Monday, November 13, 2017
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
HIST 3030 The Evolution of Social Policy in Barbados: Wendy Storey on the Development of Sanitation Services in Barbados from 1900 to 1970
By, Wendy Storey, HIST 3030 Student
A toilet or septic tank, were not
common household’s terms in Barbados in the post-emancipation period. Common phrases
for excreta disposal were “night soil”, “totsi”, “potty”, “pit –toilet”, privy
pit or latrine. Frank Ramsey, a Barbadian physician, tells us “there was no
water carriage system of sewage disposal, nor any undertaking by any sanitary
authority to remove excreta.” Excreta disposal was solely a household duty until
policies were created around the 1970’s to ensure proper methods of discarding
it, which meant that disposal was not always disposed properly but in a way the
resident saw fit. There were several methods of disposal adopted by the
Barbadian population. According to Ramsey “water closet emptying into a closed
cesspit; closet or privy with a cesspit in the earth or limestone subsoil; a
pail closet emptied into the sea; or a keg or tin in a corner of the yard with
an oat bag as an improvised screen.” Even though these methods were common
practices, there were all not sanitary practices. Dumping night soil into the
earth proved to be responsible for the rise in the Hookworm disease in the
1920’s. According to the Report of Ankylostomiasis Infection Survey “The
intimate connections between the early stages in the development of the worm
and the upper layers of the soil provides the opportunity for the larva to gain
entrance through the skin of the feet and legs of agricultural labourer and
others whose habits expose them to attack.”
Ponds played an essential role in the water supply of many
Barbadians, especially those in residing in the rural areas. Ponds were often
polluted and were the sole reasons for the birth of water-borne diseases among
Barbadians. In rural areas ponds were used for livestock, washing, drinking and
bathing; all contributing to the pollution of it. During the rainy season when
flooding occurred, garbage, night soil and ponds would become contaminated
creating risk of exposure to water-borne diseases especially during the
hurricane season with its heavy rains.
By 1857 Bridgetown had a piped water supply from a private company,
the Bridgetown Waterworks Co. and by 1861, public access to water was created
via the standpipe system. As claimed by the Chief Medical Officer 1933-1934 Report,
piped water was accessible in almost every parish in the island abandoning the
unsanitary practice of “dipping mugs into open ponds” -- this pond system was
also linked to the 1854 cholera epidemic.
After the cholera epidemic threatened the health care of Barbadians,
sanitation was no longer overlooked because the colony’s economic standing was
at risk. Subsequently by the early 20th century, the recommendations
of Dr. John Hutson, the Public Health Inspector, were taken into consideration
creating quarantine facilities and Isolation Hospitals to protect Barbados’
harbour from infectious diseases.
In 1910 untrained sub-inspectors were regulated to inspect homes and
premises. By 1928, the Chief Medical Officer and Sanitation Officer Act was
passed, granting permission to oversee the improvement of the sanitary
situation.
Very little progress was accomplished in the sanitary problem in
Barbados but garbage disposal upgraded from a household duty to being disposed
of on specific lands. According to the 1945 -1948 Annual Reports of the St.
Michel District, garbage was dumped at Hill Road, Bank Hall, Mental Hospital
Lands, Carrington’s Village, Reef Grounds, Cheapside, Brittons Hill and
approved private lands. Unused quarries, ponds, low-lying and water-logged
lands were also used to dump garbage. The Constitution River and coastal areas
were also refuse dumping spots, of both garbage and night soil. In order to
maintain proper dumping practices inspectors and harbour police supervised
these practices.
The Sanitation practices were slowly improving, under the suggestion
of J.T.C. Johnson’s report the total destruction of the hookworm disease would
be accomplished with the establishment of latrines. To eradicate night soil
dumping Privy Pits were erected as well. Public Latrines were created along
with public baths that allowed the average Barbadian to have access, while
abandoning the dependency of pond usage.
