After the passage of the Technical Instruction Act (1889), AHM reacted immediately to secure the right of girls to receive grants to improve their technical and science education. The need for ‘domestic subjects’ instruction began to be considered. A special meeting of Executive Committee to discuss the subjects of Grants for Technical and Secondary Education was first held in November, 1890. There headmistresses agreed to take action for the use of such grants for girls (‘November 22nd, 1890’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
Furthermore, several points were made for future action.
Miss Hadland pointed out that the chief things to be noted in the scheme, (of which she had made in clear and careful abstract) were;
1.Public opinion on what she called domestic testimonial education. 2.the help afforded to head-work, by hand-work.
3.the utilization of public grants to make domestic technical instructions an integral part of the curriculum of institution for technical education.
4.the importance of giving elementary scientific training.
5.the establishment of continuation and evening technical classes for girls.
6.the securing a fair proportion of grants, for girls. (‘November 22nd, 1890’. MEC).
They also considered cooperating with the National Association for the Promotion of Technical and Secondary Education on this line (‘November 22nd, 1890’; ‘December 6th
, 1890’; ‘February 7th, 1891’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
76 AHM was also aware of the establishment of the new Polytechnics providing technical instructions to girls and women. In February 1891, a letter was received from the late Battersea Polytechnic asking the AHM to draft a scheme for the Women’s side of the Polytechnic. However, after careful consideration, they agreed not to make any official recommendation.
A letter from Miss Cooper of Edgbaston was read asserting that she thought it inadvisable to give the imprimatur of the Association to the work of a Committee not elected by the Association or to publish any scheme of Technical Education which had not been laid before the members of the Association. Miss Hadland proposed that the scheme should be sent to the Battersea Polytechnic with the names of individual members attached, and the Secretary should be informed that it did not come from the Association as a body.
It was moved by Miss Gadesden seconded by Miss Ottely.
“That the scheme be sent out as proposed it be sent to the London Members of the Exe. who had been present at the meeting where it was discussed, for signature” (‘February 7th, 1891’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
The quote shows that the headmistresses held differing views toward the introduction of technical education, and because the Association valued such differences, it was careful in expressing a public statement as one body. As we can see later in the cases in the 1910, the varieties among headmistresses and schools were continuously maintained and valued.
By being involved in the establishment of Polytechnics, the Association moved on to discuss the definition of ‘technical education’ by the Special Committee to draft a scheme for technical education.
Miss Buss pointed out the difficulties in the way of coming to an unanimous decision on the subject of a scheme for a Polytechnic Institute the views of members of the Association varying so widely as they appeared to do as to what subjects would properly come under the head of ‘technical Institution’ (‘April 11th, 1891’. MEC).
However, AHM was unable to define ‘technical education’ clearly because of the ‘various views’ held by its members. After making some general recommendations it was resolved that the matter concerning technical education should be discussed in a wider arena to include wider opinion from women of all classes.
77 Miss Cooper suggested that the following resolution be submitted to the Conference; “That this Committee having given much time and consideration to the subject of a scheme for the Battersea and other Polytechnic (Institutes) find it impossible to reconcile the various views of the members respecting Technical Education sufficient to draft a definite scheme-; in the place of such a scheme they therefore subject to the Conference a few general recommendation on the subject of Technical Schools& Classes.
1.that in Technical Schools & Classes of the United Kingdom both sees be admitted on equal terms.
2.that in addition to the subjects usually offered, systematic instruction should be given in the domestic Arts& Sciences.
3.that the special need of localities be carefully considered in the scheme of instruction of all technical schools.
4.that it is desirable that steps be taken to train a body of teachers competent to give instruction in the Domestic Arts& Sciences.
It was resolved “that the Secondary Education Committee be asked to report on Technical Education to the Annual Conference in 1892.
A short discussion followed on the difference between general and technical education, and on the question how technical instruction can be introduced into general schools….
It was moved by Miss Cooper, seconded by Miss Gadesden and carried …
“that the subject of Technical Education being one which deeply concerns women of all classes it seems desirable that any organisation dealing with the provision of Technical Training for women should have the widest possible scope, and should not be confined to a special class or see as is the case with the Association of Head Mistresses (‘April 11th, 1891’. MEC).
In spite of their varying views, AHM worked to send a draft scheme to the Polytechnics and County Councils. ‘The desirability of establishing a large central college for the training of Technical teachers was generally admitted’ and Holloway College was selected as the suitable institution. It was also suggested that ‘Polytechnic Institutes should be asked to lend rooms for Technical Classes to be held in the day time for students of a higher social grade, than those who usually attend the evening classes’ (‘May 5th, 1891’. MEC).In the December meeting, ‘Miss Hadland reported that according to the instructions she had received, a
78 circular letter, enclosing the resolutions respecting Technical Education passed at the Conference of June 1890, had been sent to County Councils’ (‘December 5th, 1891’. MEC).
The discussion around ‘technical education” continued in 1892. The Agenda for the Joint Conference with Association of Assistant Mistresses clearly states that ‘this meeting is of opinion that if Technical Education be introduced into Girls’ Schools, it should be introduced for the sake of its educational value, and in no way as a direct preparation for the after pursuit of any Art or Trade’ (‘April 9th, 1892’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
The interesting statement made here is the emphasis of the completely educational value of ‘technical education’, not the vocational value. Memorials were sent to County Councils or County Borough Councils ‘praying them to make grants of money for certain specified subjects connected with the teaching of technical subjects in Girls’ Schools.’ However, in some cases, headmistresses did not present enough knowledge on the matters discussed around the ‘technical education’ of girls under County Councils (‘October 22nd, 1892’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
After the establishment of the Technical Education Board (TEB), especially that of London in 1893, headmistresses became more interested in securing the representation of women experts in the Board. For example, Mrs Bryant, the second headmistress of NLCS, was also one of the female members of TEB and The London TEB covered a wide variety of fields in technical education by holding Sub-Committees, including the Domestic Economy Sub-Committee which Mrs. Bryant belonged to. The Domestic Economy Sub-Committee mainly dealt with ‘domestic subjects’ in girls’ elementary education (Bremner, 1898; Summerfield and Evans (ed.), 1990; Roach, 1991, Chapter 10), but CSG also benefitted from the grants given as we will see in Part III.
Miss Buss pointed out that a new Technical Education Board was established for London and that as it would materially affect endowed schools for girls she though that some effort should be made to secure the proper representation of those schools in the board (‘February 11th, 1893’. MEC. See Appendix 4).
To discuss the matter in detail, the Sub-Committee of Head Mistresses of London Endowed Schools was held on February 16th, 1893. In the next Executive Committee it was reported that:
79 1. We observe with surprise and regret that the London County Council has declined to give any representation on the Technical Education Board to that branch of the educational profession concerned with the work of secondary schools for girls. 2. Since it is at great importance that the Technical Education Board should have the advice of women acquainted with the secondary schools in London, we express our hope that the woman, or women who are to be coopted by the Council on the Board shall be chosen on the ground of educational knowledge, and acquaintance with schools (‘May 13th, 1893’. MEC).
3.4. Headmistresses’ answers to the Royal Commission on Secondary Education