by Geoffrey Speak
(Principal, 1967-1971)
|
|
It seems impossible that twenty years have passed since Island School first opened. Memories of tiny, timid eleven year-olds going through the doors on the first day are too vivid. I have to remind myself that many of those excited children now have families of their own and that not one of the almost equally excited teachers who greeted them that day any longer remains at the school. Even so, it still does not seem like twenty years ago. To make the perspective right I have to recall some of the progress that has been made since then, and when I remember the agony and frustration that lay behind the planning to achieve that progress it begins to feel more like fifty years!
The actual year, 1967, was almost accidental. The site of the school and even its name were similarly accidents of history. My own connection with the ESF and with Island School was largely the result of another historical accident. Let me start this reminiscence with a little background to show how all those accidents came together and resulted in the school we see today.
After the end of the Pacific War the number of English speaking families in Hong Kong increased enormously, and more and more of them wanted to keep their children in Hong Kong for schooling. Kowloon Junior, Quarry Bay and the old Peak Schools could not cope with the surge of numbers in the primary sector. A new Peak School and Glenealy were built by public subscription and handed over to the Government to run. Government itself added classrooms at Kowloon Junior and provided a building in Kennedy Road, originally as an annex to Glenealy.
A few English-speaking children found places in other secondary schools, but, at eleven, the vast majority transferred to KGV or went overseas. Government built an extension to KGV but, even so, its resources became more and more strained.
It is difficult now to remember that, until 1966, KGV was the only secondary school for non-Chinese children. There were no International, German-Swiss, French or Japanese schools and children of a wide variety of nationalities had to go to KGV or leave Hong Kong altogether. These children came from both Kowloon and the Island. Eleven-year-olds from the Island had to be taken to the Star Ferry (there was no harbour tunnel), cross the harbour and catch the school bus from Tsim Sha Tsui, and face the return journey after school was over. Small wonder that more than thirty years ago parents of English-speaking children were vigorously urging the need for a secondary school on Hong Kong Island.
There were those who thought that it would be better to avoid a Government connection with any additional school and there was a very active investigation of the possibility of establishing an English private school, perhaps in the New Territories, with weekly boarding facilities. The idea came to nothing because it became clear that the costs to parents, if standards were to be comparable, would be greater than the cost of a good boarding school in England.
The story of Island School really begins with a Government committee set up in 1962 in response to the clamour for new English schools. The committee eventually reported that there was definitely a need for an English secondary school on Hong Kong Island and another English primary school in Kowloon. They anticipated that Government itself would provide and manage the schools, since all the English schools at that time were "Government".
Government response does not seem to have been wildly enthusiastic - at least, nothing was said in public. It is not difficult to imagine why there was embarrassment. For some years Government had been severely criticized over its policy for English schools. At the time, only a proportion of Chinese children was in school at all - every English-speaking child was sure of a school place. Fees in the English schools were the same as fees in the Government Chinese schools - but clearly, with their largely expatriate staffing, the English schools were much more expensive to run. Every English-speaking child went to a Government school - in the Chinese sector only about one child in five or six of those who were actually in school at all went to a Government school, the rest went either to an aided or a private school where the parents paid much higher fees, the teachers received much lower salaries and the Government subvention was much smaller or even nothing at all.
When Governments are embarrassed by a report they commonly refer it to another committee. This was the fate of the report on the English schools. There were many pressing problems in education in the 60s and an Education Commission was established in 1963 to advise Government how to achieve universal education without diverting all public funds from other necessary work to education. Government added the problems of the English schools to the much greater problems of universal education and asked the Commissioners to make recommendations on the earlier committee's thinking. The report of the Education Commission - the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) Marsh-Sampson Report appeared late in 1963 and included a chapter on English schools, on which the whole future was to be based.
The Marsh-Sampson Report contained very radical recommendations for change. They suggested that expansion of education should be through aided schools rather than through direct Government control. They thought that teachers in both aided and Government schools should receive the same salaries. They accepted that there was a need for additional English schools, but suggested that, as in the Chinese sector, these should be aided rather than Government controlled and that their teachers should receive the same pay as their Government colleagues. Since English schools were necessarily more expensive to run than Chinese schools, the report also suggested that the extra costs should be passed on to parents in much increased fees.
