15 and the primary section [also of 25 pupils] in the afternoon from 1.15 to 4, the first grade being dismissed at 3.30.
Each section comprises four grades. By this plan the cost of transportation of the two upper grades to the School Street school at one time considered was avoided.
The plan has many obvious advantages and the conditions in this district make it a practical one.
Only part of the school is in the room at the same time thus giving better conditions as to air. The school day is extended one hour and a quarter thus giving the teacher that amount of extra time for work with the pupils. Under this plan more time is gained, amounting to more than a day a week – longer recitation periods are possible, more instruction for the individual pupils can be given, the primary grades are given more attention and better work in every study and greater progress will be possible.
The plan is pleasing to the people and has the approval of the teacher.
It seems to fit the situation in an ideal manner.
With a high number of pupils, this grading plan was continued through 1915 at the Green and was so successful that it was implemented at Rock School in 1915 and Fall Brook in 1916 when those schools began to experience overcrowding of their own.
Because of the growing numbers of schoolchildren within each district in East Middleborough, Superintendent Bates proposed the creation of a centrally located school to replace the Green, Thompsonville, Soule and Waterville Schools. Bates suggested a “three or four room building, centrally located, [which] could accommodate the present enrollment in three graded schools.” The new school would feature graded classes, “large playground, garden for agricultural work, manual training rooms, and pupils having the services of the different supervisors transported by motor vehicles or on electric cars.” Additionally, the anticipated salary expense was expected to be about 25 less than the town presently paid for four separate schools. While Bates believed that “this seems to be the only solution financially and educationally for the best interests of the suburban districts,” the wartime conditions prevailing in 1917 made any change impossible.
Finally, in 1919, crowding at the Green School was somewhat lessened when the 7th, 8th and 9th grade students were bussed to classes at the School Street School. With fewer students, the two-session plan in operation since 1914 was abandoned and the full-day plan resumed. In the early 1920s, the sixth grade was also transferred to the central schools, leaving the Green with just five grades. A permanent solution to the rural school issue, however, was contingent upon solving crowding at Middleborough center which could only be accomplished through the construction of a new school. Additionally, because of the cost of transporting upper level Green students to the center ($1,560 in 1923), periodically the thought of retaining them at the Green was considered though it would have once more led to crowding there.
In September, 1929, under Superintendent J. Stearns Cushing, the three remaining schools serving East Middleborough - the Green, Soule and Waterville - were reorganized as a district or “unit of three buildings containing two grades each; grades one and two at the Green, three and four at Soule, and five and six at Waterville. Pupils are transported direct to the buildings eliminating the dangers of children walking on highways.” Superintendent of Schools J. Stearns Cushing believed the change improved the conditions in each school, and made for a more economical operation. “The educational values gained I believe are self evident. Pupils in these buildings are at the present time in a much more advance[d] stage in the work of the grade than in previous years. Their associates are of the same age. Their classes are large enough to give the children the valuable spirit of friendly competition with the classmates….Equipment is centralized and therefore administration is more economical for duplication may be eliminated.”
The Green School was not reopened in September 1941 due to the small enrollment, and the remaining first and second grade pupils were transferred to the central schools.
Like all Middleborough school districts, District 3 (the Green) covered a wide area stretching west to the Wading Place at East Main Street and the Nemasket River, north to Thompson, Fuller and Plympton Streets, east along Plymouth Street to and including Short Street, and south along Wood Street nearly to Sachem Street. For the education of all children residing in this area, the Green School was responsible.
The Green, as a one-room schoolhouse, operated as an “ungraded” or “mixed” grade school, where students ranging in age from 5 to 15 and older were organized by ability rather than age or grade. Because these one-room schoolhouses existed only outside Middleborough center following the early 1850s, they also came to be known in local parlance as “suburban schools.”
Typically these schools had a higher proportion of girls and younger children as older children and boys were frequently needed to help with the operation of the family farm. In its first full year of operation (1872-73), however, the Green School was an anomaly for the class that year consisted solely of boys. Perhaps because of this, it was reported that there was “great room for improvement.”
In 1888, Superintendent of Schools Fitts well elaborated the challenges of the Green and other mixed grade schools in Middleborough:
…They are as deserving of honorable mention as any other, and perhaps more so when we consider the long distances that many of the pupils have to come, the oft detention at home to work, the many grades of all ages which most of them have, and the lack of enthusiasm which must needs be with small classes. Yet were you to ask me to take you to some of the most successful schools in town, it would be my privilege to take you to some of these schools.
By 1914, Massachusetts still had 800 one-room school houses, of which 13 were located in Middleborough, and the movement was for consolidation into larger more centralized schools. Not only did consolidation promote better grading; the inclusion of special branches such as drawing, music and nature study; higher retention of skilled teachers; and the conservation of resources; but it most importantly was believed to improve the overall quality of the education provided. “There is much value in such a plan and it would be practical with sufficient school accommodations at the Centre for this town to adopt,” reported Superintendent Bates at the time. As late as 1929, Middleborough still operated 12 one-room schoolhouses, the most of any town in the state, a not surprising circumstance given the physical extent of the town.
While the Middleborough School department had begun looking at the consolidation of Middleborough’s schools by closing outlying suburban schools as early as 1895, it was ultimately the overcrowding in the these schools which would initiate educational change in the early twentieth century. Ironically, despite the rapid growth of the town in the latter half of the nineteenth century, overcrowding initially was not a problem in the suburban schools. Superintendent Fitts felt in 1887 that the suburban schools, including the Green, were sufficient to well accommodate pupils. “The out-districts have plenty of room for all the pupils who attend.” Indeed, the sole school to confront crowding issues was South Middleborough.
A second factor in the eventual consolidation of Middleborough’s schools was the desire to create a shorter elementary course. Until the early 1900s, the elementary school course in Middleborough consisted of nine grades, all of which (outside Middleborough center) were housed in a single ungraded school. Superintendent Bates became increasingly dissatisfied with this arrangement and recommended an eight-year course of study for students before entering the high school. “I believe with a shorter course better application on the part of the pupils would be gained and less of dawdling would be noticeable in the schoolrooms.”
The situation at South Middleborough, coupled with the desire to establish an eight-year elementary program eventually combined in a single solution which began to see ninth graders sent to school at Middleborough center. Beginning in 1905, students from South Middleborough began attending the 9th grade at the central schools in order to reduce crowding in their school. This solution was not preferable however, as it split the 9th grade between the central schools and the suburban schools. “I wish it could be arranged,” wrote Superintendent Bates in 1906, “that all the pupils in the ninth grades could take that year in the Central School, as I think more would continue the work in the High School and a greater uniformity would result in having all the ninth grade pupils under the direct supervision of one teacher, besides giving more time to the other grades in the Suburban Schools.” Bates was still urging the eight-grade plan in 1910 both as a means of improving the general level of education and as of reducing crowding in the suburban schools and he argued that 9th grade students from the largest suburban schools, including the Green, should attend school at Middleborough Center. In 1912, Bates went one step further and formally recommended that all suburban schools be reduced to seven grades and 8th and 9th graders sent to the central schools “as soon as increased school accommodations will permit.”
Though the Green had long avoided the problem of overcrowding which had particularly troubled the South Middleborough School, by 1913 the number of scholars was so great that a temporary relief plan was required. During this period, the Green would have the largest enrollment of any suburban school and by 1917 its classes numbered more than the other three East Middleborough schools (Waterville, Soule and Thompsonville) combined. Residents of the district met on November 14, 1913, to discuss the crowded condition of the school and petitioned the School Committee for a solution. Superintendent Bates initially recommended the reduction in the number of grades at the Green to reduce crowding, but due to limited space in the central schools, this solution was not immediately practicable. Others recommended that use of the First Congregational Church’s chapel building be requested, but this solution was not financially feasible as it would have necessitated two teachers as the class would be divided between the two structures. Ultimately
this congestion problem was solved for the time by the division of the school into two sections – a grammar and a primary – on the one session plan.
The grammar section [of 25 pupils] attends in the morning from 8.20 to 12.15 and the primary section [also of 25 pupils] in the afternoon from 1.15 to 4, the first grade being dismissed at 3.30.
Each section comprises four grades. By this plan the cost of transportation of the two upper grades to the School Street school at one time considered was avoided.
The plan has many obvious advantages and the conditions in this district make it a practical one.
Only part of the school is in the room at the same time thus giving better conditions as to air. The school day is extended one hour and a quarter thus giving the teacher that amount of extra time for work with the pupils. Under this plan more time is gained, amounting to more than a day a week – longer recitation periods are possible, more instruction for the individual pupils can be given, the primary grades are given more attention and better work in every study and greater progress will be possible.
The plan is pleasing to the people and has the approval of the teacher.
It seems to fit the situation in an ideal manner.
With a high number of pupils, this grading plan was continued through 1915 at the Green and was so successful that it was implemented at Rock School in 1915 and Fall Brook in 1916 when those schools began to experience overcrowding of their own.
Because of the growing numbers of schoolchildren within each district in East Middleborough, Superintendent Bates proposed the creation of a centrally located school to replace the Green, Thompsonville, Soule and Waterville Schools. Bates suggested a “three or four room building, centrally located, [which] could accommodate the present enrollment in three graded schools.” The new school would feature graded classes, “large playground, garden for agricultural work, manual training rooms, and pupils having the services of the different supervisors transported by motor vehicles or on electric cars.” Additionally, the anticipated salary expense was expected to be about 25 less than the town presently paid for four separate schools. While Bates believed that “this seems to be the only solution financially and educationally for the best interests of the suburban districts,” the wartime conditions prevailing in 1917 made any change impossible.
Finally, in 1919, crowding at the Green School was somewhat lessened when the 7th, 8th and 9th grade students were bussed to classes at the School Street School. With fewer students, the two-session plan in operation since 1914 was abandoned and the full-day plan resumed. In the early 1920s, the sixth grade was also transferred to the central schools, leaving the Green with just five grades. A permanent solution to the rural school issue, however, was contingent upon solving crowding at Middleborough center which could only be accomplished through the construction of a new school. Additionally, because of the cost of transporting upper level Green students to the center ($1,560 in 1923), periodically the thought of retaining them at the Green was considered though it would have once more led to crowding there.
In September, 1929, under Superintendent J. Stearns Cushing, the three remaining schools serving East Middleborough - the Green, Soule and Waterville - were reorganized as a district or “unit of three buildings containing two grades each; grades one and two at the Green, three and four at Soule, and five and six at Waterville. Pupils are transported direct to the buildings eliminating the dangers of children walking on highways.” Superintendent of Schools J. Stearns Cushing believed the change improved the conditions in each school, and made for a more economical operation. “The educational values gained I believe are self evident. Pupils in these buildings are at the present time in a much more advance[d] stage in the work of the grade than in previous years. Their associates are of the same age. Their classes are large enough to give the children the valuable spirit of friendly competition with the classmates….Equipment is centralized and therefore administration is more economical for duplication may be eliminated.”
The Green School was not reopened in September 1941 due to the small enrollment, and the remaining first and second grade pupils were transferred to the central schools.
Construction
.
The historic Green School was built in 1871 to replace an earlier structure which stood on the same site and which by that time had fallen into great disrepair. The 1870 School Committee report for Middleborough noted that "the schoolhouses in No. 3 [the Green] and 14 [Fall Brook] are poor and inconvenient, and in our opinion unsuitable for school purposes. If the town does not deem it advisable to build more than one house the coming year, we most earnestly recommend that steps be taken to build a house at the Green, suitable to accommodate that school ...."
As a consequence of the Committee's recommendation, the following year a schoolhouse was constructed at the Green. "Your committee have done nearly as much as the means in their hands would enable them, to improve the condition of the school buildings. A new house has been built at the Green, No. 3, according to the vote of the town, at an expense of $1,674.67. This includes a new fence. It stands on the ground so long occupied by what had become an apology for a schoolhouse, and which has been sold for $75. The new house is 24x36, is a neat structure, with blinds, and will accommodate 56 scholars. It has modern seats, a sink, extensive blackboard, and many other conveniences. The building deserves to be appreciated by the people of the district. It has been honestly and creditably built by Mr. James P. Sparrow." The cost of the school was broken down as follows: James P. Sparrow, per contract, $1,500; B. N. Bradt & Company, furniture, $172.47; and George Soule of Middleborough, chairs, $2.20.
While the original exterior design of the Green School has been preserved in photographs, its interior layout is less well documented. Likely the building had two small foyers at each entrance, one for boys and one for girls. It is here that coat hooks and shelves for lunch pails were likely located. Between the two was undoubtedly a washhroom which contained a small sink.
