|
|
 |
School History
The villages
of Langford and Little Faringdon lie
two miles
apart, in the
far south-west of Oxfordshire. Until
the middle of the
nineteenth
century they were in the ancient county
of Berkshire,
part of
Faringdon Union. Little Faringdon was
an estate village,
owned by a
single landlord, the epitome of
a 'close' village. The
chief landowner
at Langford was the Ecclesiastical
Commission, and
its standing as
on 'open' village was confirmed by the
presence of
three non-
conformist chapels, several pubs, and a
more varied
pattern of
houses and cottages. The combined
population of the
villages,
according to the Post Office Directory
of 1841, totalled
630: by the
time of the 1891 census it had sunk to
490, a decline of
more than 20%,
as the farming recession bit deeper and
people moved
away in search
of employment.
The village
schools of Langford and Little
Faringdon are
particularly
rich in records. Their Log Books and
School Admission
Registers are
complete from the date of their
adoption by the
Department of
Education following Forster's Education
Act of 1870;
for records
earlier than this the census returns
from 1851 enumerate
the 'scholars'
among the children of the parishes,
while Directories
for
Oxfordshire, Berkshire and
Buckinghamshire list the schools and
the teachers
for the years that they were
published.
Little
Faringdon's school and school house
were 'built by W
Vizard Esq.,
supported entirely by his lady, Mrs
Vizard' in 1847;
the date is
confirmed by its incision over the door
of the school.
It was to
accommodate 40 children, though the
average attendance in
1895 was 20..
After their purchase of the estate in
1864 Lord and
Lady de Mauley
in their turn 'entirely supported 'the
school.
This seems
to have been the first school in Little
Faringdon, but
at the
beginning of the nineteenth century
Langford was particularly
rich in
schools. In 1808 there were six,
including a boarding school
and a day
school for girls. The number varied
during the following
years;
Gardner's Directory for Oxfordshire of
1852 included a
'National
School recently established'. The first
mention of a
school which
was aided by a Parliamentary Grant was
in 1867; the
Post Office
Directory for Oxon. of 1869 includes
a 'Parochial school
for boys and
girls, supported by subscription'.

[i]Langford
School as it is today, now a
house

The new
langford school just after
completion
The school
room in Langford was evidently viewed
as a communal
resource, and
was often in demand for village
activities. The Log
Book regularly
mentions its use for the annual
Vegetable Show in
September, for
the Clothing Club in November, while in
1896 there
was a 'Poll';
on occasions such as these the school
had to be
closed. Little
Faringdon School, on the other hand,
was the property
of the de
Mauleys, and was not used by the
villagers; while it was
being repaired
in 1902, teaching took place in the de
Mauleys'
laundry. At
Langford, the School Treat was held in
the school; in
Little
Faringdon the children were given tea
at the 'big house'.
From 1851
until 1891 the Census returns show how
many children
went to school,
although the 1891 entries are very
inaccurate and
the figures in
this case come from the School
Admissions Register.
The proportion
of children who attended school rose
steadily, from
25% in 1851 to
80% in 1891. At first the proportion of
scholars to
population of
Little Faringdon, under the watchful
eye of its owner,
was
considerably higher than at Langford,
but by 1891 they had
become the
same. At the same time the parish
marriage registers show
that
illiterates were diminishing steadily;
after 1891 only one man,
an elderly
widower from the outlying village of
Grafton, made a
cross instead
of signing his name.
In November
1875 Langford School, and in April 1879
Little
Faringdon
School came under Government
Inspection. From these dates
a detailed
weekly record was kept in the Log Books
following the New
Code of
Regulations for 1872. At first the
entries in both schools'
Log Books were
perfunctory, noting the attendance in
vague terms as
'small'
or 'better than last week' or
even 'much better.' At
Langford the
first Report from the Inspector was not
copied into the
Log Book, and
the Register went unchecked; the
entries reveal the
easy-going
methods of the teachers. With the
appointment of Miss
Newcomb at
Langford in August 1879 the
deficiencies became apparent.
The previous
teacher had 'left the greater part of
her Register to
add up.' Her
successor refused to do this
retrospectively, 'for when
I leave the
Schoolroom in the afternoon I am
completely used up'.
| 'The Vicar has admitted
several children one a
mere
Baby 17 months old the consequence is
another person has
sent a
Child under 2 years, they quite upset
the whole School,
if one
is not in tears the other is indeed two
days together I
had to
send down a reading class it was
impossible to hear a
Child
speak' |
The Revised
Code of 1862 envisaged children
starting school at
six years old;
this was ignored in both schools. At
Langford Miss
Newcomb
complained that 'The Vicar has admitted
several children one
a mere Baby 17
months old the consequence is another
person has sent
a Child under 2
years, they quite upset the whole
School, if one is
not in tears
the other is indeed two days together I
had to send
down a reading
class it was impossible to hear a Child
speak (sic).'