True to form the Government referred this Report to yet another Working Party set up by the Legislative Council. I served as a member of this Working Party and well remember its weekly meetings which were held throughout 1964. Eventually we produced a report which Government turned into a White Paper on Educational Policy in 1965.
In the White Paper the Government accepted the need for additional English schools, but said that, like new Chinese schools, they should be managed by private bodies and receive a subvention from Government. The White Paper also provided that the subvention for English schools should be the same as for Chinese schools with the necessary extra costs forming part of increased fees, while teaching salaries in aided and in Government schools should become the same.
Widespread discussion of the proposals took place before Legislative Council eventually endorsed the White Paper as Government policy. At the time I was Principal of St. Paul's College and met regularly with the heads of the other Anglican schools to hammer out attitudes to the suggested changes. At one of these meetings the problems of English schools were mentioned and it was remarked that, unlike Chinese schools, there were no existing non-Government management bodies, which meant that someone would have to take an initiative if anything were to come of the new proposals. I was asked to convene meetings of a small sub-committee which was appointed to examine the need for English schools and make suggestions for such an initiative.
Bishop Hall accepted the suggestions and asked me to be secretary of the "Preliminary Committee on the Proposed English Secondary School". The first meeting was held in March 1965 and I was able to report that the Director of Education had already said that Government accepted in principle that the new school should be aided, that capital and recurrent subsidies could be expected, and that a site in Wong Nai Chung Gap would be available.
This is not a detailed history of the ESF, so I will not describe all the discussions and developments that went on during that year. I recall attending a meeting of Kowloon Junior School PTA where the problems of having two fund-raising exercises were discussed, and as a result the Preliminary Committee was expanded to include representatives of Kowloon and accepted, from the outset, that the "Trust" would assume responsibility for both secondary and primary schools. Gradually the pattern of the ESF emerged - the "Trust" became the "Foundation" when the Government's lawyers studied the draft of the Ordinance which was needed to establish a body to receive the grants of land and the subventions. School Councils were established for the secondary school and for the primary school and they studied sketch plans for the schools that were being designed by Christopher Haffner, who later became a partner in Spence Robinson.
Development of the primary school proved reasonably straightforward and Beacon Hill School appeared on its site in Ede Road almost on schedule. The secondary school was more troublesome! The site in Wong Nai Chung Gap was just below the present Urban Council tennis courts. In 1965 the valley had just been filled and roughly terraced. Before a school could be built there access roads would be needed. These were planned as part of the development of the area but the political difficulties of 1966 and 1967 made all development uncertain and fears were expressed very early on that the school could not be opened until 1968 or even 1969.
Discussions continued throughout 1966 and fund-raising was begun in order to meet the part of the capital costs that could not be obtained from Government. It is interesting, looking back, to notice some of the people who gave active assistance right. from the beginning, and to marvel at the time and energy they gave to the ESF. Bishop Hall continued as Chairman until his own retirement from Hong Kong and saw the ESF through to the approval of its Ordinance. John Browne, who had been vice-chairman and responsible for running the appeal, was appointed Chairman at the first meeting after the Ordinance and Regulations were accepted by the first members. Despite being chairman of John Swire's and, for much of the time, a member of both the Legislative and Executive Councils, he served the ESF as Chairman from 1967 until 1973 - six very turbulent years, in which he spent much energy seeking what he called "a viable financial arrangement" with Government. The original Treasurer of the Preliminary Committee was Sidney Gordon who was at the time Senior Partner of Lowe, Bingham's (now known as Price Waterhouse) as well as a member of the Legislative and Executive Councils. He began the long association of the ESF with Price Waterhouse, which still provides a succession of honorary treasurers, while, on a personal basis, he served as a member of the Executive Committee of the ESF from its first meeting until the reorganisation of the structure in 1985 - twenty years of voluntary service! The original representative of the Joint Council of PTAs on the Preliminary Committee was Duncan Bluck who served until he was posted out of Hong Kong, and returned later to do a spell of five years as Chairman of the ESF.
Of particular interest to Island and South Island Schools is the tremendous generosity of the Marden family which led to the swimming pools they both enjoy. John and Ann Marden have, however, been generous with their time and energy as well. Both have served personally on the Foundation for many years and Ann has also served on the Executive as its Vice-chairman and on South Island School Council. I do not suppose that anyone who was at the opening of the Island School swimming pool will ever forget the sight of John declaring it open by diving in fully clothed!