Next Page: Furnishings
The historic Green School was built in 1871 to replace an earlier structure which stood on the same site and which by that time had fallen into great disrepair. The 1870 School Committee report for Middleborough noted that "the schoolhouses in No. 3 [the Green] and 14 [Fall Brook] are poor and inconvenient, and in our opinion unsuitable for school purposes. If the town does not deem it advisable to build more than one house the coming year, we most earnestly recommend that steps be taken to build a house at the Green, suitable to accommodate that school ...."
As a consequence of the Committee's recommendation, the following year a schoolhouse was constructed at the Green. "Your committee have done nearly as much as the means in their hands would enable them, to improve the condition of the school buildings. A new house has been built at the Green, No. 3, according to the vote of the town, at an expense of $1,674.67. This includes a new fence. It stands on the ground so long occupied by what had become an apology for a schoolhouse, and which has been sold for $75. The new house is 24x36, is a neat structure, with blinds, and will accommodate 56 scholars. It has modern seats, a sink, extensive blackboard, and many other conveniences. The building deserves to be appreciated by the people of the district. It has been honestly and creditably built by Mr. James P. Sparrow." The cost of the school was broken down as follows: James P. Sparrow, per contract, $1,500; B. N. Bradt & Company, furniture, $172.47; and George Soule of Middleborough, chairs, $2.20.
While the original exterior design of the Green School has been preserved in photographs, its interior layout is less well documented. Likely the building had two small foyers at each entrance, one for boys and one for girls. It is here that coat hooks and shelves for lunch pails were likely located. Between the two was undoubtedly a washhroom which contained a small sink.
Next Page: Furnishings
Furnishings
.
There is little record regarding the original furnishings of the Green School, though it was undoubtedly furnished like a typical schoolhouse. The blackboard was the focal point of the Green school room and likely was situated on the rear wall opposite the entrances. In nearly constant use throughout the day, the blackboard required frequent repair and repainting. In 1877, the Green School’s blackboard was repainted by H. A. Sparrow, and it is likely that it was repainted with “liquid slating” in 1887. It was “thoroughly renovated” in 1906, repaired in 1910 by Eben Jones and again in 1912 by F. A. Johnson. In 1917, the board was resurfaced.
To write on the board, lumps of chalk known as “crayons” which differed from the slender cylindrical pieces common today were used.
A desk or table for the teacher likely stood at the rear of the building near the blackboard, and was used for her books, record cards, and as a resting place for the iconic hand bell. In 1886, Lorenzo Tinkham was paid $1.50 for a table for the building, though whether this was a replacement table for the teacher or a second table to help students with their studies is not known.
The students at the Green were originally provided with twenty double seats and desks which provided seating for forty students, just enough to accommodate all the students in 1881. These desks which were required to stand up to heavy use, were not always as durable as one wished. By 1881, just ten years after having been installed in the building, “several” were characterized as having “long been broken” and in need of replacement. Eventually, in 1904, the Green was furnished with adjustable seats and desks from the Chandler Chair and Desk Company at a cost of $161.00.
Adjustable desks had long been considered preferable to the previous seating options as indicated by Superintendent Jacoby in 1897:
Adjustable school furniture is far superior to the old line seats and desks, and no other should be bought. By its use it is no longer necessary to attempt the adjustment of the pupils to the seats and desks, but the seats and desks can be easily and properly adjusted to them. They are the best to buy on hygienic grounds, promoting , as they do, the physical growth and development of the puils, and the closer the adjustment the better will be the results. Being more comfortable, they are also more conducive to intellectual and moral growth and development; for one of the conditions of good work and conduct in school is physical comfort.
Despite the high praise adjustable desks received, there may have been some dissatisfaction with the new desks at the Green, for just two years later in 1906, Superintendent Bates was recommending they be renovated.
Sometime about 1884 a bookcase was probably installed in the Green Schoolhouse following the requirement by the state that school districts furnish pupils with free text books and supplies. The School Committee recommended in its report for 1883 the addition of these pieces of furniture to the local schoolrooms, and it was likely adopted. A more substantial piece of furniture arrived in 1903 when an organ was donated to the school for the use of students.
Also present in the room would have been a clock, a highly recommended article for instilling promptness in scholars. “We are more desirous of having clock-work in every school without exception. Such discipline is splendid, and obviates the need of frequent reproofs, or repeated punishments," noted the Middleborough School Committee in early 1873. The clock, however, was also an important tool for the teacher, helping her track the amount of time spent on each lesson.
Smaller articles in the building undoubtedly included galvanized pails - one with a dipper to be used for drinking water, and a second for cleaning - an ash pail and stove equipment, clothes hooks for clothing, shelving for lunch pails, cleaning tools such as a mop and broom, and doormats to eliminate the amount of dirt and mud tracked into the building.
While the Green School with its bare walls may have appeared initially somewhat spartan following its construction in 1871, in time this lack of decoration was addressed through the school adornment movement through which local schoolhouses were filled with suitable works of art of educational value including reproductions of noted paintings and busts of famous Americans. Superintendent of Schools Jacoby supported the movement stressing “what grand opportunities are here offered for private munificence!” It is not recorded what items may have been added to the Green School, though in many local one-room classrooms, pictures of Washington and Lincoln were commonplace.
NEXT PAGE: Heating & Ventilation
PREVIOUS PAGE: Construction
There is little record regarding the original furnishings of the Green School, though it was undoubtedly furnished like a typical schoolhouse. The blackboard was the focal point of the Green school room and likely was situated on the rear wall opposite the entrances. In nearly constant use throughout the day, the blackboard required frequent repair and repainting. In 1877, the Green School’s blackboard was repainted by H. A. Sparrow, and it is likely that it was repainted with “liquid slating” in 1887. It was “thoroughly renovated” in 1906, repaired in 1910 by Eben Jones and again in 1912 by F. A. Johnson. In 1917, the board was resurfaced.
To write on the board, lumps of chalk known as “crayons” which differed from the slender cylindrical pieces common today were used.
A desk or table for the teacher likely stood at the rear of the building near the blackboard, and was used for her books, record cards, and as a resting place for the iconic hand bell. In 1886, Lorenzo Tinkham was paid $1.50 for a table for the building, though whether this was a replacement table for the teacher or a second table to help students with their studies is not known.
The students at the Green were originally provided with twenty double seats and desks which provided seating for forty students, just enough to accommodate all the students in 1881. These desks which were required to stand up to heavy use, were not always as durable as one wished. By 1881, just ten years after having been installed in the building, “several” were characterized as having “long been broken” and in need of replacement. Eventually, in 1904, the Green was furnished with adjustable seats and desks from the Chandler Chair and Desk Company at a cost of $161.00.
Adjustable desks had long been considered preferable to the previous seating options as indicated by Superintendent Jacoby in 1897:
Adjustable school furniture is far superior to the old line seats and desks, and no other should be bought. By its use it is no longer necessary to attempt the adjustment of the pupils to the seats and desks, but the seats and desks can be easily and properly adjusted to them. They are the best to buy on hygienic grounds, promoting , as they do, the physical growth and development of the puils, and the closer the adjustment the better will be the results. Being more comfortable, they are also more conducive to intellectual and moral growth and development; for one of the conditions of good work and conduct in school is physical comfort.
Despite the high praise adjustable desks received, there may have been some dissatisfaction with the new desks at the Green, for just two years later in 1906, Superintendent Bates was recommending they be renovated.
Sometime about 1884 a bookcase was probably installed in the Green Schoolhouse following the requirement by the state that school districts furnish pupils with free text books and supplies. The School Committee recommended in its report for 1883 the addition of these pieces of furniture to the local schoolrooms, and it was likely adopted. A more substantial piece of furniture arrived in 1903 when an organ was donated to the school for the use of students.
Also present in the room would have been a clock, a highly recommended article for instilling promptness in scholars. “We are more desirous of having clock-work in every school without exception. Such discipline is splendid, and obviates the need of frequent reproofs, or repeated punishments," noted the Middleborough School Committee in early 1873. The clock, however, was also an important tool for the teacher, helping her track the amount of time spent on each lesson.
Smaller articles in the building undoubtedly included galvanized pails - one with a dipper to be used for drinking water, and a second for cleaning - an ash pail and stove equipment, clothes hooks for clothing, shelving for lunch pails, cleaning tools such as a mop and broom, and doormats to eliminate the amount of dirt and mud tracked into the building.
While the Green School with its bare walls may have appeared initially somewhat spartan following its construction in 1871, in time this lack of decoration was addressed through the school adornment movement through which local schoolhouses were filled with suitable works of art of educational value including reproductions of noted paintings and busts of famous Americans. Superintendent of Schools Jacoby supported the movement stressing “what grand opportunities are here offered for private munificence!” It is not recorded what items may have been added to the Green School, though in many local one-room classrooms, pictures of Washington and Lincoln were commonplace.
NEXT PAGE: Heating & Ventilation
PREVIOUS PAGE: Construction
Heating & Ventilation
..
Like other local schools, the Green was heated by means of a wood stove which likely stood in the center of the room and had a pipe traversing the ceiling to the rear chimney. To fuel the stove, the town paid various dealers to provide wood. During the school’s first year of operation, Arad Bryant was paid $7.50 to supply it with wood, and an additional $1.75 was spent for sawing. In 1872-73, $18.50 was paid to A. H. Soule and R. Gammons for wood for the Green School. Contracts called for wood to be cut and split, ready for use, and brought to the school yard where it was stored in a large wood house.
Throughout the early twentieth century, wood continued to be provided by local dealers and farmers. In 1906, the town was paying from between $5.00 and $5.50 a cord for hard wood and from $3.00 to $3.50 for pine. In 1905, the Green School would have consumed approximately 5½ cords of wood, two-thirds hard and one-third soft. Shortage of fuel could sometimes be a problem though usually not enough interfere with the operation of the school. In 1918, however, the February vacation was extended by a week in order to conserve a limited fuel supply.
Coupled with heating, ventilation was long an issue of concern in local schools. In 1872-73, the Middleborough School department regulations required teachers to “give due attention to the temperature and ventilation of their respective school-rooms.” In order to provide a free-flow of air, doors and windows were frequently opened, even in the coldest weather. “That children may not take cold by exposure to draughts during this process of ventilation gymnastic exercises are given. These exercises are given at intervals during the day whenever the air becomes impure.” Greatly variant tempreatures were a notorious feature of the one-room schoolhouse.
It is not clear whether any steps were taken at the Green School to remedy these ventilation concerns until 1895 when “…boards about a foot high were placed in front of the lower sash of the windows, about an inch distant from it. By raising the sashes to a proper height, fresh air may now be admitted to the rooms in such a way that the danger to the health of the pupils from window draughts is greatly lessened.”
The installation of these boards was merely a temporary expedient. The following year (1896), the School Committee was calling for improved ventilation in the suburban schools, including the Green, and suggested the installation of a jacketed or ventilating stove. In response, the school department, in 1897, installed a “Lakewood” wood furnace in the Green School. “Connected with it are a fresh air duct leading from the outside, and a galvanized iron ventilating duct extending from the floor up through and above the roof. The latter duct is heated by the smoke pipe which enters it about two feet from the floor and runs up through its centre. It is believed that excellent results will be obtained from the system, both in heating and in ventilation….The Green schoolhouse was selected for the first one because the attendance there is the largest of the suburban schools.”
By 1913, however, parents were dissatisfied with both the heating and ventilation in the building, and requested that the School Committee look into the matter of improving both. It is not clear what steps were taken, though in time, an oil-burning furnace was installed, providing for more efficient heating of the building.
NEXT PAGE: Repairs & Renovations
PREVIOUS PAGE: Furnishings
Like other local schools, the Green was heated by means of a wood stove which likely stood in the center of the room and had a pipe traversing the ceiling to the rear chimney. To fuel the stove, the town paid various dealers to provide wood. During the school’s first year of operation, Arad Bryant was paid $7.50 to supply it with wood, and an additional $1.75 was spent for sawing. In 1872-73, $18.50 was paid to A. H. Soule and R. Gammons for wood for the Green School. Contracts called for wood to be cut and split, ready for use, and brought to the school yard where it was stored in a large wood house.
Throughout the early twentieth century, wood continued to be provided by local dealers and farmers. In 1906, the town was paying from between $5.00 and $5.50 a cord for hard wood and from $3.00 to $3.50 for pine. In 1905, the Green School would have consumed approximately 5½ cords of wood, two-thirds hard and one-third soft. Shortage of fuel could sometimes be a problem though usually not enough interfere with the operation of the school. In 1918, however, the February vacation was extended by a week in order to conserve a limited fuel supply.
Coupled with heating, ventilation was long an issue of concern in local schools. In 1872-73, the Middleborough School department regulations required teachers to “give due attention to the temperature and ventilation of their respective school-rooms.” In order to provide a free-flow of air, doors and windows were frequently opened, even in the coldest weather. “That children may not take cold by exposure to draughts during this process of ventilation gymnastic exercises are given. These exercises are given at intervals during the day whenever the air becomes impure.” Greatly variant tempreatures were a notorious feature of the one-room schoolhouse.