Standpipes were erected almost in every village, creating no excuse for
unsanitary practices to exist in the Barbadian every day routine.
Even though these new sites were created to curb poor sanitation, people
persisted in dumping in the Constitution River and water-logged lands were prone
to developing breeding grounds for mosquitoes. Dumping in near-shore areas also
persisted and often failed to remove the garbage because it just flowed back on
shore. Access to improved sanitary measures was slow to progress in Barbados
between 1900 and 1970 even with major changes in policies and continued
setbacks. According to policymakers such as Dr. John Hutson, education was key
to solving the problem and enforcement of sanitation policies were the only
successful measures to achieve proper sanitation.
Work Cited
Annual Report of Chief Medical Officer (Barbados).1932. Chief
Medical Office.
Annual Report of 1945 on the St.Michael District
Annual Report of 1946 on the St.Michael Disrict
Johnson, J.T.C. A Report to the Public Health Commission on the
Organization of the Medical and Sanitary Services of the Colony of Barbados
with Recommendations. Cole’s Printery.1926.Pamphlet.Print.
Merritt, Brittany. Developing Little England: Public Health, Popular
Protest and Colonial Policy in Barbados 1918-1940.2016.Thesis.Print.
Ramsey, Frank C. Protein-Energy Malnutrition in Barbados. The Role
of Care in Management. Josiah Macy, Jr.Foundation.1979.Print.
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
HIST 3030 The Evolution of Social Policy in Barbados: Levisha Josiah on the Origins of the Common Entrance Exam in Barbados
The
origin and evolution of the Common Entrance Examination in Barbados and its effectiveness
in achieving quality education 1959-1982
The
Barbados Secondary Schools Entrance Examination, commonly called the Common
Entrance Examination, was implemented in 1959 as a method for transferring
students from primary to secondary school. It emerged from a recommendation by
G.S.V. Petter (1956). After
conducting a survey in both grammar and modern secondary schools, Petter
realized that something had to be done about the way in which students went on
to secondary schools. He concluded that children were being examined too early
in their lives (some as early as 9 years old). During this time period, because
of a high demand for secondary education children would write several
examinations by different secondary schools with hopes of gaining entry to at
least one grammar school. Petter (1956) noted that this led to evident fatigue
and lack of enthusiasm amongst students by the time they got to secondary
school. Out of all of his recommendations one that was taken into the
consideration was the request for the government to set one entrance exam based
on attainment, which would not overexert students.
In
1959, this recommendation was brought to fruition by way of a Screening Test
administered by the Ministry of Education for all students between the ages of
10-12. Prior to 1959 in addition to the entrance examination by individual
schools, students had to complete an interview in order to get in. This
interview segment could be highly discriminatory and place persons from a lower
socio-economic background at a disadvantage. Carter (2017) noted that questions
could include if a child had running water in their home, where their toilet
was located – whether it was inside or outside, how far from the house one’s
toilet was located and even what they had for breakfast on the day of the
interview. These questions were geared towards identifying which socio-economic
background a student belonged to and a child’s response could determine whether
or not they were granted a place into the school. At the end of the day the
choice was left up to the headmaster to decide who would be accepted or not,
which was very subjective and discretionary.
The
Screening Test in 1959 came as an opportunity for all, irrespective of one’s
socio-economic background. A student’s academic ability on examination became
the primary determinant for their admission to secondary school. But there was
still room left for subjectivity because once a child made the cut off point
they would be able to attempt the entrance exam at the school of their choice
where the final decision was still left up to the headmaster. In 1962
subjectivity was completely removed and the Screening Exam (Part I) and the
actual entrance exam (Part II) were both administered by the Ministry of
Education. This created equal opportunities for all the candidates to attend
secondary school. According to the
Ministry of Education Report 1976-1977, by 1977 entrance to secondary schools
were determined by a one-stage examination instead of the Part I and II system.
