Reflecting on Judaism

On 7th July 1969 the Managers and Committee received a report from the Architect setting out his vision of the school when finished. I am sure that reading this report is not everyone’s cup of tea but I set it out below for those for whom it is. It is interesting to note how many of the original concepts have now been discarded, so much so, that if one were to visit the school today it would be difficult to envisage the conceptual layout.

Architect’s Report

REDBRIDGE JEWISH PRIMARY SCHOOL

          A radically new approach to primary school design has been pioneered by architects Scott, Brownrigg, and Turner in the design of a new primary school which replaces the historic Stepney Jewish School. The new school, to be built in the London Borough of Redbridge, will be air-­ conditioned, completely flexible and carpeted throughout - but built within the normal DES cost allowance.

          The need for instant flexibility in new 'team' teaching methods is the basis of the whole design and the main stimulus to a complete rethink about the way money is normally spent in school building. Team teaching involves minute-to-minute changes from large group instruction to small group discussion. So as to avoid the distractions of many small groups working in one large space, partitions need to be moveable, dividing up the teaching space in whatever way is most suited to a particular class, teacher and subject. The difficulty lies in providing light and air to all the small spaces, not all of which can be next to windows.

          If a school planned on normal lines is provided with partial air-conditioning and artificial lighting, the cost is inevitably raised above the DES cost allowance. The architects decided to explore the consequences of carrying the need for these services to their limit - that is, of providing them to the whole school. Experience in the United States has shown that these conditions result in higher standards of health, and less absenteeism.

          It was immediately apparent that, instead of spreading out the school to provide light and air to all spaces, it was possible to compact the whole building into the most economic shape - a square ­providing small windows for a view only.

          Immediate capital savings follow: - a more simple structure; less corridor space; less outside wall for the same floor area; less window area. The savings achieved in these ways not only allowed an excellent standard of artificial lighting to supplement daylight, but also enabled the architects to provide instantly moveable partitions giving a high standard of sound insulation and to carpet the floor surface throughout the school.

          Savings in running costs also followed, counteracting the additional cost of operating the lighting and air-conditioning; the compact shape and smaller windows resulted in a smaller heat loss (in fact it is doubtful if heating will often be required) smaller windows also result in less solar heat gain with smaller cooling load (the greenhouse effect is a common failure among post-war schools) and less discomfort glare for the children; the carpeted floors (now that synthetic fibers suitable for this kind of work are available) have the lowest of all flooring maintenance costs, provide a comfortable sitting surface for the children and reduce noise both at source and by absorption of airborne sound.

          The structure is simple. Steel decking roof is supported on castellated beams and steel box columns on concrete pad foundations. External walls are of facing brick, 4" cavity filled with plastic foam and an inner skin of lightweight hollow concrete block: this gives a U value of 0.05; windows are of standard steel section. The primary school is part of a complex which also includes a nursery school, youth club and caretaker's house. A gymnasium is shared with the boys’ club; splash pool and sheltered courtyard with the nursery school.

          The external band of teaching areas in the primary school is supported by an inner band of a "learning resource area" which is provided with sinks and other equipment needed in the teaching process. The fixed core comprises the assembly hall (which has a higher roof level) with an adjacent music and drama room which is insulated from teaching areas by a bank of store rooms; offices for school staff and the kitchen which serves primary and nursery schools. The DES cost limit is applied to the primary school and caretaker's house, together costing £72,234. The whole complex will be in operation by October 1969.

          The summer months were comparatively quiet with meetings concerning fund raising, the delay in the completion date for the school, negotiating funds due to us from the youth club for their proportion of the building costs and the suchlike. The main building contractor wrote to us, most unusually, apologising most profusely for the delay and giving the reasons which sounded convincing. On 13th October Stanley Rosslyn wrote reporting on a meeting he attended, together with Rev. Black and Mr. Harry Balkin, with a representative of the Torah Department and Dr. Fishman, Chief Education Officer of the ‘Board’. The purpose of the meeting was twofold. Firstly, to announce that they had appointed a Mr. Chaim Wertheimer as Director of Religious Education for the school and secondly, to discuss the proposed syllabus for the school, which would also be discussed with the Director of Jewish Studies when he arrived. Little did they realise that they had, to a large extent, been wasting their time. I could write a whole chapter about Mr. Wertheimer but will make do with a summary.