It is not clear whether any steps were taken at the Green School to remedy these ventilation concerns until 1895 when “…boards about a foot high were placed in front of the lower sash of the windows, about an inch distant from it. By raising the sashes to a proper height, fresh air may now be admitted to the rooms in such a way that the danger to the health of the pupils from window draughts is greatly lessened.”
The installation of these boards was merely a temporary expedient. The following year (1896), the School Committee was calling for improved ventilation in the suburban schools, including the Green, and suggested the installation of a jacketed or ventilating stove. In response, the school department, in 1897, installed a “Lakewood” wood furnace in the Green School. “Connected with it are a fresh air duct leading from the outside, and a galvanized iron ventilating duct extending from the floor up through and above the roof. The latter duct is heated by the smoke pipe which enters it about two feet from the floor and runs up through its centre. It is believed that excellent results will be obtained from the system, both in heating and in ventilation….The Green schoolhouse was selected for the first one because the attendance there is the largest of the suburban schools.”
By 1913, however, parents were dissatisfied with both the heating and ventilation in the building, and requested that the School Committee look into the matter of improving both. It is not clear what steps were taken, though in time, an oil-burning furnace was installed, providing for more efficient heating of the building.
NEXT PAGE: Repairs & Renovations
PREVIOUS PAGE: Furnishings
Repairs & Renovations
.
Following construction of the Green School in 1871, the schoolhouse appears to have been well cared for. In 1887, it was valued at $1,000, the same sum as the schools at Waterville, South Middleborough, Fall Brook, Wappanucket and Purchade. Only the central schools – the high school, School Street and Union Street – were valued higher.
Periodic repairs were made to the building including those in 1876-77 by James P. Sparrow, the builder of the school, for which he was paid $5.50. In 1881, Sparrow was paid $9.02 for repairs to the Green and Fall Brook schools and the following year, D. F. Wood was paid $5.75 for similar work to the school. Unspecified repairs continued to be made by Horatio N. Wilbur (1886, 1887, 1889, 1905), Warren Wood (1888), Fred C. Sparrow (1907, 1914, 1919), Herbert Erickson (1907), J. J. Fowler (1914), and F. A. Johnson (1917). A more substantial interior renovation was completed in 1907, with $59.47 worth of material from J. K. & B. Sears, by Eben Jones. In 1895 and 1919 new floors were laid in the building, and in 1895 the roof was reshingled.
In 1912 and 1925, the building is stated to have been "thoroughly renovated", though the nature of these changes is not known. Possibly it was in 1925, that the three bays of the facade were altered from dual entrances flanking a large 6-over-6 sash window to two smaller windows on either side of a single doorway. At some unknown point, electric lighting, a bathroom and a modern oil-burning furnace were installed.
Throughout its history, the Green School was painted a number of times, though most likely not red, that color actually being uncommon for schools. Similarly, it appears that only in later years has the building been painted green, undoubtedly a play upon its name. Most likely it was painted white with dark trim. Such is the color scheme indicated in an early photograph of the Fall Brook School which was built by Sparrow just one year after the Green and is likely to have shared the same plan. The earliest known photograph of the Green, dating from about 1906 depicts a a color scheme of white trim work, a pale body of either white, buff or light gray, and dark doors and window trim. Following 1871, the building was first repainted in 1878 by H. A. Sparrow who was paid $28.00 for painting the building, and then again in 1888. The building may have gone unpainted for several years for in 1902 Superintendent Bates noted that a number of the suburban schools were in need of painting, and the following year, the Green School was repainted, along with those at Nemasket, Thompsonville and Thomastown. The exterior was repainted in 1910 at which time the interior was done as well, the total work costing $79.51. In 1925, the exterior and interior were again repainted, with the interior being renovated at the time. Interior repainting is also recorded as having been done in 1895 and 1899.
NEXT PAGE: School Yard
PREVIOUS PAGE: Heating & Ventilation
Following construction of the Green School in 1871, the schoolhouse appears to have been well cared for. In 1887, it was valued at $1,000, the same sum as the schools at Waterville, South Middleborough, Fall Brook, Wappanucket and Purchade. Only the central schools – the high school, School Street and Union Street – were valued higher.
Periodic repairs were made to the building including those in 1876-77 by James P. Sparrow, the builder of the school, for which he was paid $5.50. In 1881, Sparrow was paid $9.02 for repairs to the Green and Fall Brook schools and the following year, D. F. Wood was paid $5.75 for similar work to the school. Unspecified repairs continued to be made by Horatio N. Wilbur (1886, 1887, 1889, 1905), Warren Wood (1888), Fred C. Sparrow (1907, 1914, 1919), Herbert Erickson (1907), J. J. Fowler (1914), and F. A. Johnson (1917). A more substantial interior renovation was completed in 1907, with $59.47 worth of material from J. K. & B. Sears, by Eben Jones. In 1895 and 1919 new floors were laid in the building, and in 1895 the roof was reshingled.
In 1912 and 1925, the building is stated to have been "thoroughly renovated", though the nature of these changes is not known. Possibly it was in 1925, that the three bays of the facade were altered from dual entrances flanking a large 6-over-6 sash window to two smaller windows on either side of a single doorway. At some unknown point, electric lighting, a bathroom and a modern oil-burning furnace were installed.
Throughout its history, the Green School was painted a number of times, though most likely not red, that color actually being uncommon for schools. Similarly, it appears that only in later years has the building been painted green, undoubtedly a play upon its name. Most likely it was painted white with dark trim. Such is the color scheme indicated in an early photograph of the Fall Brook School which was built by Sparrow just one year after the Green and is likely to have shared the same plan. The earliest known photograph of the Green, dating from about 1906 depicts a a color scheme of white trim work, a pale body of either white, buff or light gray, and dark doors and window trim. Following 1871, the building was first repainted in 1878 by H. A. Sparrow who was paid $28.00 for painting the building, and then again in 1888. The building may have gone unpainted for several years for in 1902 Superintendent Bates noted that a number of the suburban schools were in need of painting, and the following year, the Green School was repainted, along with those at Nemasket, Thompsonville and Thomastown. The exterior was repainted in 1910 at which time the interior was done as well, the total work costing $79.51. In 1925, the exterior and interior were again repainted, with the interior being renovated at the time. Interior repainting is also recorded as having been done in 1895 and 1899.
NEXT PAGE: School Yard
PREVIOUS PAGE: Heating & Ventilation
School Yard
.
An important feature of the Green School, as with all schoolhouses was the surrounding schoolyard which provided not only a recreational space for children, but also a location for sanitary facilities and a woodhouse.
While a fence was originally built in 1871 when the school was built, in 1878, either a new fence or an addition to the existing fence was erected about the Green School yard with J. K. & B. Sears of Middleborough being paid $6.63 for lumber, and E. B. Elmes $5.63 for building it. Schoolyard improvements continued the following year (1879) during which James Sparrow was paid $1.00 for grading the yard which was described as “large” and “well-fenced” in 1881. Despite its size, the Green School yard was nonetheless somewhat barren. In April, 1904, undoubtedly as part of Arbor Day exercises, trees were purchased through the contributions of the pupils and planted in the school yard under the supervision of Tree Warden Bailey. Increasing motor traffic in the second quarter of the twentieth century led to the posting of "Warning" signs along the approaches to the school in the summer of 1935.
Located within the school yard were sanitary facilities which were provided in the form of an outhouse. While there is no specific mention of a separate outhouse, a “commodious wood-house” is mentioned as standing in the schoolyard in 1881. This may have, in fact, included sanitary facilities as was sometimes common. School outhouses tended to be subject to vandalism on the part of some students. In 1885, the interiors of the outhouses at several Middleborough schools (though not the Green), were described as “shockingly marked and cut, each year adding something to that of the year before, till they now are unfit for use.” Like other school property, the prevention of damage to these structures was added to the burdens of the school teacher. In 1911, Superintendent Bates recommended the construction of privy vaults for these outbuildings which, in time, were replaced by indoor bathrooms.
Typically, male students were assigned responsibilities for wood and water. Water for the Green School was obtained from either the Church of the Green or from “agreeable neighbors”, and carried in a pail by students across the road. With the designation of Plympton Street as Route 44, traffic volume through the area increased and made such a task potentially hazardous. Not until 1936 was the school provided with running water following the extension of a town water line beyond the school which made a connection with the school feasible. During the summer of 1936, the school was connected and cisterns dug to accommodate waste from the sink. “The installation of this water aids greatly to the convenience and health of the children attending the school.”
To care for the school property, janitors were engaged, though somewhat haphazardly during the early years of the school's existence. In the 1870s and 1880s, the chore appears to have been carried out by younger boys and during the school’s first year of operation, Willie Bryant was paid $3.00 for regularly cleaning the building. In 1907, the janitor responsible for cleaning the Green School was paid $14.75 for the year. Later, Edward Buchanan was paid $2.50 per week for maintaining the Green School in 1930. Edward W. Fessenden served as the school’s last janitor from 1936 until its closure in June, 1941.
Besides the regular janitorial service the building received, once a year it was thoroughly scrubbed, typically in late summer in preparation for the school year. While neighbors looking to supplement their income generally took on the task, in rare instances a teacher might perform the work. In 1889, teacher Mary E. Deane at the Green was paid $2.00 for cleaning the school, a singular mark of devotion on her part.
PREVIOUS PAGE: Repairs & Renovation
An important feature of the Green School, as with all schoolhouses was the surrounding schoolyard which provided not only a recreational space for children, but also a location for sanitary facilities and a woodhouse.
While a fence was originally built in 1871 when the school was built, in 1878, either a new fence or an addition to the existing fence was erected about the Green School yard with J. K. & B. Sears of Middleborough being paid $6.63 for lumber, and E. B. Elmes $5.63 for building it. Schoolyard improvements continued the following year (1879) during which James Sparrow was paid $1.00 for grading the yard which was described as “large” and “well-fenced” in 1881. Despite its size, the Green School yard was nonetheless somewhat barren. In April, 1904, undoubtedly as part of Arbor Day exercises, trees were purchased through the contributions of the pupils and planted in the school yard under the supervision of Tree Warden Bailey. Increasing motor traffic in the second quarter of the twentieth century led to the posting of "Warning" signs along the approaches to the school in the summer of 1935.
Located within the school yard were sanitary facilities which were provided in the form of an outhouse. While there is no specific mention of a separate outhouse, a “commodious wood-house” is mentioned as standing in the schoolyard in 1881. This may have, in fact, included sanitary facilities as was sometimes common. School outhouses tended to be subject to vandalism on the part of some students. In 1885, the interiors of the outhouses at several Middleborough schools (though not the Green), were described as “shockingly marked and cut, each year adding something to that of the year before, till they now are unfit for use.” Like other school property, the prevention of damage to these structures was added to the burdens of the school teacher. In 1911, Superintendent Bates recommended the construction of privy vaults for these outbuildings which, in time, were replaced by indoor bathrooms.
Typically, male students were assigned responsibilities for wood and water. Water for the Green School was obtained from either the Church of the Green or from “agreeable neighbors”, and carried in a pail by students across the road. With the designation of Plympton Street as Route 44, traffic volume through the area increased and made such a task potentially hazardous. Not until 1936 was the school provided with running water following the extension of a town water line beyond the school which made a connection with the school feasible. During the summer of 1936, the school was connected and cisterns dug to accommodate waste from the sink. “The installation of this water aids greatly to the convenience and health of the children attending the school.”
To care for the school property, janitors were engaged, though somewhat haphazardly during the early years of the school's existence. In the 1870s and 1880s, the chore appears to have been carried out by younger boys and during the school’s first year of operation, Willie Bryant was paid $3.00 for regularly cleaning the building. In 1907, the janitor responsible for cleaning the Green School was paid $14.75 for the year. Later, Edward Buchanan was paid $2.50 per week for maintaining the Green School in 1930. Edward W. Fessenden served as the school’s last janitor from 1936 until its closure in June, 1941.
Besides the regular janitorial service the building received, once a year it was thoroughly scrubbed, typically in late summer in preparation for the school year. While neighbors looking to supplement their income generally took on the task, in rare instances a teacher might perform the work. In 1889, teacher Mary E. Deane at the Green was paid $2.00 for cleaning the school, a singular mark of devotion on her part.
PREVIOUS PAGE: Repairs & Renovation
Teaching at the Green
.
The work of the Green School was carried out nearly exclusively by women. While male teachers had been active during the mid-19th century particularly during the winter, largely in order to maintain discipline as this was the term typically attended by older farm boys, by the time the new Green school opened in 1872, the role of teacher largely had been assumed by women. Partially this was a result of encouragement from noted educators such as Horace Mann who maintained that “females are incomparably better teachers for young children than males …. Their manners are more mild and gentle, and hence in consonance with the tenderness of childhood.”