Many other notable names could also be mentioned, the list seems almost endless, for the good-will towards the new schools was enormous and most of the major firms were willing to co-operate, giving both cash and time. I must, however, return to my narrative.
The various unplanned happenings, which I called accidents of history" earlier, began early in 1966. The first concerned myself. The School Council was considering not only plans for a new secondary school but also its initial staffing, in particular the need for the first Principal to be involved in other staff appointments and in the detailed planning, which really necessitated his presence in Hong Kong long before the school was due to open. Eventually they suggested to the Executive Committee that I be invited to become the first Principal. A suggestion the Executive endorsed. I had been at St. Paul's for twelve years and felt ready for a new challenge, so, after considerable discussion with the Bishop, the invitation was accepted and arrangements were made for me to leave St. Paul's in January 1968.
That date was intended to give me at least two terms, and probably five, to finalise the staffing of the new school, to supervise the last stages of the building, to arrange for equipment and to enrol the first pupils for opening in September 1969, or earlier if the building were ready.
The second "accident" followed shortly afterwards and put paid to that cosy plan. The Director of Education, concerned at the overcrowding at KGV continuing for several more years, asked us whether, if Government provided temporary premises, the secondary school could be opened in September 1967. We took a deep breath and eventually said "Yes". St. Paul's arranged for an acting head so that I could leave in the summer of 1967, but the idea of having time for planning and making appointments totally disappeared.
The temporary building eventually offered was the 60-year old military hospital in Bowen Road. A new hospital to replace it was being built in Kowloon and the army were due to leave by May 1967. I was asked to visit, along with senior officers from various Government departments, to determine if the building could be turned into a temporary school and if the work could be done between May and September.
The British Military Hospital
That first visit was pretty daunting. The old hospital looked very much as it does today - except that the central block had not then been demolished - but it was very run-down. Much worse were the many other army buildings round about. There were three large red-brick barrack blocks on terraces in the hill above the hospital. One was totally derelict and had clearly been deserted for years. The other two were almost equally derelict but were still in use for the troops who maintained the hospital. There were other buildings and a variety of huts scattered about, serving as stores, nurses' quarters, laboratories, guard rooms and the like. Where the "Green area" is today was a reservoir fed by three huge open nullahs. The general impression of the whole place was depressing in the extreme.
We went first to the administrative office, which was housed in a small building which stood in the middle of what is now the road underneath the Green area. There we met the Colonel and some of the non-medical staff. While the Government officials were discussing timing for the army's move out, I found myself in conversation with the senior Warrant Officer, whom I asked what he thought of the building. His answer, which put everything in a nutshell, was something like "If you want me 'onest opinion, Sir, the 'ole bloody place is unfit for 'uman 'abitation". So, of course, it was decided that it would do for children and their teachers.
We discovered how right the W.O. had been when the humid weather started the next Spring. I was sitting in my office one Monday morning, waiting for the bell to signal morning assembly, when a very excited Beryl Fairey burst in. She was the original music teacher and was due to play the piano for assembly. Her message was dramatic, "We can't use the hall - it's turned green!" And so it had - the humidity had caused mould all over the new paintwork, and we had to have the whole place scrubbed down with fungicide and repainted with anti-mould paint before it was presentable again.
Similar problems plagued the years in the old building. There was the time when we discovered a massive water leak in the basement and no one could tell us where to turn off the supply to stop it because the plans had been lost in the war and it was nothing to do with the school's metered supply. Eventually it was blocked off but not before we had wondered if the building might float away into the harbour.
The corridors of the B.M.H.
This all lay ahead when we began to consider the conversion of the hospital into a school. Obviously the large wards could be divided for classrooms, and other areas could form workshops and laboratories. It looked as though ample accommodation could be found for the numbers of pupils expected in the first two years. To make it available the whole place needed re-wiring and re-plumbing as well as decorating inside and out. We were promised possession by June, giving three months for all the work, and Spence Robinson drew up time-tables and contracts to achieve completion in time for school to open.
In the event, the army's move was delayed, we didn't get possession until well into July, and everyone was in a panic that the school could not, after all, open in September. Spence Robinson, in fact, achieved miracles, persuaded contractors to speed up their work, and we opened one week later than intended.
Back of the B.M.H.