Miss Newcomb
left the school after one stormy term;
within a week
her successor
had 'sent away several children who
were under three
years of age,'
apparently without complaint from the
Vicar. Both
Langford and
Little Faringdon schools customarily
admitted children
who had only
just reached their third birthdays; in
1880 the Vicar
of Little
Faringdon noted that 'Children are not
taken under three
years old
except now and then to oblige. Their
attendances are not
counted.'
The age of
leaving school was at first governed by
employment:
the Admission
Registers show children leaving to go
into service or
to take up
apprenticeships. By 1904 the process of
leaving was
regulated by
the Education Department, and
the 'Reason for Leaving'
given
was 'Gained Attendance Certificate'
or 'over 14.' The school
year was
regulated by the feasts of the Church
and the agricultural
year. There was
a Harvest Holiday for five or six weeks
in the
summer;
Christmas, Easter and Whitsun holidays
were usually for a
week, but this
was flexible until 1904, when 'Re e'd
notice today
that an uniform
school year is to be adopted throughout
the county.'
Both schools
were under the jurisdiction of the
Church of
England, and
the Log Books detail the annual report
from the
Diocesan
Inspector's visit. The children of
Little Faringdon were
taken to church
much more often than those at Langford,
where
non-conformity
was stronger: during 'Holy Week 'before
Easter they
went to Church
each morning. In 1887 SO many days had
been taken as
holidays that a
new teacher shortened the Whitsun
holiday to two
days, so that
the necessary attendances could be
achieved.
| 'When gleaning was over
children of both sexes
were
kept at home 'to mind babies and to
gather acorns"; beans
were
gleaned, potatoes picked; in the spring
children had 'to
gather
cowslips'. Occasionally a pupil was
needed to 'nurse her
sick
mother and order the house in default
of any other. Helper,
'while 'taking dinner to father
in the field' was a common
reason
for absence in Little Faringdon.' |
Reasons for
absence were carefully noted in the Log
Books. in
both villages
children went absent to go to local
festivities: May
Day in 1884,
the annual Temperance Fete in Langford
in July,
Langford Feast
every September. From Little Faringdon
the pupils
went to
Lechlade Carnival; on two occasions
they 'took the Monitress
with them',
though we are not told whether she had
permission from
the teacher to
be absent from her duties.
Attendance
was affected in both villages by wet
or 'winterly'
weather; there
were families who lived at outlying
farms who might
be away from
October until Spring; at Langford this
could mean 17
fewer pupils.
Another reason for absence was 'several
children not
being able to
put on their boots, having bad feet
from the severe
weather'. The
roads were sometimes covered with water
or with snow;
in January 1910
three boys reached school, half an hour
late because
they had been
sliding on an icy pool and had detained
(forcibly) an
infant who also
was marked late.' Sometimes so few
children arrived
that it was
considered advisable to dismiss those
present.
The pupils
changed as children moved with their
parents to other
villages. In
both schools this movement was worst in
October, the
time of
the 'mop fair' in Faringdon, when 'the
labourers are hired
from Michaelmas
to Michaelmas'. In September 1900 the
teacher at
Little
Faringdon complained that 'The annual
changing of the
children makes
it very difficult to teach them
properly, so as to
have good
results from their work'. It was
especially hard that the
moving took
place just before the annual
examination, so 'occupying
time and space
needed for those about to be examined,'
while the
teachers found
that 'as a rule the newcomers are very
backward'.
Sometimes fewer
children moved to the village than left
it. In
October 1902
Little Faringdon school had '4 children
only in place
of the 10 who
have left. 2 cannot read or write, the
other two can
read &
write fairly well but can do nothing
else'.
It was
commonplace that the start of the
school year, after the
harvest, was
slow. At Langford during the first four
weeks of
September 1888
there were 17 or 18 pupils present out
of a possible
67. Altogether
this was a difficult time, when ground
lost during
the long
Harvest break had to be made up; in
1897 a new teacher
found that 'the
children have forgotten a great deal of
the work
they had learnt
before holidays'.
When
gleaning was over children of both
sexes were kept at home
'to mind babies
and to gather acorns'; beans were
gleaned, potatoes
picked; in the
spring children had 'to gather
cowslips'.
Occasionally a
pupil was needed to 'nurse her sick
mother and order
the house in
default of any other helper,'
while 'taking dinner to
father in the
field' was a common reason for absence
in Little
Faringdon.
