THE EDITOR, Sir:

In 1945 I was in second class in Middlesex Elementary School in Christiana. The school was run by Teacher Limomious, grandfather of Peter Phillips. He was known as 'Man Teacher', being the only male, assisted by six women. Attendance sometimes reached 375, all in one room. On fair days, most classes were held outside. On rainy days, we were all inside.

Every child in 'Second Book', as we called it, could read, write and do arithmetic up to long division and at nine years old had a wealth of general knowledge and practical (handwork) skills. How can I vouch for the competence of every child? I can because no child was allowed promotion to a new class without competence in the preceding class.

You may ask: "But wouldn't favourites be promoted, even if the incompetent or 'dunce' let down the class on inspection day.

You may ask: "What would that matter?"

The answer is that teachers were paid according to the grade of the school - A, B, C or D - with A being the highest. The inspector could, based on criteria of attendance, brightness of students and the general administration of the school, promote a school from say C to B. In that case, the pay of all the teachers in that school moved up from C level pay to B.

You may ask: "But couldn't there be collusion between head teachers and inspectors?" No, the inspector, though a former head teacher himself, guarded jealousy his integrity and his elevated status. He even ate his lunch in his car under a tree in the schoolyard - he did not eat in the head teacher's house.

All of the above explains why every teacher had a leather strap. Some wore it constantly over the shoulder and administered licks in your hand or over your back for not paying attention, bad behaviour, or for not being quick with the answers in mental arithmetic. Serious breaches in behaviour were referred to 'Man Teacher' (Man Teacher had the biggest strap which, our lore contended, was soaked in urine over the weekend to make it hotter - please forgive my digression into the realm of unfounded rumour.)

Too much talk

I have heard many educationalists over the decades speaking of correcting an education system which at the elementary (primary) level now produces a high percentage of illiterates. I have not heard the planners say how they will replace the characteristics of the system that was successful in its day, i.e., the inspector, the excessive use of strap, preventing the promotion of the dunce and paying teachers according to performance.

If a system works, you cannot just stop using essential parts of it without replacing those essential parts, or modifying them; you are trying to replace a wheel with a triangle. It won't work!

I am, etc.,

MICHAEL H. ELLIOTT

Gordon Town PO

St Andrew