With the building on the may, the next task was recruitment of teachers. But first the school needed a name. There was much discussion of a suitable title for a school planned for Wong Nai Chung Gap. Most of the suggestions did not seem appropriate for the temporary premises in Bowen Road, and eventually David Greig, the Director of Education who was personally extremely involved in the early planning, himself suggested "Island School" simply to indicate that it was the school intended for children from Hong Kong Island. He also suggested that, when the new buildings were completed, the school should have a new name and invite visiting royalty to perform the opening. So we might have been the Duke of Edinburgh or the Princess Anne School - but, by the time we did achieve new buildings, the school was so well established that it seemed impossible to think in terms of changing the name - and so "Island School" remains. That was the third "accident",
I suppose I must claim the distinction of being the first member of staff appointed, but the first person to draw a salary was Sally Robertson, the first Principal's secretary. She was recruited to assist in the paper work necessary to organise overseas recruitment of teaching staff. For some months she sat at the conference table in my office at St. Paul's pounding away at the typewriter which was the only piece of equipment the Foundation owned. With her help we began the recruitment of other staff. In March 1967 the first advertisements appeared both in London and in Hong Kong and I embarked on the selection of twelve teachers for the opening of Island School.
Before advertisements could appear we had to have salary scales and here I ran into one of the crises that marked the early years. Government had accepted the principle that aided and Government teachers should have the same pay-scales, but the intention was to formulate new scales involving lower salaries for Government teachers. These had not yet been agreed, but we could not hope to recruit teachers from England on the salaries available for teachers in aided schools in the Chinese sector, as these were lower than the Burnham salaries paid in England. Fortunately David Greig perceived the problem and, after a great deal of discussion, it was agreed that the ESF could offer salaries based upon the Burnham scales in use in the U.K. but with a slight recruitment inducement above the U.K. value.
Response to the advertisements was good, though not overwhelming; it was too late in the school year for that. Shortlists were compiled and St. Paul's gave me leave to go to England to interview the candidates. I have very vivid recollections of those first interviews. I wandered all over the place conducting them. Some of the applicants were seen in a little appointments bureau in Covent Garden [Editor's note: This became, 20 years later, by a remarkable fluke, my brother's office when he was Director General of the Africa Centre - CH.R.N.], others in my mother-in-law's dining room, still others in the lounge (not the bar!) of the White Swan Hotel in Halifax, but eventually a list of appointments was achieved. Correspondence now began on the syllabus to be followed, on books and on all the minutiae of running a school. At this time I still had responsibility for 1800 boys at St. Paul's and I was also chairman of the Examinations Authority - I was more than ever glad to have Sally Robertson to deal with the mass of paper that accumulated for the ESF and Island School in particular.
"Since May 1967, communist organizations in Hong Kong have sought to impose their will on the government and the people by intimidating workers, fomenting work stoppages, by demonstrations and rioting, and by indiscriminate violence. It has been a testing time for the people of Hong Kong.But these events must be seen in their proper perspective. the communist-initiated confrontation, between themselves and the Hong Kong Government, is in no sense a popular movement, indeed it does not have the support of any significant section of the people, much less of the people as a whole. Those who have taken part represent a very small fraction of the population, and they have had no success in their attempts, either by persuasion or by intimidation, to gain support for their cause. The overwhelming majority of the people have shown clearly that they support the government and the maintenance of law and order.
Moreover, despite the claims made by the communist press, and despite the impression that might have been given by the world wide press coverage given to the disturbances, the ordinary life of the Colony has not been disrupted. The rioting that has taken place has been limited in area and in scope and has been contained. The stoppages that were called have had little effect on the Colony's economy. Throughout the summer, when the effects of confrontation were at their height, the ordinary man in the street was able to go about his work. not quite as usual and not without considerable inconvenience at times, but sufficiently easily to keep the business of the Colony operating efficiently."