From 1890
onwards the Attendance Officer began to
warn the
irregular
attenders, making a list of their names
from the
Registers;
parents were cautioned 'owing to the
very poor attendance
of some of the
scholars'. This was not always
effective: at Little
Faringdon the
teacher complained in March 1906, 'I
have taken E
Jefferies name
off roll, as she has only attended one
week out of
eleven,
although mother has promised to send
every week,' but there
were no
prosecutions for persistent absence
from either school.
Gradually
the children's health became a matter
of national
interest. The
first note of a medical certificate for
non-attendance
was in 1889; in
April 1899 two pupils at Little
Faringdon sent a
'Doctor's
Certificate for absence' for ringworm.
They did not return
until November,
when 'they have forgotten nearly all
they had
learnt, even
their letters. 'In l901 the children of
Langford were
visited by the
Medical Officer of Health; regular
visits to both
schools began
in 1908. The children were weighed and
measured and
their heads
were inspected regularly for vermin.
The Log Books
record visits
from the Vicar, who acted as the
Correspondent to the
Managers; at
Langford these visits were at first
sporadic, but after
1879 they
became much more frequent, often daily.
His comments were
noted and
valued. He provided the new slates,
books and desks needed
in the school.
He was responsible for receiving and
paying out the
salaries of the
teacher; he distributed prizes, and
acted as general
adviser. He
also regularly checked that the numbers
in the Registers
corresponded
with the numbers of children in the
school, and made an
entry in the
Log Book to validate this.
The Vicar's
wife also played her part at Langford
School, taking
lessons in
singing and drill and providing
materials for sewing
lessons. This
was sometimes inadequate: in November
1879 the
mettlesome Miss
Newcomb complained that 'I sent to the
Vicarage and
received 1
Shirt 1 Shift a few pieces of old
calico to tear up in
strips; this
will not do for the Infants it is too
closely woven for
their little
fingers. Have drawn up a needlework
scheme and sent it
to the Vicarage
just to give some idea of what is
required.'
Little
Faringdon School was visited in the
same way by successive
Vicars, who
also checked the Registers and gave
religious
instruction to
the scholars. Lady de Mauley's visits
were almost as
frequent.
Hardly a week went by without her
coming to the school.
Sometimes she
brought members of her family with her
but more often
she came on her
own and participated in the lessons. In
May 1882
'Lady de Mauley
visited the School on Tuesday morning.
Her Ladyship
also came in on
Friday morning in time to see the
children at their
Arithmetic
Lesson, she was very pleased at the
manner in which the
children did
their work.'
On other
occasions she dictated a few sums to
the children, heard
the upper
standards say their tables, and took a
class in reading.
She was
especially interested in their
needlework, and provided
material for
them to use, and in knitting: 'Her
Ladyship remarked on
seeing some
small children knitting that it is a
good plan for them
to begin
young.' Generally she expressed herself
pleased with what
she saw,
although occasionally she offered some
gentle criticism. In
January
1880 'she heard the children sing. She
commanded soft
singing and
told the children to sing a very little
bit softer.' She
also paid £30
of the teacher's salary, to supplement
the Government
grant of £20,
in addition to the pence received from
any children
over the number
of 20 attending the school.
In both
schools the subjects taught were those
which were awarded
grants by the
Education Department on the results of
examination. At
first these
were the 'Elementary Subjects' of
reading, writing and
arithmetic. In
Langford, passes in the 'Class
Subjects 'of grammar,
geography,
singing and history also attracted
grants, with
needlework as
an additional subject for girls. In
1883 'the Infant
Boys commenced
to do Needlework'. The children were
also taught
Object Lessons
from objects or pictures which were
readily available
to the teacher:
in 1883 these included 'Cheese making,
Snails, Soap,
Rice, Harvest
work, the Fish'.
The
Education Department also kept an eye
on the suitability of
the buildings.
In 1878 they noted with approval
that 'a boarded
floor is to be
laid down' in Langford; while in Little
Faringdon in
1898 they
complained that 'the water used in the
school and
teacher's house
has to be brought a distance of about
300 yards.
Could not the
Managers provide a supply on the school
premises?' The
playground at
Langford was made 'fit for Physical
Exercises' in
1901, with the
increased emphasis on national fitness
which followed
the Boer
War.
Progress in
both schools reflected the ability of
their teachers.
Joshua Walker
was appointed Headmaster of Langford
School in 1881,
when the
school was 'in
an unsatisfactory state', and
remained in office
until 1909. On
his appointment he found 'all standards
backward,
they don't seem
to have done a weeks (sic) thorough
work since the
last
examination'. Within a year of his
arrival he had drawn up a
list of rules
on 'Punctuality, Cleanliness &
Neatness and
Truthfulness';
three days later he denied admittance
to a pupil for
refusing to
comply with 'the rule of the school'.
