10,992 entries for Inspections - State

What might have been deemed adequate in the 1940s and 1950s was less so in the 1960s. The new Resident Manager in the early 1960s, Br Sinclair, was less competent than the man who had effected such improvement in the 1950s. Although the School continued to be described as well-run, basic facilities, in particular toilets and washrooms, were singled out for criticism.

From the 1960s, however, strong criticism was made of the condition of the schoolrooms. They were described as ‘very drab and dirty’ in 1960 and, in 1963, were described as being ‘very badly in need of repair – the atmosphere is depressing’.

The Department of Education Inspector, Dr C. E. Lysaght, who inspected the School in March 1966, found that the dormitories ‘gave an impression of the bleakness of an old style institution’. He also referred to a ‘general drabness’ and went on to state: I have reservations however that increased money made available would solve all problems here and bring it up to the standard of the schools operated by nuns which I have seen so far.

In 1967, the Visitor recommended the renewal and re-planning of the boys’ toilets, because they were in ‘a bad state’.

In May 1968, the Visitor commented that the infirmary department was ‘one of the bright lights of an otherwise most depressing establishment’. The house, although somewhat drab and in need of painting and many modern improvements, was ‘reasonably satisfactory’. There were still no facilities for the boys to wash themselves during the day. It noted that the toilets were clean but ‘primitive in the extreme’. The premises had been neglected, and the Resident Manager of the time was blamed for this deterioration.

Just before the School closed, things had improved somewhat. The Visitation Report for April 1969 noted that one of the dormitories had been fitted out as a study hall, and that two other rooms had been set up as television and recreation rooms. One dormitory catered for all boys and this had been painted, remodelled and looked very presentable. The shower room had cubicles fitted and was working very satisfactorily.

The negative impact of bad Resident Managers was clearly seen in Tralee, not only in terms of the physical care of the boys, but in every aspect of life there. The quality of the food improved in the 1950s with the improvements in the kitchen and the arrival of Br Lafayette. The Christian Brothers’ Opening Statement mentioned that Visitation Reports gave the impression that clothing and footwear were generally satisfactory but, in fact, there were numerous Inspector’s Reports indicating that clothing was below standard. Boys should not have gone hungry whilst produce from the farm was sold for private profit. This situation continued for a number of years before being stopped by a newly appointed Resident Manager.

The Department of Education inspections almost invariably referred to the health of the boys in positive terms. Only on one occasion, in 1944, did the Inspector comment on the fact that ‘In this school numbers of children much below average height and weight for age. Many of the children under weight’. In spite of this observation, the Inspector also noted that the children were medically well cared for. Eighteen months later, the Inspector noted that the ‘Boys look healthy and have put on weight regularly’ and that the children were medically ‘well cared’. Throughout the period, the Inspector described the boys as being ‘well cared’ or ‘very well cared’ and her description of their health varied from ‘satisfactory’ to ‘excellent’. The documentation also refers to the doctor attending regularly and as required. However, two complainants made allegations of the failure to treat them medically for specific conditions, and one in particular said that he had only seen a doctor once during his six years in Tralee. Neither of these complainants was in Tralee in the 1950s when conditions appear to have improved.

The children committed to an industrial school were entitled to a full primary education and an industrial training to equip them for employment when they left. A full primary education could be measured by the attainment of a Primary Certificate at the end of the national school cycle. The Christian Brothers maintain that the statistics show that the pass rate for those pupils who were present for the Primary Certificate examination was good, averaging 76%.

The Committee has Primary Certificate records for 10 of the 15 complainants heard. Of the 10, eight passed and two failed.

Visitors’ comments on the standard of education in Tralee were generally positive. For example, in 1941, the Visitor noted that the Department Inspector had given a ‘very flattering report on the vast improvement which he stated was discernible in the manners appearance and proficiency of the pupils’. In 1944, the Visitor noted that the boys could ‘give a good account of the instruction they have received’. The following year, the Visitor noted that they were ‘making satisfactory progress in all classes but the standard of proficiency is not as high as in the ordinary schools’.

In both 1954 and 1963, the Visitor noted that the frequent changes of staff had had an adverse effect on the standards. By contrast, in 1958 the Visitor said that quite a good standard was reached by the boys. Although the ‘uneven’ standard was mentioned in 1954, 1960 and 1961, the Visitor in 1960 noted that most of the boys had ‘the essentials’. The large numbers of weak pupils were mentioned in the 1964 and 1968 Reports and, in 1968, the Visitor noted that many of the boys needed individual help, which they were being given ‘as well as possible’.

Only two Department of Education reports were available to the Committee. In 1942, the level of education in most subjects was stated to be pitched at a lower standard than the official standard. In 1952, the school was reported to be ‘satisfactory’.

Witnesses who were taught by Br Marceau confirmed his brutality and eccentricity, which had been commented on by Visitors.

Br Aribert, who was in the School in the early 1960s, told the Committee he disagreed with Br Marceau’s teaching methods. He had charts ‘all over the walls’ and he made the boys go around learning them. He felt that the boys did not like this system.