This summary is undoubtedly true historically, but at the time international confidence in Hong Kong collapsed. Based upon about fifteen farmers demonstrating outside a border police-post an American newspaper had headlines intimating that the Reds had invaded Hong Kong! There was world-wide consternation, while we in Hong Kong could see that the problems were being created by a small number of militants. I lived at St. Paul's, but Sally Robertson had to get to work each day. One day she was late, and it transpired that she had had to make her way through one of the worst demonstrations outside the Hilton Hotel. The Bus companies almost ceased to operate, the post was disrupted and we feared that the water supply from China would stop. Nevertheless life in Hong Kong went on almost as usual and there was certainly more excitement overseas than was ever found amongst residents. My chief concern for the new Island School was over the effect that the bad press might have on the newly recruited staff. I soon discovered their quality. Not one ever suggested that he should withdraw from his contract - the strongest query I ever had from any of them was from one married man who asked mildly if it was safe for him to bring his wife and children with him to Hong Kong! For the first time, but certainly not the last, the teachers of Island School had shown their calibre.
Nevertheless there were problems. Building workers were affected by strikes and disturbances. There were huge delays on building contracts and a massive collapse in land values and property prices. International firms withdrew expatriate employees from Hong Kong to such an extent that we began to wonder if there would be any children left to come to Island School. The Governor's daughter, who had been enrolled to come to Island School, was sent overseas to school as a safety precaution. There was a day when, because of a disturbance, the KGV school buses for the Hong Kong children were sent to the North Point vehicular ferry and the children were unloaded at Mansfield Road, while a massive telephone operation notified anxious parents to collect their children from there.
Despite it all, work on the temporary Island School went ahead; pupils were enrolled; and, eventually, the staff began to arrive. The very first teacher to be met at Kai Tak was Neil Harding and I remember queuing for hours at the vehicular ferry to go and meet him. More vividly, I remember queuing for more hours on the way back in a very restricted ferry concourse, with police all over the Place, and an area cordoned off with signs saying 'Danger - unexploded bomb'. Neil never said a word, and neither did other teachers who arrived in similar circumstances over the next few days.
There was a meeting of the Foundation on 4 September 1967 and I was able to announce that the school would open on 19 September with 237 children - 136 in 4 divisions of Form I, 76 in 3 divisions of Form II and 25 in a single division of Form III. This was far fewer than had been anticipated at the beginning of the year, and numbers overall had dropped enormously. In September 1967 there were actually fewer children at KGV and Island School together than there had been at KGV alone the previous year. Confidence slowly returned. The riots had died out by about the beginning of the school year. Bombs continued to occur for a few more months, but these too eventually ceased and life returned to normal. Expatriate families were again recruited in vastly increasing numbers, and enrolment in both the secondary schools went very rapidly upwards.
The Original Island School in the B.M.H.
Looking back it is more than ever amazing that the opening days of the school should have gone so well. The political crisis has already been described. It formed the background for the whole of the first year. The summer of 1967 had, however, produced other problems which had to be overcome by the staff who had newly arrived in Hong Kong. The summer of 1967 had been very dry. By June the reservoirs were virtually empty. Requests to the Chinese authorities for additional supplies through the pipeline went unanswered and so drastic water-rationing was introduced. By September we were down to a four hour supply of water every fourth day! What an introduction to Hong Kong. Fortunately there was rain in mid-September and on 1 October supplies from China were resumed as usual under the agreement and rationing was ended.
If this were not enough, we also had a salary problem. The U.K. Government had a Sterling crisis and the pound Sterling was devalued abruptly and very considerably. The Hong Kong dollar had been 16 to the pound for as many years as people could remember, but over one weekend it was revalued to 14.5 to the pound. This would not have created difficulties had not the Government's finance branch argued that, therefore, our teachers' salaries should be reduced because they were based on Sterling. It was an anxious moment, but, fortunately, we were eventually able to demonstrate that our salary scales were denominated in Hong Kong dollars, although the structure was the same as in the U.K. Had this not been so, we would have found it virtually impossible to staff the school after 1967 as salaries would have fallen behind England. 1967 was certainly an interesting year.
I shall never forget the end of the first term in the life of the school. A Carol Concert was arranged and virtually every pupil in the school took part. Virtually every parent turned up to listen and one took a tape-recording of the whole concert which I still play from time to time.
The same support was seen for the early plays the school put on. We had no pupils older than fourteen, so Colin Goddard chose plays which involved large numbers of characters and used most of the school. Everyone wanted to come and the tiny hall was crowded every evening. The same was true of athletic and swimming sports. Parents and friends flocked to support the infant school.