Given the variety of ages, the varying academic abilities, and sometimes the sheer number of pupils, the task of the one-room school teacher was challenging at best. The report of the School Committee for the year ending March, 1874, concurred, stating simply “Teachers have a difficult task”. Confronted with a class of students of varying scholastic abilities ranging in age from five to fifteen or older, the Green School teacher was required to tailor her daily lesson plans to the need of each pupil. In 1895, the situation of the suburban school, like the Green, was clearly expressed. “It is divided into nine grades, each grade representing a year’s work for the average pupil. It very seldom happens that all the grades are represented in one school at one time; but enough are always represented to tax the knowledge and skill of the teachers to the utmost to know how best to deal with the different grades in the limited time at their disposal.”
To fill these positions, the town frequently hired young women with little or no teaching experience as more qualified teachers were deterred by the rural location and the low pay. While efforts would eventually be undertaken in Middleborough over the course of the late nineteenth century to improve the one-room schoolteacher’s abilities and accordingly the level of education which was afforded in these buildings, it was a long and slow process.
Middleborough’s first Superintendent of Schools, Charles H. Morss, seems to have held a jaundiced view of ungraded schools like the Green. Writing in 1885, Morss stated:
By an ungraded school, outside of the cities, is generally meant a school in the sparsely settled districts, in which studies are taken up without definite order, whenever it suits the caprice of teacher, parent, or pupil. When a skilled educator was in charge, no harm could come from this lack of system; but, unfortunately, it was rarely that such a person could be obtained for such a school, and the result was too frequently disastrous to the mental growth of the pupils. Studies were taken up without regard to whether the mind of the pupil was fitted to receive them.
Although Morss spoke as early as 1885 of the possibility of grading these one-room schools, this appears not to have been done until 1895 when a formalized curriculum establishing three layers of development was adopted in November of that year.
Ironically, despite the low pay which was provided for the rural schoolteacher, much was expected of them, both as teachers and as role models. Teachers were expected (at least according to the 1876-77 Middleborough School Committee) to be exemplars of “Good breeding, gentleness, courtesy and politeness, as illustrated by the most refined and intellectual, should shine forth in the behavior, habits, conduct , and deportment of every teacher.”
Additionally, increasingly more was expected of teachers beyond the ability to educate the pupils in the basic skills. “We demand much more of a teacher to-day than simply the ability to teach arithmetic, reading, writing, and the other studies of the course. At least the elements of psychology and physiology, and the laws that govern mental and bodily development, are required of the teacher if she is to train the child’s mind, develop power of thought, and promote healthy physical conditions.” The demands of Massachusetts state law appeared even more daunting:
It shall be the duty of all instructors of youth to exert their best endeavors to impress on the minds of children and youth committed to their care and instruction the principles of piety and justice, and a sacred regard to truth; love of their country, humanity, and universal benevolence; sobriety, industry, and frugality; chastity, moderation, and temperance; and those other virtues which are the ornament of human society, and the basis upon which a republican constitution is founded; and it shall be the duty of such instructors to endeavor to lead their pupils, as their ages and capacities will admit, into a clear understanding on the tendency of the above-mentioned virtues, to preserve and perfect a republican constitution, and secure the blessings of liberty, as well as to promote their future happiness, and also to point out to them the evil tendency of the opposite vices.
NEXT PAGE: Wages
The work of the Green School was carried out nearly exclusively by women. While male teachers had been active during the mid-19th century particularly during the winter, largely in order to maintain discipline as this was the term typically attended by older farm boys, by the time the new Green school opened in 1872, the role of teacher largely had been assumed by women. Partially this was a result of encouragement from noted educators such as Horace Mann who maintained that “females are incomparably better teachers for young children than males …. Their manners are more mild and gentle, and hence in consonance with the tenderness of childhood.”
Given the variety of ages, the varying academic abilities, and sometimes the sheer number of pupils, the task of the one-room school teacher was challenging at best. The report of the School Committee for the year ending March, 1874, concurred, stating simply “Teachers have a difficult task”. Confronted with a class of students of varying scholastic abilities ranging in age from five to fifteen or older, the Green School teacher was required to tailor her daily lesson plans to the need of each pupil. In 1895, the situation of the suburban school, like the Green, was clearly expressed. “It is divided into nine grades, each grade representing a year’s work for the average pupil. It very seldom happens that all the grades are represented in one school at one time; but enough are always represented to tax the knowledge and skill of the teachers to the utmost to know how best to deal with the different grades in the limited time at their disposal.”
To fill these positions, the town frequently hired young women with little or no teaching experience as more qualified teachers were deterred by the rural location and the low pay. While efforts would eventually be undertaken in Middleborough over the course of the late nineteenth century to improve the one-room schoolteacher’s abilities and accordingly the level of education which was afforded in these buildings, it was a long and slow process.
Middleborough’s first Superintendent of Schools, Charles H. Morss, seems to have held a jaundiced view of ungraded schools like the Green. Writing in 1885, Morss stated:
By an ungraded school, outside of the cities, is generally meant a school in the sparsely settled districts, in which studies are taken up without definite order, whenever it suits the caprice of teacher, parent, or pupil. When a skilled educator was in charge, no harm could come from this lack of system; but, unfortunately, it was rarely that such a person could be obtained for such a school, and the result was too frequently disastrous to the mental growth of the pupils. Studies were taken up without regard to whether the mind of the pupil was fitted to receive them.
Although Morss spoke as early as 1885 of the possibility of grading these one-room schools, this appears not to have been done until 1895 when a formalized curriculum establishing three layers of development was adopted in November of that year.
Ironically, despite the low pay which was provided for the rural schoolteacher, much was expected of them, both as teachers and as role models. Teachers were expected (at least according to the 1876-77 Middleborough School Committee) to be exemplars of “Good breeding, gentleness, courtesy and politeness, as illustrated by the most refined and intellectual, should shine forth in the behavior, habits, conduct , and deportment of every teacher.”
Additionally, increasingly more was expected of teachers beyond the ability to educate the pupils in the basic skills. “We demand much more of a teacher to-day than simply the ability to teach arithmetic, reading, writing, and the other studies of the course. At least the elements of psychology and physiology, and the laws that govern mental and bodily development, are required of the teacher if she is to train the child’s mind, develop power of thought, and promote healthy physical conditions.” The demands of Massachusetts state law appeared even more daunting:
It shall be the duty of all instructors of youth to exert their best endeavors to impress on the minds of children and youth committed to their care and instruction the principles of piety and justice, and a sacred regard to truth; love of their country, humanity, and universal benevolence; sobriety, industry, and frugality; chastity, moderation, and temperance; and those other virtues which are the ornament of human society, and the basis upon which a republican constitution is founded; and it shall be the duty of such instructors to endeavor to lead their pupils, as their ages and capacities will admit, into a clear understanding on the tendency of the above-mentioned virtues, to preserve and perfect a republican constitution, and secure the blessings of liberty, as well as to promote their future happiness, and also to point out to them the evil tendency of the opposite vices.
NEXT PAGE: Wages
Wages
..
As more was demanded of teachers, pay and the cost of instruction, became an issue. The Middleborough School Committee acknowledged that Middleborough teachers were paid below the state average and argued for increased appropriations in order to secure qualified teachers. (The salary for teachers, including Lura Sawin at the Green School, teaching all three terms in 1876-77 was $280. Later, in the 1880s, salaries were about $320-340).
One-room schools like the Green were also at a disadvantage since teachers there were paid the same salaries as teachers in the graded schools at Middleborough Center who had what was thought an easier task as they taught one level only, rather than mixed levels. This led to the recognition that “it will be difficult to keep good teachers in district schools, when they can get the same pay in a village school with only one class to teach”.
Quickly, however, a disparity developed between the salaries of central school teachers (who were regarded as more qualified and generally had a number of years of practical teaching experience behind them) and those in mixed grade schools. Superintendent Bates felt this pay differential unwarranted, given the demands made upon this latter group. “To fill acceptably a suburban teacher’s position requires a greater ability as an instructor and disciplinarian, a wider knowledge of studies, a greater amount of time for preparation than in a central position. In justice to the teacher her salary should be regulated by the responsibility and requirements of the position.”
In 1892, the Middleborough School Committee recognized that “the salaries paid are inadequate to retain the services of our best teachers” and urged that additional funds be appropriated. This would prove a long-standing recommendation. The Superintendent’s report of 1899 points to the failure to pay competitive salaries as a reason the town was losing qualified teachers. In 1904, the average female teacher’s monthly salary in Massachusetts was $55.37 while that of Middleborough’s female teachers was just $43.12, a considerable difference. By 1910, while the state average had risen to $59.58, Middleborough’s had in fact dropped to $42.06. Throughout the period, Superintendent Bates called for increased appropriations earmarked for salary increases in order to bring them more in line with the county and state averages, and in 1910 provided a battery of documentation in support of his request.
In 1911, voters finally responded and $671.43 was appropriated for increases in the salaries of teachers in the largest suburban schools, including Mary E. Deane at the Green. Over the course of the subsequent years, suburban school salaries did increase, the Green rising from $380.00 in 1906 to $494 in 1914. “The policy of the School Board in raising the salaries of the suburban school teachers, by which action they are now on the same level as the salaries paid by the teachers of the Central Elementary schools, has had the result of retaining the services of many of these teachers who otherwise would have sought employment elsewhere…. The same salary is now paid to every teacher with the exception of the teacher at the Green who receives a larger wage owing to a longer school day.” Perhaps not surprisingly, male teachers were paid at a higher rate than women. When C. Harold Striley replaced Mabel Stearns as the Green School teacher for the 1914-15 academic year, he received $76 more in pay to do the work that Stearns had done.
In June 1916 a further revision in the salaries of female teachers was made and those having served ore than three years would receive $550 annual wages for teaching in suburban schools. Yet despite the earlier rhetoric concerning the challenges of the suburban school teacher in comparison to her central school counterpart, central school teachers were to be paid $50 more. [1916:28] The steady growth in Middleborough teacher salaries during this period notwithstanding, average rates of pay for Middleborough teachers still fell below what their counterparts were making throughout the remainder of the county and the state. In 1919, Superintendent Bates recommended “that salaries of the teachers be increased $300 each.” Even after salaries were raised to $1,000, Bates still contended that the minimum base salary for grade school teachers should be $1,200. Somewhat surprisingly, the increase was made and in 1921, Mary Burke at the Green was being paid $1,200. Another welcome change at the time was the frequency of pay. Teachers were paid once monthly until October, 1917, when the School Committee voted to pay twice monthly.
Bates could be well satisfied with the results which had dramatically increased teacher pay and correspondingly retention rates and, most importantly, the level of instruction in the suburban schools. “It is a great advance from placing these schools in charge of inexperienced teachers at $7 a week, or $266 a year, as was done 20 years ago, to securing trained and experienced teachers at $1,200 a year. And the work of these schools attests to the work of the trained teachers.”
NEXT PAGE: Turnover & Retention
PREVIOUS PAGE: Teaching at the Green
As more was demanded of teachers, pay and the cost of instruction, became an issue. The Middleborough School Committee acknowledged that Middleborough teachers were paid below the state average and argued for increased appropriations in order to secure qualified teachers. (The salary for teachers, including Lura Sawin at the Green School, teaching all three terms in 1876-77 was $280. Later, in the 1880s, salaries were about $320-340).
One-room schools like the Green were also at a disadvantage since teachers there were paid the same salaries as teachers in the graded schools at Middleborough Center who had what was thought an easier task as they taught one level only, rather than mixed levels. This led to the recognition that “it will be difficult to keep good teachers in district schools, when they can get the same pay in a village school with only one class to teach”.
Quickly, however, a disparity developed between the salaries of central school teachers (who were regarded as more qualified and generally had a number of years of practical teaching experience behind them) and those in mixed grade schools. Superintendent Bates felt this pay differential unwarranted, given the demands made upon this latter group. “To fill acceptably a suburban teacher’s position requires a greater ability as an instructor and disciplinarian, a wider knowledge of studies, a greater amount of time for preparation than in a central position. In justice to the teacher her salary should be regulated by the responsibility and requirements of the position.”
In 1892, the Middleborough School Committee recognized that “the salaries paid are inadequate to retain the services of our best teachers” and urged that additional funds be appropriated. This would prove a long-standing recommendation. The Superintendent’s report of 1899 points to the failure to pay competitive salaries as a reason the town was losing qualified teachers. In 1904, the average female teacher’s monthly salary in Massachusetts was $55.37 while that of Middleborough’s female teachers was just $43.12, a considerable difference. By 1910, while the state average had risen to $59.58, Middleborough’s had in fact dropped to $42.06. Throughout the period, Superintendent Bates called for increased appropriations earmarked for salary increases in order to bring them more in line with the county and state averages, and in 1910 provided a battery of documentation in support of his request.
