New houseparents' accommodation on the back avenue

[michael scuffil]

Clearly one of the biggest social changes at CH in the last half century has been the huge increase in the proportion of married staff, and this is not without its problems.

Houseparents are clearly a separate issue, but even then, I'm not sure they need to live on top of their houses, but I suppose there's little use mourning the loss of the old monitorial system (at Horsham and Hertford) where housemasters/mistresses had only a long-stop function. Actually, the monitorial system was one of the great educational advantages of a boarding school.

A very considerable amount of space in the central area of the school is now given over to staff housing. I think it would have been better to build it out beyond Big Side, but the point I made earlier, that most married staff needn't live on site, still seems to me to be valid.

[Mrs C.]

Clearly one of the biggest social changes at CH in the last half century has been the huge increase in the proportion of married staff, and this is not without its problems.

Houseparents are clearly a separate issue, but even then, I'm not sure they need to live on top of their houses, but I suppose there's little use mourning the loss of the old monitorial system (at Horsham and Hertford) where housemasters/mistresses had only a long-stop function. Actually, the monitorial system was one of the great educational advantages of a boarding school.

A very considerable amount of space in the central area of the school is now given over to staff housing. I think it would have been better to build it out beyond Big Side, but the point I made earlier, that most married staff needn't live on site, still seems to me to be valid.

Valid maybe, but then CH would become a normal run-of-the-mill school where no-one is prepared to do anything "out of hours"
And all sense of "community" would be sadly lost

[michael scuffil]

Bachelors/spinsters are out of fashion. It's a problem, and I don't claim to have an answer (my initial contribution to this thread shouldn't be taken TOO seriously). Maybe in 50/60 years' time things will have come full circle, who knows. Then the married accommodation will have to be sub-divided into smaller flats again.

[blondie95]

if staff didnt live on site, and house parents and some live in tutors were not based in the house do you not think parents would be wary. Parents dont leave there 11years old alone at night so when sending them to school where the school's staff take on the parental role they expect staff to be around as the parents would be at home.

[Wuppertal]

if staff didnt live on site, and house parents and some live in tutors were not based in the house do you not think parents would be wary. Parents dont leave there 11years old alone at night so when sending them to school where the school's staff take on the parental role they expect staff to be around as the parents would be at home.

I agree. Being a houseparent, you are on call day and night. Obviously there are several house tutors who take charge on certain days or at certain hours, but in case of an emergency or a difficult decision/situation the housemaster/mistress will always be there; that is their job. They are not always on duty, but always on call if ever needed. I had brilliant houseparents for whom it was second nature to always be there and were completely devoted to the house and the pupils - it is indeed a large part of their working lives.

So my opinion is that it is absolutely imperative that the houseparents live right at the site of the boarding house - not somewhere on Big Side or King Edward's Road or Southwater.

[michael scuffil]

There is no doubt that you are right, but it's clear what the problem is. When the Horsham school was designed, and until mid-century, the "houseparenting" for each house was done by:
6 monitors, who did the bulk of it, and whose accommodation was provided for anyway
half a matron, who had one sitting room, one bedroom, and had her meals centrally
a senior housemaster, ditto
a junior housemaster, ditto

I don't doubt that houseparents do a good job, especially if they have to do what monitors used to do, and that in the present climate, there is no alternative to employing married ones, who in the nature of things will have children of their own and need space. But it does mean that staff housing is encroaching on land that should be for the students. I suppose one could say that the latter have so much better accommodation indoors these days that they don't need so much space outdoors. That of course is another malaise of modern society.

The problem first became apparent in about 1960, when the first new houses were built. The amount of built-on land at the school must now be a good twice what it was then. I don't think anyone at the time realized the way things were going, or whether they could have taken different decisions if they had. The only alternative would have been to have made a positive virtue of a Spartan ethos, and attract staff prepared to go along with it. I doubt if that would've worked.

[Ajarn Philip]

This is quite a tricky one for people of my generation (oh, how I hate that phrase, but in this case it's relevant. Sadly.) or earlier. I was in Maine A as a junior house with Basil Gregory, a confirmed bachelor if ever there was one (and I mean absolutely no disrespect there, if ever there was a substitute parent he was one, though he'd have hated the phrase), as housemaster, 'Potty" Burr and Chris Read as assistant housemasters. All bachelors. No substitute 'parents.' John Hall Matthews (in my second year), young, married with children lived just across the avenue. Married housemasters (and I've been trying to think who they were, as there were a few back in the late 60s - Bob Sillett, Tom Keeley, eeerrrgh Leigh Hunt? Fry?) - anyway, they tended to live in the large houses attached (or almost attached? - sorry, it really has been a long time...) to the house blocks themselves.

I can remember spending quite a bit of time in later years (73-74ish) in Richard Palmer's flat within/above Mid B, and it seemed pretty good to me for a young couple with no kids. Richard's sound system was a good counter to any noise from the house... So they had no garden to themselves? Neither did many people of their age, and they had all of CH to roam.

I suppose the point is that I'm remembering things as they were then, but that really isn't hugely relevant to how they are now. Expectations of both parents and staff are undoubtedly much higher than they were 30 or 40 years ago.

I had a gentle knock at onewestguncopse (not a bad place to live) earlier in this thread for being a bit 'teacherish,' but he/she is a teacher, so it's permitted. I'm trying to think of how I would want things if a child of mine were at CH now, and if I were a member of staff there now. The back asphalt was undoubtedly a seriously important place for letting off steam, but priorities do change.

I can't believe I'm being quite so reasonable - my initial reaction to this thread was, 'How could they possibly build there?'

Anyway, I'll end with a question (always easiest, especially in tricky situations) - state schools have parent governors/Parent-Teacher Associations. Do parents of students at CH have any say in how things are run?