A startling innovation among the activities was sailing fairly common among schools today, but Island School was the first in Hong Kong. During the first year Neil Harding got to work building six Cadet dinghies and was joined the next year by Keith Mowser. Soon there was a tiny sailing club learning to use them at Stanley. Building the boats, like everything else, was a cooperative effort. Staff stayed on after school or came back in the evening to work on them. Fathers came in too to lend a hand and so did any of the members of the club.
I have a vivid recollection of the first regatta when my eldest son, Paul, was racing with a rather attractive girl as crew. They managed to capsize and when they came ashore I offered sympathy to both of them. Stella, the crew, dripping water all over the, place, gave me a brilliant smile and said, "Oh! Mr. Speak, it was super. I've never been in a capsize before."
I kept on having shocks from the girls in those first days. Inevitable, I suppose, as I had spent all my career in boys' schools until Island School opened. The school was only a few days old when one of the women teachers came into my office at about 5.30 one evening. She was brandishing a minute pair of pants and a diminutive school uniform dress and demanded "What do you suppose she went home in?" My imagination ran riot for some moments before I realised that the small offender had undoubtedly been attending a games activity and had got on the bus without changing.
It will be evident that Island School quickly settled into a lively and cheerful life-style which remains today. I should not, however, give the impression that there were no criticisms or problems. There were plenty of both!
"ISLAND SCHOOL
PEDESTRAIN ENTRANCE"
and before anyone could get him to correct it a letter had appeared in the newspaper not only drawing attention to the error, but reaching the conclusion that it showed how incompetent were the school authorities. In a place where almost any misspelling can appear on a sign-board this stung, but the comment was all too typical of a school of thought that existed outside the community of teachers and parents who were connected with ESF schools. Amongst teachers and parents of children in the Government schools it was freely said that standards were lower in the ESF schools. "Bright" children were encouraged not to go to Island School because it was "Comprehensive" but to apply to KGV which was a "Grammar School". Even when the passage of time showed that standards were not lower at Island School, criticism continued because there were many who thought that only Government could (or "should") manage English schools. I was never very sure whether the view was that only Government possessed the ability to manage them or whether it was that it was politically correct for all the management to be contained within the Government department. Either way the view was very long-lived and was very actively expressedagain when the Government eventually proposed to hand over management of all English schools to the ESF.
That violent argument lay far ahead in the early days of the school that I have been describing and I must return to the theme. During the very first year it became clear that the plans to build a new school in Wong Nai Chung Gap could not possibly reach fruition before the school grew out of its temporary accommodation. It was also felt that the Bowen Road location was far more convenient than Wong Nai Chung could ever be. Behind the temporary school stood the derelict army barracks - so application was made for a suitably sized portion of the Bowen Road site to be allocated to ESF permanently.
There were those within Government who had other ideas of the future use of the Bowen Road site and it was not for some time that approval was forthcoming. Eventually, however, we were offered the site on which Island School now stands - the final accident of history - and building planning began all over again.
The earliest plans for the site envisaged staff housing in a high block about where the squash courts are today. This concept disappeared when it became clear that Government would charge a very high premium to permit part of the site to be used for that purpose. Since three-quarters of the staff were recruited from the UK there had to be housing - renting was too expensive. The possibility of obtaining the adjacent site, which today is occupied by Government quarters, was explored but, again, dropped because the premium for the land was too high for the very limited finances of the ESF.
So, at last, Christopher Haffner began to develop the plan which eventually became the school we see today. The old hospital had been leased to the ESF for five years, so there was no particular urgency to vacate those premises. By the time negotiations over the land and over the Government grants and loans to pay for the building had been completed, however, numbers in the school were rising rapidly and it was vital that at least part of the new buildings be taken into use as soon as possible. Particularly needed were laboratories and workshops and so the design allowed for these to be built first on the part of the site nearest to the hospital, and taken into use while the classrooms and hall were being built later.
My original statements to the ESF about the needs and the planning to meet them talk of the laboratories being necessary for 1969, which required that building work on the new school commence during 1968. It very soon became clear that this time-table was wildly optimistic and we had to rethink our use of rooms in the hospital to ensure that classes could be conducted satisfactorily until 1970. The principal cause of delay was over the grant of land by Government. Despite approaches at every level, and despite repeated assurances that the grant had been approved, we did not, in fact, actually have the land until late in 1969 and work on the piling began immediately. This was completed early in 1970, by which time tenders for the building works had been received and submitted to Government. The tender documents anticipated completion of the first of the new buildings by 15 August 1970, with other buildings following the sequence. Our planning for classes had to assume that this would be achieved.