This relieved some stress children experienced.
The
Common Entrance Examination served as a vehicle for providing quality education
in Barbados. Despite the equal opportunity in sitting the
Common Entrance Examination, there were faults in the new system. There was
only one shot to succeed and it reinforced a system of segregation amongst
students and schools based on ability grouping which compromised the delivery
of quality education using the Common Entrance Examination in Barbados.
The Common Entrance was not fair to students because
it gave them one shot (although resisting was offered the following year) at
gaining entrance to the school of the student’s choice. Schooling before secondary school lasted for
approximately 6-7 years and a child’s transfer to secondary school depended on
one English and Arithmetic exam and a short composition. If a child scored 25% on the
Arithmetic component is did not necessarily mean that he or she was not at the
level of attainment required, it could simply mean they had a ‘bad day’. The exam did not assess student
learning/performance over a time span, nor did it assess a child’s consistency.
Continuous assessment is an important component of the delivery of quality
education that the Common Entrance did not possess. If a child failed that day for whatever reason they could be
labeled a ‘failure.’ Because of this ‘one shot’ feature the Common Entrance exam
failed to achieve quality education in Barbados.
The Common Entrance Examination reinforced a system
of segregation among the older and newer secondary schools and led to ability
grouping upon the results of the exam.
The older
secondary schools were perceived as prestigious based on past events
specifically the 1878 Education Act. And so when secondary modern schools were
implemented they had no other choice but to take the inferior position to
them. Grammar Schools offered
sixth form opportunities and persons attending them were the ones to take up
significant positions for the development of the island. They received the ‘crème
de le crème’ of performers and received more professional staff and lab
equipment. The newer secondary schools received students who were deemed to be
underachievers in the system. This led to a harsh system of ability streaming,
and because of the prestige attached to grammar schools every child aimed
towards attending one. If they were not successful, they were perceived as underachievers
within Barbadian society. A writer
to the Advocate Newspaper, Bertram
Niles, showed his concern because this appeared to be harmful on the academic
development and the socio-emotional stance low performers. The children who
were placed at the newer schools lost enthusiasm. Another writer to the Advocate newspaper, Jean Springer, suggested that ability grouping did have benefits, since
students with the same ability can work at their own pace, but given the
interschool ability grouping that the Common Entrance Examination emphasized,
it placed students across the system at a disadvantage, and especially those in
modern secondary schools.
The
Common Entrance Examination engaged all pupils aged between the ages of 10 and 12. In 1959 it was merely a Screening Test
that evolved into both a screening test and entrance examination administered
by the Ministry of Education in Barbados. It served as a vehicle for achieving
quality education to all persons and making the transfer from primary to
secondary an easier one by creating equal access for students making the
transition; it terminated the uncoordinated method to get into secondary schools.
Nonetheless in some instances it failed as an appropriate strategy to provide
quality education because it only offered one single shot and it reinforced
segregation among the masses between 1959-1982 which both had severe
consequences on the students involved.
References:
Barbados, Ministry
of Education. Report of the Department of Education . Bridgetown :
Government Printing Office, 1958-1959.
—. Report of the Ministry of Education Barbados
1976-1977. Bridgetown: Government Printing Office , 1976-1977.
Carter, Dan Clifford. The Origin and Effectiveness of
the Common Entrance Exam in Barbados Levisha Josiah. 14 October 2017.
Niles, Betram. Ministry must act fast to abolish exam.
Bridgetown: The Advocate, 17 May 1979. Newspaper.
Petter, G.S.V. Report of a survey of secondary education
in Barbados . Bridgetown , 1956.
Shorey, Leonard and Gerald St. Rose . "Education and
Development ." Barbados Thirty Years of Independence. Ed. Trevor
Carmichael. Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers, 1996. 118-150.
Springer, Jean. Grouping Children According to Ability .
Bridgetown: The Advocate Newspaper , 1 June 1979.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)