Good work was
rewarded with
illuminated certificates which he
provided, rewards
were given for
perfect attendance. Physical punishment
was rare;
shocked by the
bruises caused by Miss Newcomb's use of
the cane, the
Vicar had
prohibited corporal punishment of any
kind, and exclusion
from school was
generally effective enough.
During his
twenty-eight-year headship Joshua
Walker introduced
lessons in
drawing and nature study, as well as
practical gardening;
by 1902
Langford School had won the Gardening
Prize offered by St
John's College,
Oxford, several years running. Mr
Walker was
commanded by
the Education Department's Inspector as
conducting the
school with
vigour and intelligence. The standards
reached improved
steadily; by
1893 the first Standard VI was
achieved. The grant
which resulted
from examination passes and annual
attendance rose
from £34.11.0
in 1880 to £68.0.0 in 1901, augmented
by annual Merit
Grants
for 'excellent' teaching.
The
Headmaster's wife taught needlework at
Langford for thirty
two years. Her
teaching was interrupted by absences of
three to four
weeks, when the
Log Book noted that she was 'not well';
the dates
coincide with
those of the christenings of Walker
children given in
the Parish
Register of Baptisms.
Mr and Mrs
Walker were assisted by a series of
teachers for the
Infant Class.
These were not always satisfactory: in
1885 Mr Walker
noted that one
had 'been at work now a Fortnight but
at present I
find her of no
use whatever'. Other assistant teachers
were more
successful:
Emily Lafford attended the school from
1875 until 1878,
gaining
Standard III; she became a Pupil-
Teacher at the age of
eleven in 1879,
and went on to gain a Queen's
Scholarship to train
for a
professional qualification after twenty
years' teaching.
There were
also Monitors in both schools; their
duties were to
assist with the
Infants and, in the case of William
Tanner at
Langford, to
light the fire before school, which he
sometimes failed
to do. His
salary in 1907 was £l0 a term. In
Little Faringdon in
1903, Patience
Green, aged nearly 14, was paid one
shilling a week
as a
Monitress.
The progress
achieved by Joshua Walker at Langford
was not
matched in
Little Faringdon, despite Lady de
Mauley's enthusiasm.
Teachers stayed
only a few years, discouraged by the
rapid turnover
of pupils. In
March 1903 one reported that 'so many
of the children
are newcomers
that the general average of attainment
is not very
high'. Prizes
were given to children both
for 'Conduct' and for
'General
Progress' but in the twenty-six years
from 1879 to 1905,
only three
children attained Standard IV, roughly
that of a
ten-year-old,
and none was recorded as reaching the
higher
Standards.
There were persistent hopes of each new
mistress, but in
December 1903
the Log Book notes that 'the children
are making a
little progress
in their work & seem anxious to do
their best, but
it is still
very inaccurate'.
Both the
teachers and the Vicar misunderstood
the growing and
complex demands
of the Education Department. No 'Class
Subject' was
taught in 1895,
and as a result the whole annual Grant
was
withdrawn,
despite the Vicar's protests.
Subsequent years did not
improve
matters. Expectations continued to be
low, attendance
short-lived and
numbers too small to divide the pupils
into groups
for separate
teaching. Successive Government
Inspections found the
standard of the
school unsatisfactory. It finally
closed in 1920,
when the few
remaining pupils transferred to
Langford School.
Manuscript
Sources:
Langford School Log Books,
1875-1892, 1892-1919
Langford School Admission
Registers 1875-1910, 1910-1920
Little Faringdon School Log
Books 1879-1901, 1901-1920
Little Faringdon School
Admission Registers 1871-1920
Langford Baptismal Register
1838-1920
Langford Marriage and Burial
Registers 1840-1920
Little Faringdon Baptismal
Register, Marriage Register and
Burial
Register, 1864-1920
Langford Vestry Book
Langford and Little
Faringdon Census Returns 1841-1891
Miriam
James came to the village of Langford
from London in
1940. She was
educated at Mayfield School, Sussex,
and at St Anne's
College,
Oxford. She subsequently became Head of
history at
Carterton
Community College. Now retired, she has
recently completed
a Master of
Studies degree in English Local History
at Kellogg
College,
Oxford. As part of this degree she
studied the early
development of
the schools in the neighbouring
villages of Langford
and Little
Faringdon, with an emphasis on the
influence of their
contrasting
status as an 'open' and a 'close'
village and of the
people involved
in the teaching and patronage of the
two schools.

The plans
for the new school
|
 |
 |
 |
| |
 |
|
|