In 1911, voters finally responded and $671.43 was appropriated for increases in the salaries of teachers in the largest suburban schools, including Mary E. Deane at the Green. Over the course of the subsequent years, suburban school salaries did increase, the Green rising from $380.00 in 1906 to $494 in 1914. “The policy of the School Board in raising the salaries of the suburban school teachers, by which action they are now on the same level as the salaries paid by the teachers of the Central Elementary schools, has had the result of retaining the services of many of these teachers who otherwise would have sought employment elsewhere…. The same salary is now paid to every teacher with the exception of the teacher at the Green who receives a larger wage owing to a longer school day.” Perhaps not surprisingly, male teachers were paid at a higher rate than women. When C. Harold Striley replaced Mabel Stearns as the Green School teacher for the 1914-15 academic year, he received $76 more in pay to do the work that Stearns had done.
In June 1916 a further revision in the salaries of female teachers was made and those having served ore than three years would receive $550 annual wages for teaching in suburban schools. Yet despite the earlier rhetoric concerning the challenges of the suburban school teacher in comparison to her central school counterpart, central school teachers were to be paid $50 more. [1916:28] The steady growth in Middleborough teacher salaries during this period notwithstanding, average rates of pay for Middleborough teachers still fell below what their counterparts were making throughout the remainder of the county and the state. In 1919, Superintendent Bates recommended “that salaries of the teachers be increased $300 each.” Even after salaries were raised to $1,000, Bates still contended that the minimum base salary for grade school teachers should be $1,200. Somewhat surprisingly, the increase was made and in 1921, Mary Burke at the Green was being paid $1,200. Another welcome change at the time was the frequency of pay. Teachers were paid once monthly until October, 1917, when the School Committee voted to pay twice monthly.
Bates could be well satisfied with the results which had dramatically increased teacher pay and correspondingly retention rates and, most importantly, the level of instruction in the suburban schools. “It is a great advance from placing these schools in charge of inexperienced teachers at $7 a week, or $266 a year, as was done 20 years ago, to securing trained and experienced teachers at $1,200 a year. And the work of these schools attests to the work of the trained teachers.”
NEXT PAGE: Turnover & Retention
PREVIOUS PAGE: Teaching at the Green
Turnover & Retention
.
Dissatisfaction with salary fueled teacher turnover which remained high during the late nineteenth century, and the resulting lack of continuity in rural one-room schools created challenges for students, a circumstance acknowledge by Superintendent Fitts in 1886. “With so many changes it is very difficult to show good results, and yet with the smallness of the pay, and the lonesomeness of some of the places to those who do not call them ‘home,’ we can hardly expect to keep our good teachers.” Fitts looked at improving this situation, as did the school committee which at this time began engaging teachers “with the understanding that they would stay until the end of a term, and then not leave without two weeks notice being given to the Superintendent.” The committee’s action had been prompted by the departure of Fannie W. Richards who had resigned her position in the School Street School for a higher paying position in Watertown which “so seriously … interfere[d] with the best good of the school.” (Not only had Miss Richards’ decision disrupt the School Street School, it affected the Green School as well, for Mary E. Frink was transferred from the Green to replace Miss Richards at School Street. She herself was replaced by Mary E. Deane).
Middleborough continued to lose qualified teachers throughout this period due to the lure of more lucrative wages elsewhere. The 1882 School Committee report remarked: “We find it possible to pay just so much as will satisfy the inexperienced teacher; and, when she has proved her ability, the Committee are compelled to accept in reply to their interrogation concerning her return: ‘If I cannot do better.’” Despite the wounded tone of the report, the Middleborough School Committee was clearly looking to have it both ways, paying suburban school teachers as little as possible while expecting a long-term commitment to the town on the part of teachers.
The continual turnover in teachers, seen most readily in the suburban schools, was undesirable. “The one great drawback in these schools is the lack of permanency in the teaching force.” The 1912-13 academic year at the Green was particularly notable in this regard with four teachers taking a portion of the year. Miss Erna Cornish was forced to give up her duties at the Green at the start of the year in September due to ill health so that she could “rest for a time.” She was succeeded temporarily by Mrs. Jeanette Tobey as a substitute. Miss Edith Holbrook of Lakeville was appointed to fill the position, but resigned in January, 1913, to be replaced by Miss Frances Sawyer of Kittery, Maine, “a teacher of experience” who completed the year. The continual change was not conducive to learning, particularly as the school was overcrowded at the time, and epitomized the School Committee’s concerns.
The situation was drastically improved during the 1910s when a series of wage increases brought Middleborough teacher salaries up to par with those offered elsewhere. A consequent stabilization in the teaching force was clearly discernible over the subsequent decadeat the Green School where teacher Mary R. Burke remained for eight years, leaving only in July, 1924, when she retired.
NEXT PAGE: Training & Development
PREVIOUS PAGE: Wages
Dissatisfaction with salary fueled teacher turnover which remained high during the late nineteenth century, and the resulting lack of continuity in rural one-room schools created challenges for students, a circumstance acknowledge by Superintendent Fitts in 1886. “With so many changes it is very difficult to show good results, and yet with the smallness of the pay, and the lonesomeness of some of the places to those who do not call them ‘home,’ we can hardly expect to keep our good teachers.” Fitts looked at improving this situation, as did the school committee which at this time began engaging teachers “with the understanding that they would stay until the end of a term, and then not leave without two weeks notice being given to the Superintendent.” The committee’s action had been prompted by the departure of Fannie W. Richards who had resigned her position in the School Street School for a higher paying position in Watertown which “so seriously … interfere[d] with the best good of the school.” (Not only had Miss Richards’ decision disrupt the School Street School, it affected the Green School as well, for Mary E. Frink was transferred from the Green to replace Miss Richards at School Street. She herself was replaced by Mary E. Deane).
Middleborough continued to lose qualified teachers throughout this period due to the lure of more lucrative wages elsewhere. The 1882 School Committee report remarked: “We find it possible to pay just so much as will satisfy the inexperienced teacher; and, when she has proved her ability, the Committee are compelled to accept in reply to their interrogation concerning her return: ‘If I cannot do better.’” Despite the wounded tone of the report, the Middleborough School Committee was clearly looking to have it both ways, paying suburban school teachers as little as possible while expecting a long-term commitment to the town on the part of teachers.
The continual turnover in teachers, seen most readily in the suburban schools, was undesirable. “The one great drawback in these schools is the lack of permanency in the teaching force.” The 1912-13 academic year at the Green was particularly notable in this regard with four teachers taking a portion of the year. Miss Erna Cornish was forced to give up her duties at the Green at the start of the year in September due to ill health so that she could “rest for a time.” She was succeeded temporarily by Mrs. Jeanette Tobey as a substitute. Miss Edith Holbrook of Lakeville was appointed to fill the position, but resigned in January, 1913, to be replaced by Miss Frances Sawyer of Kittery, Maine, “a teacher of experience” who completed the year. The continual change was not conducive to learning, particularly as the school was overcrowded at the time, and epitomized the School Committee’s concerns.
The situation was drastically improved during the 1910s when a series of wage increases brought Middleborough teacher salaries up to par with those offered elsewhere. A consequent stabilization in the teaching force was clearly discernible over the subsequent decadeat the Green School where teacher Mary R. Burke remained for eight years, leaving only in July, 1924, when she retired.
NEXT PAGE: Training & Development
PREVIOUS PAGE: Wages
Training & Development
.
Teachers at the Green School were monitored, and were under the watchful eye of the local School Committee which visited frequently. During 1877-78, Miss Kingman at the Green School had 8 visits from the School Committee to observe her teaching manner. Little constructive help was provided where teachers were found lacking.
While Superintendent of Schools Edward P. Fitts began teacher meetings in the fall of 1886 in order to help raise the general level of teaching in Middleborough, it was his successors, Willard T. Leonard and Asher Jacoby who took steps to establish more formalized and substantive teacher training. A training school was established in 1891 during Leonard’s tenure to fit high school graduates for teaching careers, while Jacoby wrote in 1893 that he believed one of his duties was “to improve the tone and strength of the teaching service.” Towards this end, Jacoby in 1893 instituted a series of five mandatory teacher meetings each month. “Although attendance at these meetings was required, I believe that the teachers attended cheerfully,” noted Jacoby. Separate meetings were held for each department as well, including the teachers in the “ungraded” or “mixed grade” schools such as the Green. In 1894, these meetings were held Saturday afternoons. In 1895, the suburban school teachers, including the Green, studied and discussed Arnold’s Waymarks of Teaching. These meetings proved highly successful, attracting “considerable attention in outside educational circles”, as well. In 1911, the manner in which suburban school teachers met was revised. The teachers were divided into three groups of five and attended bi-monthly meetings in the Superintendent’s office.
In October, 1893, the Middleboro Pedagogical Club was organized under Jacoby’s direction with the purpose of “the mutual improvement of its members along educational lines”. The first task undertaken was a study of educational psychology. To encourage teachers to read educational texts, volumes related to the field were kept as a library in the Superintendent’s office, and by 1895 110 volumes were included. Four years later, the number had reached 190, and the library represented an important educational resource for teachers.
Teachers were also permitted so called “visiting days” during which they were allowed to visit other schools in order to observe educational practices elsewhere. In 1897, the “Rules and Regulations” of the Middleborough School Committee set the number of these days at two per year “for the purpose of observing the modes of discipline and instruction.”
Most successful of all, however, was the Teachers’ Training Class conducted under the supervision of the Superintendent of Schools in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The purpose of the class was to provide high school graduates with a one-year training course combined with observation work in Middleborough’s central schools. The young women “were assigned after their training to vacancies, if any, in the Suburban Schools, generally caused by those former graduates of the Training Class who had been successful in such positions being transferred to the Central Schools.” While the Training Class undoubtedly provided well needed and well received instruction, it tended to underscore the suburban schools’ role as a training ground for future central school teachers, a development which ran counter to the argument that these schools, in fact, required the better-trained teachers. Nevertheless, the Training Class ensured that these women were ultimately better prepared than they otherwise would have been.
Following the end of the school year in May, 1911, the Teachers’ Training Class was abandoned. While the class had served an essential service for a number of decades, increasingly the Middleborough School Committee felt that teachers who had been trained through such institutions as the Bridgewater Normal School should be employed instead of high school graduates trained through the local course.
Helping also drive the improvement of one-room school teaching was the Middleborough School Committee’s actions throughout the period establishing higher standards for its teachers. In 1894, the School Committee adopted a policy requiring teachers in Middleborough schools to have a high school or equivalent education as well as either practical teaching experience or training in education.
NEXT PAGE: Green School Teachers, 1871-1941
PREVIOUS PAGE: Turnover & Retention
Teachers at the Green School were monitored, and were under the watchful eye of the local School Committee which visited frequently. During 1877-78, Miss Kingman at the Green School had 8 visits from the School Committee to observe her teaching manner. Little constructive help was provided where teachers were found lacking.
While Superintendent of Schools Edward P. Fitts began teacher meetings in the fall of 1886 in order to help raise the general level of teaching in Middleborough, it was his successors, Willard T. Leonard and Asher Jacoby who took steps to establish more formalized and substantive teacher training. A training school was established in 1891 during Leonard’s tenure to fit high school graduates for teaching careers, while Jacoby wrote in 1893 that he believed one of his duties was “to improve the tone and strength of the teaching service.” Towards this end, Jacoby in 1893 instituted a series of five mandatory teacher meetings each month. “Although attendance at these meetings was required, I believe that the teachers attended cheerfully,” noted Jacoby. Separate meetings were held for each department as well, including the teachers in the “ungraded” or “mixed grade” schools such as the Green. In 1894, these meetings were held Saturday afternoons. In 1895, the suburban school teachers, including the Green, studied and discussed Arnold’s Waymarks of Teaching. These meetings proved highly successful, attracting “considerable attention in outside educational circles”, as well. In 1911, the manner in which suburban school teachers met was revised. The teachers were divided into three groups of five and attended bi-monthly meetings in the Superintendent’s office.
In October, 1893, the Middleboro Pedagogical Club was organized under Jacoby’s direction with the purpose of “the mutual improvement of its members along educational lines”. The first task undertaken was a study of educational psychology. To encourage teachers to read educational texts, volumes related to the field were kept as a library in the Superintendent’s office, and by 1895 110 volumes were included. Four years later, the number had reached 190, and the library represented an important educational resource for teachers.
Teachers were also permitted so called “visiting days” during which they were allowed to visit other schools in order to observe educational practices elsewhere. In 1897, the “Rules and Regulations” of the Middleborough School Committee set the number of these days at two per year “for the purpose of observing the modes of discipline and instruction.”