[Ajarn Philip]

P.S. My post wasn't a response to Michael's, as a film interrupted my typing (it turned out to be crap only worth watching for a short while, but here you pays your money and you takes... etc).

[Jo]

I probably shouldn't get involved in this thread, as emotions are clearly running high, and anyway I am not familiar with the layout of the Housey site.

However, having thought long and hard for over 30 years about what made my time at CH in Hertford downright unpleasant at times, I would have to conclude that, one the whole, it was the quality of the Housemistresses (ours were all non-teaching, employed exclusively for house duties). They were almost all embittered sadistic old spinsters who resented the fact that they couldn't land a better job, and I'm convinced that one of the prime reasons for that was the quality of the accommodation on offer (I have previously suggested this elsewhere in forum, along with the guess that the pay was probably crap too). I can't imagine advertising for new housemistresses attracted many applicants - they were probably grateful to get anyone at all. Even the ones who weren't bitter and twisted were either bland and characterless or just very ordinary - none of them seemed to see it as a pastoral role where they should try to make the girls in their charge feel cared for. (They were just starting to improve the accommodation, by building a self-contained housemistress's flat in each house when I left in 1975).

So, in a nutshell, although it was by no means the only reason, I'd say that one of the major reasons for generations of girls having problems at Hertford over the years could be traced back to the quality of staff accommodation. Just a thought.

[Katharine]

I have been really surprised by the fact that accommodation in different houses is different. Was this so form the start or did it happen gradually? (Obviously the original Prep Block might hve been different from the others) I had naively assumed all houses were built identical as were the Wards (later Houses) at Hertford.

As a one time parent of boarding school children I don't remember ever seriously thinking about whether the housemasters slept in the same building as the children. I probably assumed they did, because they had done so at Hertford.

[Wuppertal]

I don't want to sound cynical but I wouldn't trust 17- or 18-year-old monitors to do the duties of houseparents. I certain would not feel as safe or protected if I knew that it was only them in charge of the house.

I think they would turn a blind eye to some issues that they would perceive as "minor" e.g. light bullying or sleep deprivation - but to those suffering from it are most certainly not minor. Also for other, more serious issues, they simply would not have the life experience or relevant expertise with working with children to deal with it, which a housemaster would.

On my Deps we had house captains and depty house captains who did do things like roll-call, supervising prep and bedtimes, but there was always a house tutor there as well, because there were certain situations which the older pupils were either not authorised or not knowledgeable or mature enough to deal with.

[sejintenej]

I have been really surprised by the fact that accommodation in different houses is different. Was this so form the start or did it happen gradually? (Obviously the original Prep Block might hve been different from the others) I had naively assumed all houses were built identical as were the Wards (later Houses) at Hertford.

As a one time parent of boarding school children I don't remember ever seriously thinking about whether the housemasters slept in the same building as the children. I probably assumed they did, because they had done so at Hertford.

In the 1950's all the houses were effectively identical (any possible difference being that Prep might have been just a few feet more from front to back to accommodate a few extra beds). The centre section was totally separate from boys' accommodation and was where house masters and matrons livedthough some deputy housemasters had houses on the Peele Bridge - Post Office bit of road.

[Wuppertal]

The centre section was totally separate from boys' accommodation and was where house masters and matrons livedthough some deputy housemasters had houses on the Peele Bridge - Post Office bit of road.

There was a post office there?? Shame it is apparently no longer there.

[sejintenej]

I don't want to sound cynical but I wouldn't trust 17- or 18-year-old monitors to do the duties of houseparents. I certain would not feel as safe or protected if I knew that it was only them in charge of the house.

I think they would turn a blind eye to some issues that they would perceive as "minor" e.g. light bullying or sleep deprivation - but to those suffering from it are most certainly not minor. Also for other, more serious issues, they simply would not have the life experience or relevant expertise with working with children to deal with it, which a housemaster would.

On my Deps we had house captains and depty house captains who did do things like roll-call, supervising prep and bedtimes, but there was always a house tutor there as well, because there were certain situations which the older pupils were either not authorised or not knowledgeable or mature enough to deal with.

You are considering 2000 manners. In the 1950's the senior boys were more than capable of looking after the house and ensuring that matters ran smoothly. The housemaster would set the rules and appoint those who would ensure that the rules were adhered to, If your housemaster was not anti bullying then that is how it was but Kit was generally a stickler. Monitors could punish (but not corporal - the crime had to be referred to the housemaster) but as a monitor you had to justify each punishment. If someone was not strong enough to ensure stability then they didn't become a monitor - simple but boys had had some responsibility for a few years before so they were used to it.

[michael scuffil]

Katharine

The last three houses at each end of the avenue had (still have, I suppose) an attached house for a married housemaster. (That meant the housemaster accommodation in the centre of the respective blocks could be assigned to a bachelor non-housemaster. E.g. the director of music Jack Rust lived in that accommodation in Thorn A).

Wuppertal

Yes, there was a Post Office, by the gates coming from the station, sort of opposite Stammerham. It was run by one of the school sergeants and his wife (man named Fielden, he used to close the chapel doors among other things).

Jo

I see your point about frustrated old spinsters.

Given the modern pressures on A-level students, it would be asking a bit much to get monitors to do what we did: supervise getting up, going to bed, prep, many games, all meals, shoe-cleaning, coat-cleaning, roll-call etc. etc. Occasionally more: I was once kept up looking after, and cleaning up after, a boy who kept being sick on the dormitory floor. Eventually I got the matron up. By then it was about midnight. We then had to find a master with a car to drive him to the sicker (long way from Thornton). "Either appendicitis or too many apples," said matron. I think it was the latter.