20th century, The Ogilvie School of Recovery (now Shorefields School) (EHER 15730)

School erected in 1912 for the recovery of children with a delicate physique.

Two and a half storey brick-built school adopting half-butterfly plan and set in extensive grounds. Erected in 1912 by The Ogilvie Charities and designed by the Architect Fred Rowntree for 44 children, it was enlarged in 1921 to hold 100 children. Recognised as an Open Air School by the Education Act of 1921. It is south-east facing to improve the health of children through the use of air and sunlight treatment. Internal features likely to include classrooms, dormitories, dining hall, dispensary and staff quarters. Spatial plan likely to convey important information on social and gender segregation. <3> Other refs. <1> <2> Site Assessment, 2011: Internal inspection needed at earliest opportunity. It is not known what state the building is in at the moment. Adaptive use should be encouraged informed by an impact assessment. It is recommended that a measured survey, photography and synthesis is needed in advance of major works. <3> Site Significance: In the absence of a thematic survey this appears to be a rare and remarkably complete example of an unusual site type. <3> A programme of historic building recording was undertaken on The Shorefields School, a special school catering for pupils with a wide range of profound educational needs, prior to refurbishment and enlargement under the Building Schools for Future Project. The original school was established in 1912 as the Ogilvie School of Recovery, a residential children’s home where children of ‘delicate physique’ from the public elementary schools could receive long-term care to restore them to permanent good health. A wide range of conditions were treated, and in this respect its function was as a hospital rather than a school. Teaching was secondary, but still important and the national curriculum was studied as well as a programme of physical exercise, singing and dancing. Indeed, good exercise, rest, fresh sea air and treatment were the order of the day. To accomplish this, the school was built in a country setting overlooking the sea with unfettered access to the beach, within an area close to existing convalescent homes such as Reckitts (1908). The school was built of red brick and tile roofs and arranged in two mostly two-storey buildings- an admin building for staff at the front, with the main admin/reception block and two wings: the kitchen wing and isolation wings, set back from the main road. Linked at the back by the dining hall was the children’s home, consisting of a classroom, recreation rooms and upstairs dormitories with attached sanitary blocks. The half-butterfly plan of the home, designed by Fred Rowntree FRIBA, also had open-air verandas and sun balconies which were crucial to the concept of improving the health of the children through fresh air and sunlight treatment. Lessons would be taken outside or in the verandas and at the front all rooms were cross-ventilated. Expansion took place in 1921 after the end of WWI by extending the two wings in the same form and style. The school closed in the 1950s, due largely to improvements in healthcare after WW2 and was taken over by Essex County Council and continued as a residential school for special needs children in various forms up until 2005 when the Shorefields School was established, as a day school. During the 1990s and early 2000’s much of the school was refurbished, partly through deterioration but mostly to modernise and improve facilities. The only part of the school to be unaffected by this was the former staff living accommodation above the admin block and dining hall. Despite a certain level of enlargement and refurbishment already, much of the historic character and layout of the original school remains intact. In particular, the exteriors retain their Queen Anne revival form, particularly on the half-butterfly south-east side, providing a pleasant backdrop to the playground. To the rear, the design is more functional and institutional. The admin building at the front, despite its more prominent location, has similar but secondary architectural interest. In recent years, the internal layout and interiors of the school have inevitably changed, but the original spatial layout and room function can largely be understood, thanks in part to contemporary accounts. All areas of the admin building were served from a single spinal corridor on both levels from the entrance. All rooms of the main building (school) were served by a rear corridor that followed the symmetrical half-butterfly form of the single-sex wings, with sanitary blocks and stairs either end. Surviving fixtures and fittings tend to be of the more permanent sort: doors, windows and the tiled wall finishes largely characteristic of the corridors, though it is clear from contemporary photographs that apart from the dining hall and original classroom (latterly the hall) most of the other rooms particularly those for treatment, were sparsely decorated like hospital wards. The Shorefields School was established during an active period of school development, largely funded by charities and local authorities. It took its inspiration from a number of sources. Fundamental to this was an increased understanding of germs and infection in the second half of the Victorian period that lead to the fresh air movement; and important in the designs of the whole range of medical establishments from hospitals, sanitoria and convalescence homes. From the late 19th century onwards, the half-butterfly design was used in all these cases when built away from urban areas, as the best way to maximise light levels and draw in the fresh air. Such theories also undermined the Open Schools Movement, of which the Ogilvie’s appear as early exponents, though perhaps not to the degrees of some. Not only is it important in the study of early 20th century education and hospital design, it is also important architecturally, providing a good example of the use of revivalist styles in institutional architecture to promote well-being and recovery. <4>