Most successful of all, however, was the Teachers’ Training Class conducted under the supervision of the Superintendent of Schools in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The purpose of the class was to provide high school graduates with a one-year training course combined with observation work in Middleborough’s central schools. The young women “were assigned after their training to vacancies, if any, in the Suburban Schools, generally caused by those former graduates of the Training Class who had been successful in such positions being transferred to the Central Schools.” While the Training Class undoubtedly provided well needed and well received instruction, it tended to underscore the suburban schools’ role as a training ground for future central school teachers, a development which ran counter to the argument that these schools, in fact, required the better-trained teachers. Nevertheless, the Training Class ensured that these women were ultimately better prepared than they otherwise would have been.
Following the end of the school year in May, 1911, the Teachers’ Training Class was abandoned. While the class had served an essential service for a number of decades, increasingly the Middleborough School Committee felt that teachers who had been trained through such institutions as the Bridgewater Normal School should be employed instead of high school graduates trained through the local course.
Helping also drive the improvement of one-room school teaching was the Middleborough School Committee’s actions throughout the period establishing higher standards for its teachers. In 1894, the School Committee adopted a policy requiring teachers in Middleborough schools to have a high school or equivalent education as well as either practical teaching experience or training in education.
NEXT PAGE: Green School Teachers, 1871-1941
PREVIOUS PAGE: Turnover & Retention
Green School Teachers, 1871-1941
.
1871-72
Caroline Weston
Lucia Drake
Lucia Drake
1872-73
Annie A. Lovell
Helen Ward
Helen Ward
1873-74
Annie A. Lovell
Sarah A. Gibbs
Mary E. Evans
Sarah A. Gibbs
Mary E. Evans
1874-75
Lucia A. Thompson
Mary S. Perkins
Mary E. Evans
Mary S. Perkins
Mary E. Evans
1875-76
Mary E. Evans
Lura Sawin
Lura Sawin
1876-77
Lura Sawin
1877
Lura Sawin
L. W. Kingman
1878
1878
Mary F. Hagen
1879
1879
Mary F. Hagen
1879
Lucia Keith
1879
Mary F. Hagen
1880
Mary F. Hagen
1881
Mary F. Hagen
Edith F. Holbrook
1882
Edith F. Holbrook
1882
Edith F. Holbrook
Abbie A. Mills
Abbie A. Mills
1883
Susan A. Haywood
1884
Mary E. Frink
1885
1885
Charlotte Hezlitt
Mary E. Frink
Lura H. Pickering
Mary E. Frink
Lura H. Pickering
1886
Lura H. Pickering
1887
1887
Mary E. Frink
Mary E. Deane
1888
Mary E. Deane
1888
Mary E. Deane
.
1889
Mary E. Deane
.
1890
Mary E. Deane
1891
1891
L. Blanche Alden
1892
Lillian B. Alden
1893
Florence E. Thompson
1894
Lizzie B. Lucas
.
1895
C. Augusta Thomas
.
1896
1896
C. Augusta Thomas
.
1897
C. Augusta Thomas
.
1898
Grace E. Bailey
.
1899
Grace E. Bailey
.
1899-1900
Bertha E. Vaughan
.
1900-01
Bertha E. Vaughan
.
1901-02
Bertha E. Vaughan
.
1902-03
A. Delle Alden
.
1903-04
A. Delle Alden
.
1904-05
A. Delle Alden
.
1905-06
A. Delle Alden
.
1906-07
Bessie B. Bailey
.
1907-08
Bessie B. Bailey
.
1908-09
Bessie B. Bailey
.
1909-10
Mary E. Deane
.
1910-11
Mary E. Deane
.
1911-1912
Erna L. Cornish
1912
Jeanette Tobey, substitute
1912-13
Edith Holland
1913
Frances Sawyer
1913-14
Mabel E. Stearns
1914-15
C. Harold Striley
1915-16
C. Harold Striley
1916-17
Mary R. Burke
1917-18
Mary R. Burke
.
1918-19
Mary R. Burke
.
1919-20
Mary R. Burke
.
1920-21
Mary R. Burke
.
1921-22
Mary R. Burke
.
1922-23
Mary R. Burke
.
1923-24
Mary R. Burke
.
1924-25
Esther M. Spooner
.
1925-26
Esther M. Spooner
1926-27
Esther M. Spooner
1927-28
Annie Lee
1928-29
Annie Lee
1929-30
Annie Lee
1930-31
Elizabeth K. Drew
1931-32
Elizabeth K. Drew
1932-33
Elizabeth K. Drew
1933-34
Dora L. Cobb
1934
Evelyn L. Bailey
1934-35
Hilda G. MacKeen
1935-36
Hilda G. MacKeen
1936-37
Hilda G. MacKeen
1937-38
Hilda G. MacKeen
1938-39
Jeanne H. Lockhart
1939-40
Jeanne H. Lockhart
1940-41
Jeanne H. Lockhart
.
PREVIOUS PAGE: Training & Development
Curriculum
.
In his report for 1891, Middleborough Superintendent of Schools Willard T. Leonard laid out his vision of the role of the local schoolhouse. “The great object of the schools is to prepare the children for future usefulness. While not wholly ignoring the physical and the moral, their main work is a careful and patient training of the mind. All their energies are bent in this direction …." Towards this end, Middleborough’s school curriculum was developed.
The one-room school curriculum, itself, varied greatly, dependent as it was on the differing levels of development within each building, and though patterned upon the curriculum in the central schools, that of the suburban school was typically modified to meet the needs of a mixed grade room.
To assist teachers in ungraded schools like the Green who were confronted with the challenge of teaching a student body of varying ages and abilities, in November, 1895, a curriculum was developed and introduced into the suburban schools, including the Green. Each school was divided into three sections based upon the grades present, and a relatively rigid schedule established.
Until the early 1900s, the elementary school curriculum in Middleborough was established for nine grades, all of which (outside Middleborough center) were housed in a single ungraded school. Superintendent Bates became increasingly dissatisfied with this arrangement and recommended an eight-year course of study for students before entering the high school. “I believe with a shorter course better application on the part of the pupils would be gained and less of dawdling would be noticeable in the schoolrooms.”
With this view in mind, the elementary school curriculum was revised, and in 1911, a further overhaul of the suburban school curriculum was proposed for implementation in the fall of 1912. In September, 1917, a revised course of study in arithmetic, reading, language, grammar and geography was instituted for the entire school system, with the course of study in the primary grades being better outlined. “It is hoped by this systematic outline to be able to carry on the work more uniformly and with a more defnite aim.”
In his report for 1891, Middleborough Superintendent of Schools Willard T. Leonard laid out his vision of the role of the local schoolhouse. “The great object of the schools is to prepare the children for future usefulness. While not wholly ignoring the physical and the moral, their main work is a careful and patient training of the mind. All their energies are bent in this direction …." Towards this end, Middleborough’s school curriculum was developed.
The one-room school curriculum, itself, varied greatly, dependent as it was on the differing levels of development within each building, and though patterned upon the curriculum in the central schools, that of the suburban school was typically modified to meet the needs of a mixed grade room.
To assist teachers in ungraded schools like the Green who were confronted with the challenge of teaching a student body of varying ages and abilities, in November, 1895, a curriculum was developed and introduced into the suburban schools, including the Green. Each school was divided into three sections based upon the grades present, and a relatively rigid schedule established.
Until the early 1900s, the elementary school curriculum in Middleborough was established for nine grades, all of which (outside Middleborough center) were housed in a single ungraded school. Superintendent Bates became increasingly dissatisfied with this arrangement and recommended an eight-year course of study for students before entering the high school. “I believe with a shorter course better application on the part of the pupils would be gained and less of dawdling would be noticeable in the schoolrooms.”
With this view in mind, the elementary school curriculum was revised, and in 1911, a further overhaul of the suburban school curriculum was proposed for implementation in the fall of 1912. In September, 1917, a revised course of study in arithmetic, reading, language, grammar and geography was instituted for the entire school system, with the course of study in the primary grades being better outlined. “It is hoped by this systematic outline to be able to carry on the work more uniformly and with a more defnite aim.”
Reading
At the time the Green School was built, reading was a focus of the Middleborough School Committee which believed that it could not be considered enough. “Good reading, and spelling, cover a multitude of deficiencies, in school-days and after life.” The committee was clearly disheartened at the level of reading which it found in the schools in the early 1870s.
The reading in all our schools … is still defective. As a general rule, with the older scholars, it is too rapid. It would seem that the only end to be attained is the end of the paragraph to be read, and that readers, like race-horses and steamboats, are to be prized according to their speed. As a necessary consequence, there is imperfect enunciation, the dropping and clipping of final syllables, the ignoring of accent and sometimes several words are blended into one. For instance, we have heard and pronounced an, and the sentence, “Who is he,” Whizzie!
The committee challenged teachers to establish a high standard in this area.
Some of our teachers are not so good instructors in reading especially, as we wish they were. Some follow simply the old way, allowing about so much time, and so many paragraphs to each, and only aiding in pronunciation, and not closely and accurately in that; whereas, if need be, every paragraph should be repeated, and elaborated, till it be read with as much correctness as is aimed at in the solution of a problem, or the analysis of language. A lazy reading-exercise is of all things, inexcusable and reprehensible.
Despite the School Committees challenge, reading remained a matter of concern, and in 1879 the committee continued to regard the subject as the most neglected and poorly taught. To remedy the situation, the committee suggested the abandonment of the traditional “A B C method” in favor of phonics and word methods. Single words were taught, “one after another, by script from the blackboard, until from one hundred and fifty to two hundred had been learned as wholes, had been analyzed by sounds and spelt be letters.”
Swinton’s Primer and Readers were employed at the Green during this period, the better known McGuffey Readers being in use at Middleborough center. Such readers were important in not only advancing the abilities of the students, but in introducing them to a much wider world beyond Middleborough.
In contrast to today, scholars in the late 19th century were taught first to read script, rather than printed words. “After they can read readily at sight simple sentences in script, that is, after the first three or four months, the transition to the printed word and sentence is made, and, if the teaching has been as it should be, no difficulty is experienced in the transition, but after a few days they read as readily in the one form as in the other. The change from script to print has been found much easier than from print to script.”
In the fall of 1890, the Middleborough schools switched to the “sentence method” of teaching reading in hopes of improving standards of reading.
This differs from our previous method essentially in this, - that instead of teaching a single word by itself, that word has been incorporated into a sentence, and the teacher, by skillful questioning, gets the sentence which she wishes from the child, first in an oral expression, then writes it upon the board, and then the written expression is read by the child. To get these oral expressions the teacher brings before the children toys of all sorts, puts them into their hands, talks with them about the objects, and takes such expressions from them as : I have a cow, I see a cow, The cow has two horns, The cow gives milk, It is my cow, etc. From these expressions the word cow is forever fixed in the memory, good expression is being taught in the reading, and intuitively the child is learning “I have,” “I see,” “It is,” and the like, without having his attention called to them especially.
Despite the change, drills in phonics were retained as it was felt that such skills were helpful in aiding students in learning new words when there was no teacher present.
The school committee continued to focus upon improving reading skills among Middleborough pupils , and in 1895 reported what it considered “good progress.” “The pupils now read forty per cent. better than they did two years ago.”
In the late 1930s, after a period of having seen little focus, reading received renewed attention, particularly at the Green which by that time was operating with the first and second grades for East Middleborough only. “Longer time allotments, frequent standardized tests, and modern remedial techniques, have been employed to improve the reading facility and comprehension.” Phonics also saw increasing use in the classroom during this time.
The reading in all our schools … is still defective. As a general rule, with the older scholars, it is too rapid. It would seem that the only end to be attained is the end of the paragraph to be read, and that readers, like race-horses and steamboats, are to be prized according to their speed. As a necessary consequence, there is imperfect enunciation, the dropping and clipping of final syllables, the ignoring of accent and sometimes several words are blended into one. For instance, we have heard and pronounced an, and the sentence, “Who is he,” Whizzie!
The committee challenged teachers to establish a high standard in this area.
Some of our teachers are not so good instructors in reading especially, as we wish they were. Some follow simply the old way, allowing about so much time, and so many paragraphs to each, and only aiding in pronunciation, and not closely and accurately in that; whereas, if need be, every paragraph should be repeated, and elaborated, till it be read with as much correctness as is aimed at in the solution of a problem, or the analysis of language. A lazy reading-exercise is of all things, inexcusable and reprehensible.
Despite the School Committees challenge, reading remained a matter of concern, and in 1879 the committee continued to regard the subject as the most neglected and poorly taught. To remedy the situation, the committee suggested the abandonment of the traditional “A B C method” in favor of phonics and word methods. Single words were taught, “one after another, by script from the blackboard, until from one hundred and fifty to two hundred had been learned as wholes, had been analyzed by sounds and spelt be letters.”