This gloomy prediction proved only too true. Work on the laboratory block at first went ahead well, but, as time went by, became slower and slower as the contractor attempted to keep his costs within bounds. The workshop block also got started but only grew slowly. The summer came without any hope that the buildings would be ready for September. We tried to persuade the Education Department to allow us to stagger classes until the completion of additional accommodation, but they would not hear of it. So Neil Harding had to devise elaborate schemes for fleets of buses to take some classes to Union Church where they used the hall for drama, and other classes to Victoria Park for games and swimming. With these expedients, and by converting the hall in the hospital into three extra classrooms as well as using every other inch of space, we managed to accommodate the new intake of classes, but life was extremely difficult and everyone in the school was under a great deal of strain.
Worse was to come. At the beginning of November the contractor actually stopped work altogether and began the legal processes for the determination of the contract. The ESF had to engage solicitors and put the matter to arbitration, and, at the same time, try to obtain Government support both for the costs of arbitration and also for refinancing the building work. Some skilful negotiation persuaded the contractor to go ahead with the two blocks that he had begun, but he remained adamant that he would only continue with the rest of the works if price variation clauses were incorporated into the contract. This the Government steadfastly refused to consider and so the contract was terminated and, although the arbitrator eventually ruled in favour of the ESF and against the contractor, Island School was little nearer its permanent buildings.
The original contractor eventually finished the first two blocks in July 1971, by which time we had persuaded Government to allow us to re-tender for the rest of the buildings. A new contract, at a much higher price, was accepted and the new contractor began work at the beginning of September 1971. At last the school could expect to have a proper home. The first block of classrooms was completed in time for September 1972 and the other classrooms and the hall followed more or less on schedule. It is ironic to recall that, by the time the building, as originally planned, was complete, it was already too small! Fortunately, it had been envisaged that the school would need additional laboratories and workshops one day, and the first two blocks had been designed with extra foundations and columns to permit the addition of a further floor. So, as soon as the second contractor finished the hall a third contractor was appointed to add the extra floors needed. It is even more ironic, when remembering the struggle to achieve Island School as a second secondary school for English-speaking children, to recall that by the time the buildings were actually completed numbers had grown to such an extent that KGV had been expanded, and, in addition, the ESF was trying to persuade Government that another secondary school was needed on the Island.
Had the problems over Island School's buildings been the only difficulty facing the infant ESF it is likely that I could have continued as both Principal of Island School and Secretary of the Foundation for considerably longer. Even before building began, however, other problems were demanding more and more of my time. This is not the place to detail the catalogue of woes that beset us. Suffice it to say that official policy, approved by the Legislative Council, was that the new schools should be operated by independent management and should receive the same subventions as schools in the Chinese sector, while their teachers should receive the same salaries as their counterparts in the Government schools. This policy required the establishment of salary scales for both Government and ESF schools, working out methods of calculating the correct subsidy, and massive increases in fees to bring the costs to Government down to the approved level. Looking back today I can appreciate more readily than I could at the time the problems facing the officers of the Education Department. The higher they allowed the salaries to be fixed the greater the increase in fees and the more vociferous were parental complaints, but if Government salaries were reduced to ESF levels their own teachers and their unions would create problems, while if salaries were not equated the ESF in its turn would complain and the policy-makers in the Legislative Council would demand adherence to their declared intentions. Add to this that there was no agreed method of calculating the "correct" subsidy and it is not surprising that a great deal of time and effort went into attempting to solve these administrative problems. Nor is it altogether surprising that we frequently encountered delaying tactics, which, memory suggests, sometimes made our discussions more like scenes from "Yes, Minister" than real life.
Early in 1971 the school Council recognized that the school could not be run by a part-time Principal and suggested to the Executive Committee - that the post of Principal should be separated from that of Secretary of the Foundation. Subsequent discussion led to the realization that we could not recruit someone who would have a detailed knowledge of Hong Kong and its subvention system, but we could recruit an experienced head with recent contact with the comprehensive secondary educational system in England. So I was given permission to start to establish a separate administrative office for the ESF with myself as its chief executive, and to advertise for a Principal to succeed me at Island School. No doubt Ronald Rivers-Moore will take the story from there.