          Mr. Wertheimer and his wife Sarah had both been Headteachers in Israel with teaching experience in both Dublin and Australia. He was a man fully confident in his ability and did not suffer fools gladly. When he arrived and studied the prepared syllabus he was underwhelmed by its scope and set about writing his own syllabus. Briefly, and as I understand his objectives, he did not want to start the children off on the usual ‘Board’s’ Jewish studies syllabus because he believed that it was failing. Instead, he argued, the first few chapters of the Chumash is full of narrative, containing many words which are in common use in Israel today. Why not, he asked, prepare a reading book comprising, where-ever possible, words from these chapters so that when the children came to Siddur and Chumash the vocabulary would, to a great extent, be known to them and they could advance rapidly.

          He put his ideas into practice and by working from early in the morning till late at night prepared his material. All locally were very impressed both by his devotion and with the results he achieved within the first year or two. Not so the Officials of the ‘Board’. They had been struggling for years with their own syllabus in the part-time classes and saw no need for these innovations. Perhaps they saw his results as reflecting on their own achievements over the years or perhaps their pride was hurt. Somehow they managed to persuade the Honorary Officers of the ‘Board’ that Chaim Wertheimer was not doing a good job and in due course his contract was not renewed in spite of our repeated requests that they do so. In vain did I plead with the Honorary Officers to visit the school and see for themselves the wonderful work he was doing. The exception was Mark Kosky, an Honorary Treasurer of the ‘Board’, who did visit and was duly impressed. By the time Chaim left, the children were conversing in simple Hebrew; they had studied some Mishnah and had completed the whole of the first part of the Chumash. He even arranged a ‘Siyum’ to celebrate their achievements which was attended by the Chief Rabbi.

          His influence extended beyond the School. He taught the children how to participate in the synagogue service, for example, today we expect that a young boy will lead the ‘Anim Zemirot’ psalm during the Sabbath morning service. Few remember that it was Chaim who introduced the practice, at least as far as the Ilford area is concerned.

          I write about Chaim from memory some 35 years after the events. If some of these details are incorrect it is wholly unintentional. Please forgive.

          In 1969 there was a journal in circulation locally called ‘Hakaveret’, ‘The News Review of the Ilford Jewish Community’ and its editor was Frank Cass. He wrote that he intended to feature the Day School in its next edition and was awaiting articles from Rev. Black, Lady Brodie, Chief Rabbi I. Jakobovitz, the Architect, Mr. Rossslyn and he requested an article from me concerning the administrative history of the school. I do not recall whether or not I sent him an article but he has it now. It’s never too late. I suppose that ‘Hakaveret’ was the forerunner of the ‘Essex Jewish News’.

          Although the personal relationship between the Managers of the Schools and Club had always been good, their financial relationship left much to be desired. Arrangements had been made for the school to pay for the whole project and the club should always keep the school in funds and sign a letter of indemnity. For some reason they were reluctant to sign such a document in spite of repeated requests by Raymond and eventually he was persuaded to proceed without it. He spoke with Tom Philips and also wrote to Mr. Birn expressing his strong reservations. I, too, wrote as a Trustee of the school, on 28th November, expressing the view that the club was behaving quite unreasonably. Raymond Rudie recently reminded me that he remembers the day when we were presented with the contract to build the school and nursery project. It involved a total payment in excess of £100,000. He said that he would not sign when there were insufficient funds to make payment. Tom Philips said to him ‘Raymond, where is your faith?’ He signed. Altruism of the highest degree. The club was aware of these circumstances and so I felt that until the outstanding matter had been satisfied I could not allow the Club’s building contract to be signed and exchanged on behalf of the school. It was too great a responsibility and where was their faith?

Woolf Abahams.
November 2003.