Swinton’s Primer and Readers were employed at the Green during this period, the better known McGuffey Readers being in use at Middleborough center. Such readers were important in not only advancing the abilities of the students, but in introducing them to a much wider world beyond Middleborough.
In contrast to today, scholars in the late 19th century were taught first to read script, rather than printed words. “After they can read readily at sight simple sentences in script, that is, after the first three or four months, the transition to the printed word and sentence is made, and, if the teaching has been as it should be, no difficulty is experienced in the transition, but after a few days they read as readily in the one form as in the other. The change from script to print has been found much easier than from print to script.”In the fall of 1890, the Middleborough schools switched to the “sentence method” of teaching reading in hopes of improving standards of reading.
This differs from our previous method essentially in this, - that instead of teaching a single word by itself, that word has been incorporated into a sentence, and the teacher, by skillful questioning, gets the sentence which she wishes from the child, first in an oral expression, then writes it upon the board, and then the written expression is read by the child. To get these oral expressions the teacher brings before the children toys of all sorts, puts them into their hands, talks with them about the objects, and takes such expressions from them as : I have a cow, I see a cow, The cow has two horns, The cow gives milk, It is my cow, etc. From these expressions the word cow is forever fixed in the memory, good expression is being taught in the reading, and intuitively the child is learning “I have,” “I see,” “It is,” and the like, without having his attention called to them especially.
Despite the change, drills in phonics were retained as it was felt that such skills were helpful in aiding students in learning new words when there was no teacher present.
The school committee continued to focus upon improving reading skills among Middleborough pupils , and in 1895 reported what it considered “good progress.” “The pupils now read forty per cent. better than they did two years ago.”
In the late 1930s, after a period of having seen little focus, reading received renewed attention, particularly at the Green which by that time was operating with the first and second grades for East Middleborough only. “Longer time allotments, frequent standardized tests, and modern remedial techniques, have been employed to improve the reading facility and comprehension.” Phonics also saw increasing use in the classroom during this time.
Writing & Grammar
.
The method of teaching grammar in Middleborough’s schools, and the inordinate amount of time devoted to the subject, came in for sharp criticism by the school committee in early 1875, undoubtedly to the delight of scholars plagued by the subject.
It seems to us that an immense amount of time is wasted in the study of Grammar, as conducted in schools. The object of English Grammar is said to be to teach one to “speak and write the English language correctly.” Does the usual method of teaching it do this? To some extent, doubtless it does. But not to a degree proportioned to the amount of time and study devoted to it. Our children spend months of precious time in storing away in their minds vast quantities of almost useless verbiage. The old time “parsing” [sentence diagramming] has been mostly supplanted by the more modern “analysis.” But has this innovation, which has been for many years so popular, and from which so much was expected, answered the high hopes which were entertained of it? We think not, and we believe that we are not alone in this opinion, but that it is shared in by many of the best educators. Scholars may learn to talk very glibly of “simple,” “compound,” “complex,” “elements,” “first class,” second class,” and “third class,” and yet not know how to “speak and write the English language correctly.”
For 1877, the town adopted a new grammar for the primary levels, changing to Harvey’s which it favored for the text’s avoidance of theoretical discussions which served “only to confuse and discourage the beginners”. Throughout the period, Harvey’s remained the standard grammar text for Middleborough scholars.
In 1885, Superintendent of Schools Morss concurred that “it is in this branch [written language work] that our schools show the greatest weakness". "Grammar never taught any one to speak and write correctly. It simply tells us the usage which is sanctioned by good writers and speakers. We must learn to use good language by using it,” emphasized Morss. Little is recorded, however, regarding what changes were implemented to improve language study in the schools at this time. In fact, less attention was given in reports of the area to this field of study than to others.
In 1923, Pearson and Kirchwey’s Essentials of English language series was adopted in the Green and other schools following the recommendation of the central school teachers who had used it with success.
The method of teaching grammar in Middleborough’s schools, and the inordinate amount of time devoted to the subject, came in for sharp criticism by the school committee in early 1875, undoubtedly to the delight of scholars plagued by the subject.
It seems to us that an immense amount of time is wasted in the study of Grammar, as conducted in schools. The object of English Grammar is said to be to teach one to “speak and write the English language correctly.” Does the usual method of teaching it do this? To some extent, doubtless it does. But not to a degree proportioned to the amount of time and study devoted to it. Our children spend months of precious time in storing away in their minds vast quantities of almost useless verbiage. The old time “parsing” [sentence diagramming] has been mostly supplanted by the more modern “analysis.” But has this innovation, which has been for many years so popular, and from which so much was expected, answered the high hopes which were entertained of it? We think not, and we believe that we are not alone in this opinion, but that it is shared in by many of the best educators. Scholars may learn to talk very glibly of “simple,” “compound,” “complex,” “elements,” “first class,” second class,” and “third class,” and yet not know how to “speak and write the English language correctly.”
For 1877, the town adopted a new grammar for the primary levels, changing to Harvey’s which it favored for the text’s avoidance of theoretical discussions which served “only to confuse and discourage the beginners”. Throughout the period, Harvey’s remained the standard grammar text for Middleborough scholars.
In 1885, Superintendent of Schools Morss concurred that “it is in this branch [written language work] that our schools show the greatest weakness". "Grammar never taught any one to speak and write correctly. It simply tells us the usage which is sanctioned by good writers and speakers. We must learn to use good language by using it,” emphasized Morss. Little is recorded, however, regarding what changes were implemented to improve language study in the schools at this time. In fact, less attention was given in reports of the area to this field of study than to others.
In 1923, Pearson and Kirchwey’s Essentials of English language series was adopted in the Green and other schools following the recommendation of the central school teachers who had used it with success.
Spelling
.
“The ability to spell English words seems to be a gift of which many people are deprived,” remarked Superintendent Fitts in his report for 1889. Deploring the level of spelling skills found in children and adults alike, Fitts sought to improve the teaching of it in Middleborough schools. Throughout the period, local schools grappled with the best tools to employ in teaching spelling. In 1881, the Progressive Speller which was then in use at the Green was labeled by the local School Committee as “being one of the most obsolete text-books we know of.” It was consequently replaced by Worcester’s Speller, which in turn was gradually replaced in the late 1880s by Harrington’s Graded Speller for upper level students.
Oral spelling was emphasized in the first three years. “In the fourth year we begin to write formal lessons in a book which is preserved and used day after day.” Spelling as an educational subject gained increasing visibility during the last decade of the 19th century, so much so that by 1899 “its importance is more generally recognized than at any previous time.” Superintendent Jacoby at this time sought to bring Middleborough’s teaching of spelling in line with the theories of Dr. Edward R. Shaw, Dean of the School of Pedagogy at New York University, who considered learning to spell as a matter largely of association.
“The ability to spell English words seems to be a gift of which many people are deprived,” remarked Superintendent Fitts in his report for 1889. Deploring the level of spelling skills found in children and adults alike, Fitts sought to improve the teaching of it in Middleborough schools. Throughout the period, local schools grappled with the best tools to employ in teaching spelling. In 1881, the Progressive Speller which was then in use at the Green was labeled by the local School Committee as “being one of the most obsolete text-books we know of.” It was consequently replaced by Worcester’s Speller, which in turn was gradually replaced in the late 1880s by Harrington’s Graded Speller for upper level students.
Oral spelling was emphasized in the first three years. “In the fourth year we begin to write formal lessons in a book which is preserved and used day after day.” Spelling as an educational subject gained increasing visibility during the last decade of the 19th century, so much so that by 1899 “its importance is more generally recognized than at any previous time.” Superintendent Jacoby at this time sought to bring Middleborough’s teaching of spelling in line with the theories of Dr. Edward R. Shaw, Dean of the School of Pedagogy at New York University, who considered learning to spell as a matter largely of association.
Penmanship
.
One skill, the loss of which has been greatly lamented in recent years, is that of penmanship. Ironically, the general feeling in the late nineteenth century was also that students wrote poorly, a circumstance attributable to “delaying the beginning of systematic instruction in penmanship till the pupil has formed careless habits by too long use of the pencil.” In 1871, the Middleborough School Committee maintained simply, “we think more attention should be given to writing.”
“Writing” in the context of the nineteenth century meant penmanship. As late as 1920, Middleborough’s Supervisor of Penmanship, somewhat testily took umbrage at what he clearly sensed was an arbitrary distinction:
To state that PENMANSHIP is WRITING would seem like discrediting the intelligence of anyone who has attained the use of reason. Nevertheless PENMANSHIP is understood by some pupils to be a term used to describe the work done in one special recitation period of possibly fifteen minutes each day, while all written work is merely WRITING. Until pupils realize that these two terms are synonymous, and that the same care and intelligent practice should be taken in the preparation of all written work as that of the class devoted entirely to the study of penmanship, satisfactory results can not be obtained.
Children were taught first to write cursively, learning only later how to print. Printing was considered more cumbersome and time-consuming and so was not favored.
“A child begins to write immediately on entering school, at first with slate and pencil, soon with appear, while the third year finds him using pen and ink with regular copybooks. His writing now is quite commendable, for he has had already two years’ practice with slate and paper …." Some schools, apparently following the advice of Superintendent Morss in 1886 began writing with ink in the second grade, including “much practice with finger and arm movements.”
Morss’ successor, Superintendent Fitts concurred with the assessment that writing deserved greater attention and, as a result, a complete course in writing was set forth for the four primary grades, meeting with some initial success. “The children in the lowest Primary are at present capable of making a few letters remarkably well, for the time they have been in school, and can write their names in a very legible hand.”
Penmanship was instructed in the Green School and taught until 1895 by means of the popular Spencer method with its ornate flourishes and prescribed 52-degree slant. “The average results, however, were not satisfactory. The writing in many cases was poor. Illegible writing was too prevalent. The subject was difficult to teach and hard to learn. Besides, eminent medical authorities began to assure us that slanting writing produced deformity and imperfect vision.” Consequently during the 1890s, penmanship as an educational subject received renewed attention. Beginning in 1895 “a system of intermedial penmanship” was introduced into the local schools which sought to eliminate the floridness of Spencerian penmanship as well as the amount of time the Spencer method required.
In 1908, Superintendent Bates recommended the appointment of a Supervisor of Penmanship to oversee the subject throughout the towns schools. Previously, Supervisors of Music and Drawing had been successful in developing those areas and it was thought that a Supervisor of Penmanship would be able to raise the standards in that field as well. In 1911, William A. Harthorne was named to fill this role, and he met with the Green School teacher monthly in order to discuss the progress of the pupils and the direction of penmanship teaching at the school. The object of penmanship education at the time was to train students to write “a neat, swift, and creditable hand.” The following year (1912), the copy book, so long a staple of the training of penmanship, was abandoned in favor of a “course outlined by the supervisor [which was] followed under his direction.” Harthorne was a strong advocate of writing efficiently, and surprisingly announced in 1912 that “A person may write the vertical, the medial, the back hand, Spencerian or some other system, I care not what, but if he uses the arm movement, his efficiency is increased 2 or 3 times. This is our aim.” Of the two methods of writing – finger movement and arm movement – Middleborough’s supervisors like Harthorne would continually favor the latter. Harold C. Sears in 1923, also a proponent of arm movement methods of writing, stated somewhat pedantically in 1923: “in my reports of other years I have endeavored to show just what is meant by arm movement and its advantages over finger movement, and I will not repeat here those advantages except to say that they are obvious to all.”
In 1914, the nearly ubiquitous Palmer Method (an arm movement method) was finally adopted for use by the elementary classes under Louise H. Scott, the new Supervisor of Penmanship. “This method is meeting with excellent success and already 13 of the teaching force have been awarded diplomas [Palmer Teachers’ Certificates] by the Palmer Co. signifying their ability to teach their system of writing.”
While previously a metronome had occasionally been utilized in penmanship work in order to help students in their movement drills, music was also suggested as helping teach rhythm and correlating work in penmanship and music. Pupils were encouraged to practice their penmanship skills and those in the fourth grade or above were recognized by the Palmer Company for doing so. Following approval of the first 25 drills by the teacher and Supervisor of Penmanship, students could have them submitted to the Palmer Company’s Boston office. “If the work is up to their standard, the pupil is awarded a Palmer Button.” Similarly, the first 100 drills could be awarded a Palmer Progress Pin and satisfactory completion of all 172 drills resulted in the Pupil’s Final Certificate. Later, the Ayres Scale for the Measurement of Handwriting was introduced to aid students.