Before drawing these memories to a close, however, there is one topic that I have saved for the ending, because of its importance to the future development of English schools in Hong Kong. It had been decided, right from the outset, that Island School should attempt to offer a very wide range of subjects and give pupils as much choice as possible especially in preparing for public examinations. To this end, during the very first year, plans were made for "option groups" in Forms IV, V and VI. This involved having more subjects being taught at a time than there were actual classes in the year group. This system has two great advantages - it reduces the size of classes being taught and it gives an element of choice to the pupils. It also has one great disadvantage - there are more teaching periods on the timetable, and either teachers have to undertake extra lessons or there have got to be more teachers.
In 1968 some options were introduced for Form IV and the small number of extra periods was met without much difficulty. During that year, however, plans were made for the opening of the first Form V, and it became clear that the extension of the option system would result in teachers being asked to undertake far more 'contact-hours' than teachers in other secondary schools in Hong Kong. Not surprisingly this prospect upset many of the teachers. I well remember a staff meeting that was called to discuss the position. I went to it in very considerable trepidation, particularly as I had not the least idea of what I could do if the staff would not undertake the extra work - we had promised parents options and the Government would only agree to the same number of teachers as would be allowed for a Chinese school.
The meeting began fairly stormily and there was a good deal of violent opposition to the prospect of additional work. Eventually I was able to remind staff of the advantages that options extended to the pupils and, in the end, the meeting voted unanimously that each teacher should undertake two additional teaching periods to enable the option system to be extended. I have often quoted this meeting as an example of the quality of staff Island School has been fortunate to attract. There are probably many heads of schools who have been faced with an angry staff demanding a reduction in work-load. There cannot, however, be many whose staff, in that situation, then volunteered to do more!
Until that time choice in schools in Hong Kong had been limited to a broad division of classes between, say, an Arts and a Science stream, with every pupil in the class following exactly the same time-table of lessons. That meeting marked a watershed - it was the moment at which, at least in the English schools, choice became a matter for the individual, and today this is the pattern in all the English schools.
More important for the development of the English schools, from that time teaching staff recognised that it was vital that the ESF have sufficient freedom to recruit more staff than was permitted under the Government's pattern, which was geared to the needs of the selective grammar-school system operating in the Chinese sector. This recognition spread gradually to the parents through the PTA and slowly there grew a demand from influential parents that more teachers be provided, even if it resulted in still higher fees.
The Executive Committee of the ESF lent its support to this idea, but little progress could be made as the Government was unable to permit KGV to have more teachers than a Government secondary school in the Chinese sector, and was not willing to allow Island School to progress if KGV could not.
After years of agitation and frustration the Island School PTA eventually formally proposed that Island School be allowed to increase its fees in order to be able to employ additional teachers. Not surprisingly the Government rejected this proposition, but the message was received. Ever since the ESF was established there had been within Government those who believed that all English schools should be managed by the ESF - the proposition had been rejected several times by the ESF because it could not perceive a viable financial future. Now, with parental acceptance of the concept of higher fees to achieve higher standards, the proposition was renewed with some seriousness.
In 1978 the Government's Director of Audit, in his annual report on the Government accounts made to the Legislative Council, criticised the Code of Aid under which the ESF had operated from 1973 as still providing more subvention than the 1965 policy allowed. The result was a massive review of finance and management which resulted in the amalgamation of the Government schools with the ESF schools under ESF management, with limited freedom to recruit for all the schools the staff that parents were willing to pay for. All, I suggest, as a consequence of our staff meeting in 1968 which endorsed the need for more teaching hours to permit freedom of choice.
At the beginning of this article I spoke of the "agony and frustration" of the early days of Island School - but I would not have missed them for anything! I take considerable pride in having had a small part in the tremendous enterprise which started from absolutely nothing and resulted in a major school playing a vital part in Hong Kong's educational world. I just hope that the next twenty years will be as happy and as fruitful and that the school, so hardly won, will continue the successful career it has begun.
Island School girls - Mairi Mcdonald, Maggie Coombes and Liz Kutt.
Sports
New school under construction
Island School teachers in the 1960s
To re-enter this site without logging in again please bookmark the Home Page. If you have forgotten your password and would like to reset it please visit the password reset page.
Back to the Islanders Alumni Home Page
E-mail: info@ishk.org
20003