Scott’s successor as Supervisor of Penmanship, Raymond S. Dower, however, was less impressed with the results in the schools. “The actual written work [was] not of a very high standard when measured by the standard established by commercial educators.” Penmanship, perhaps, received a seemingly inordinate amount of attention, perhaps because, as Dower contended, “without exception, writing, correct writing, is the most difficult subject that a grade teacher has to teach”. Dower questioned whether parents expected “too much of teachers in the matter of penmanship” and maintained that “psychologists emphasize the fact that, by nature, the child is not old enough to learn to write rightly until about ten years of age.”
Suburban schools like the Green clearly struggled in teaching penmanship of an acceptable standard and it was not until 1923 that suburban school pupils received awards for the penmanship abilities. This latter fact, however, was a testament to the tenacity of suburban school teachers in elevating the quality of their pupils’ work. Little assistance was received from the Supervisor of Penmanship whose “only contact with the teacher of these schools is through the Teachers’ Institute held every term.”
To help guide students, in 1924 Blackboard Wall Charts were placed in a conspicuous location at the Green “where pupils may see at all times the perfect forms of all the capitals, small letter, and numerals.”
Each teacher has for her own guidance, a scientifically arranged list of the successive steps to be taken in teaching the subject of penmanship. This list is also posted where it may be referred to constantly by the teacher.
In addition, books containing stories illustrating the forms of letters have been obtained for use of the teacher so that she may make her work interesting for the pupils.
I have prepared, for the use of the theachers, an analysis of all the letters, showing not only the proper strokes used in making the letters, but also special drills and constructive criticism.
With the devotion of the Green School to grades 1 and 2 following 1929, the focus of penmanship studies was the proper formation of letters and development of a “free easy writing movement.”
One skill, the loss of which has been greatly lamented in recent years, is that of penmanship. Ironically, the general feeling in the late nineteenth century was also that students wrote poorly, a circumstance attributable to “delaying the beginning of systematic instruction in penmanship till the pupil has formed careless habits by too long use of the pencil.” In 1871, the Middleborough School Committee maintained simply, “we think more attention should be given to writing.”
“Writing” in the context of the nineteenth century meant penmanship. As late as 1920, Middleborough’s Supervisor of Penmanship, somewhat testily took umbrage at what he clearly sensed was an arbitrary distinction:
To state that PENMANSHIP is WRITING would seem like discrediting the intelligence of anyone who has attained the use of reason. Nevertheless PENMANSHIP is understood by some pupils to be a term used to describe the work done in one special recitation period of possibly fifteen minutes each day, while all written work is merely WRITING. Until pupils realize that these two terms are synonymous, and that the same care and intelligent practice should be taken in the preparation of all written work as that of the class devoted entirely to the study of penmanship, satisfactory results can not be obtained.
Children were taught first to write cursively, learning only later how to print. Printing was considered more cumbersome and time-consuming and so was not favored.
“A child begins to write immediately on entering school, at first with slate and pencil, soon with appear, while the third year finds him using pen and ink with regular copybooks. His writing now is quite commendable, for he has had already two years’ practice with slate and paper …." Some schools, apparently following the advice of Superintendent Morss in 1886 began writing with ink in the second grade, including “much practice with finger and arm movements.”
Morss’ successor, Superintendent Fitts concurred with the assessment that writing deserved greater attention and, as a result, a complete course in writing was set forth for the four primary grades, meeting with some initial success. “The children in the lowest Primary are at present capable of making a few letters remarkably well, for the time they have been in school, and can write their names in a very legible hand.”
Penmanship was instructed in the Green School and taught until 1895 by means of the popular Spencer method with its ornate flourishes and prescribed 52-degree slant. “The average results, however, were not satisfactory. The writing in many cases was poor. Illegible writing was too prevalent. The subject was difficult to teach and hard to learn. Besides, eminent medical authorities began to assure us that slanting writing produced deformity and imperfect vision.” Consequently during the 1890s, penmanship as an educational subject received renewed attention. Beginning in 1895 “a system of intermedial penmanship” was introduced into the local schools which sought to eliminate the floridness of Spencerian penmanship as well as the amount of time the Spencer method required.
In 1908, Superintendent Bates recommended the appointment of a Supervisor of Penmanship to oversee the subject throughout the towns schools. Previously, Supervisors of Music and Drawing had been successful in developing those areas and it was thought that a Supervisor of Penmanship would be able to raise the standards in that field as well. In 1911, William A. Harthorne was named to fill this role, and he met with the Green School teacher monthly in order to discuss the progress of the pupils and the direction of penmanship teaching at the school. The object of penmanship education at the time was to train students to write “a neat, swift, and creditable hand.” The following year (1912), the copy book, so long a staple of the training of penmanship, was abandoned in favor of a “course outlined by the supervisor [which was] followed under his direction.” Harthorne was a strong advocate of writing efficiently, and surprisingly announced in 1912 that “A person may write the vertical, the medial, the back hand, Spencerian or some other system, I care not what, but if he uses the arm movement, his efficiency is increased 2 or 3 times. This is our aim.” Of the two methods of writing – finger movement and arm movement – Middleborough’s supervisors like Harthorne would continually favor the latter. Harold C. Sears in 1923, also a proponent of arm movement methods of writing, stated somewhat pedantically in 1923: “in my reports of other years I have endeavored to show just what is meant by arm movement and its advantages over finger movement, and I will not repeat here those advantages except to say that they are obvious to all.”
In 1914, the nearly ubiquitous Palmer Method (an arm movement method) was finally adopted for use by the elementary classes under Louise H. Scott, the new Supervisor of Penmanship. “This method is meeting with excellent success and already 13 of the teaching force have been awarded diplomas [Palmer Teachers’ Certificates] by the Palmer Co. signifying their ability to teach their system of writing.”
While previously a metronome had occasionally been utilized in penmanship work in order to help students in their movement drills, music was also suggested as helping teach rhythm and correlating work in penmanship and music. Pupils were encouraged to practice their penmanship skills and those in the fourth grade or above were recognized by the Palmer Company for doing so. Following approval of the first 25 drills by the teacher and Supervisor of Penmanship, students could have them submitted to the Palmer Company’s Boston office. “If the work is up to their standard, the pupil is awarded a Palmer Button.” Similarly, the first 100 drills could be awarded a Palmer Progress Pin and satisfactory completion of all 172 drills resulted in the Pupil’s Final Certificate. Later, the Ayres Scale for the Measurement of Handwriting was introduced to aid students.
Scott’s successor as Supervisor of Penmanship, Raymond S. Dower, however, was less impressed with the results in the schools. “The actual written work [was] not of a very high standard when measured by the standard established by commercial educators.” Penmanship, perhaps, received a seemingly inordinate amount of attention, perhaps because, as Dower contended, “without exception, writing, correct writing, is the most difficult subject that a grade teacher has to teach”. Dower questioned whether parents expected “too much of teachers in the matter of penmanship” and maintained that “psychologists emphasize the fact that, by nature, the child is not old enough to learn to write rightly until about ten years of age.”
Suburban schools like the Green clearly struggled in teaching penmanship of an acceptable standard and it was not until 1923 that suburban school pupils received awards for the penmanship abilities. This latter fact, however, was a testament to the tenacity of suburban school teachers in elevating the quality of their pupils’ work. Little assistance was received from the Supervisor of Penmanship whose “only contact with the teacher of these schools is through the Teachers’ Institute held every term.”
To help guide students, in 1924 Blackboard Wall Charts were placed in a conspicuous location at the Green “where pupils may see at all times the perfect forms of all the capitals, small letter, and numerals.”
Each teacher has for her own guidance, a scientifically arranged list of the successive steps to be taken in teaching the subject of penmanship. This list is also posted where it may be referred to constantly by the teacher.
In addition, books containing stories illustrating the forms of letters have been obtained for use of the teacher so that she may make her work interesting for the pupils.
I have prepared, for the use of the theachers, an analysis of all the letters, showing not only the proper strokes used in making the letters, but also special drills and constructive criticism.
With the devotion of the Green School to grades 1 and 2 following 1929, the focus of penmanship studies was the proper formation of letters and development of a “free easy writing movement.”
Arithmetic
.
In the late 1800s, a modified version of the Grube Method of teaching arithmetic was employed in Middleborough schools, including the Green. “By this method the four fundamental rules, together with fractions, are simultaneously taught....All the combinations and separations are taught simultaneously by the use of objects, instead of dwelling on addition till it is mastered, then proceeding to subtraction.”
All instruction in arithmetic was strictly oral until the 5th grade when the first text – White’s Elementary Arithmetic – was introduced. This same text was utilized for 6th grade students as well. Scholars in the subsequent three levels used White’s Complete Arithmetic. While White’s comprised the standard arithmetic text for Middleborough pupils, in 1884, the school committee noted that “there is a new and much better edition of White’s Arithmetic, issued since their introduction into town. The change must come sooner or later….” Textbook work was supplemented by “extra work upon the black-board taken from different arithmetics and original work by the teachers."
Success in arithmetic at the time was measured how rapidly and how accurately students could calculate. In this regard, Superintendent Fitts in 1887 felt that local schools lagged behind those elsewhere and consequently sought an improvement in this area.
In January, 1898, the school department formalized a “Course of Study in Arithmetic” for the elementary schools which urged that “accuracy and rapidity should be thoroughly cultivated” while “long and complicated problems should be avoided”. Students were introduced to simple multiplication, division and fractions as early as the first grade, while simple geometric problems such as calculating surfaces and volumes was introduced in the 5th grade.
The intention of the school committee that the course prove of practical use was indicated by the fact that 5th graders also learned simple business forms such as bills, receipts and promissory notes, and would continue to study these items through the remaining grades when accounting principles were added. Algebra was studied in the 9th grade until 1904 when it was dropped from the grammar school curriculum in order to provide more time for arithmetic. Typical arithmetic problems taken from White's New Complete Arithmetic (1883) indicate the practicality of the subject:
A dairy of 10 cows yielded in one season 120 Hl of milk and 450 Kg of butter; the milk was sold at an average of 6 1/2 cts. per liter; and the butter, at 56 cts. per kilo: what were the season's receipts in money?
In the late 1800s, a modified version of the Grube Method of teaching arithmetic was employed in Middleborough schools, including the Green. “By this method the four fundamental rules, together with fractions, are simultaneously taught....All the combinations and separations are taught simultaneously by the use of objects, instead of dwelling on addition till it is mastered, then proceeding to subtraction.”
All instruction in arithmetic was strictly oral until the 5th grade when the first text – White’s Elementary Arithmetic – was introduced. This same text was utilized for 6th grade students as well. Scholars in the subsequent three levels used White’s Complete Arithmetic. While White’s comprised the standard arithmetic text for Middleborough pupils, in 1884, the school committee noted that “there is a new and much better edition of White’s Arithmetic, issued since their introduction into town. The change must come sooner or later….” Textbook work was supplemented by “extra work upon the black-board taken from different arithmetics and original work by the teachers."
Success in arithmetic at the time was measured how rapidly and how accurately students could calculate. In this regard, Superintendent Fitts in 1887 felt that local schools lagged behind those elsewhere and consequently sought an improvement in this area.
In January, 1898, the school department formalized a “Course of Study in Arithmetic” for the elementary schools which urged that “accuracy and rapidity should be thoroughly cultivated” while “long and complicated problems should be avoided”. Students were introduced to simple multiplication, division and fractions as early as the first grade, while simple geometric problems such as calculating surfaces and volumes was introduced in the 5th grade.
The intention of the school committee that the course prove of practical use was indicated by the fact that 5th graders also learned simple business forms such as bills, receipts and promissory notes, and would continue to study these items through the remaining grades when accounting principles were added. Algebra was studied in the 9th grade until 1904 when it was dropped from the grammar school curriculum in order to provide more time for arithmetic. Typical arithmetic problems taken from White's New Complete Arithmetic (1883) indicate the practicality of the subject:
A dairy of 10 cows yielded in one season 120 Hl of milk and 450 Kg of butter; the milk was sold at an average of 6 1/2 cts. per liter; and the butter, at 56 cts. per kilo: what were the season's receipts in money?
How many yards of Brussels carpeting will carpet a flight of stairs consisting of 18 steps, including the landing, each step being 10 in. wide and 8 in. high, if 1 1/4 yards be allowed for turnings? What will be the cost at $2.25 per yard?
Smith & Jones bought $500 worth of goods on 4 months' credit, $700 on 6 months' credit, and $1000 worth on 5 months' credit: what is the equated time for the payment of the whole?
In 1906, Superintendent Bates recommended that arithmetic no longer be taught in the first grade in order that more time could be devoted to reading, writing, language, music and drawing. Such a recommendation was consistent with educational practice in a large number of schools. 1910 saw the reduction of abstract arithmetical work in the lower grades.
In 1940, a new course of arithmetic study was approved for the first three grades and introduced into the local schools including the Green.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
+-+Copy.jpg)
+of+Smoky+Mountains+018.jpg)
