Why do our kids hate secondary school?

[noblegiraffe]

Together with the news from PISA that our teens are the unhappiest in Europe, new research shows that engagement and enjoyment of school falls off a cliff once kids leave primary and start secondary.

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/revealed-the-school-pupils-who-disengage-during-year-7-dip/

https://www.thedeveloperlive.co.uk/opinion/opinion/why-do-uk-teens-have-among-the-lowest-life-satisfaction-in-the-oecd

"It found that while engagement declines through school “in almost every country”, the magnitude “is more pronounced in England”, suggesting disengagement is not just a symptom of age “but something atypical” that is happening in England.

There has been lots and lots of discussion about the impact that social media is having on teen mental health - what about the impact of having to go to secondary schools that they clearly don't like?

A lot of this certainly applies to my kids school. The building is awful. They even have a rat infestation.

I think the point someone made about constant assessment does still stand despite engagement improving in year 11. My child hates secondary school but is definitely engaging more in year 10 because she understands the importance of GCSEs. It's not that school has suddenly got better for her, it's that she wants good results.

I would also add in that there just aren't the funds or staff anymore for any/much pastoral care. Their wellbeing unit is overwhelmed with unhappy kids. My daughter regularly gets turned away because it's effectively full. Her attendance is lower than it should be but there's no help for her because the school are firefighting trying to help kids who are on 40% attendance or lower.

For DS2 the Year 6 SATs haunted him. He is able at maths (doing FM and Maths A Levels) but English he got high scores in the SATs but I don't think they any way reflect the GCSE curriculum.
So he was in top set for English throughout secondary, despite never successfully completing a mock paper. The school were rigid he had to be in that set because of his SATS result and he would pass. They were frustrated with him as there was no reason they could see that he was struggling, and if he just tried, he'd pass.

Also the timetable filler option he had was not in anyway suitable for him (iMedia Btec)

He burnt out in Yr11 (he's also autistic), 50% attendance, with zero in Jan/Feb.

With a tutor we found, he did get over the line pass in English so was able to go onto A Levels, which have suited him perfectly.

The school did let him drop out of the iMedia BTEC, and I understand the timetables just can't offer the flexibility for all students to do subjects they can do well in. The iMedia Btec was a complete shambles, though. All the work they'd done in Yr10 was wrong. There was a similar situation with Art that year too, with no students getting higher than a D.

His school doesn't allow phones at break, but they are expected to use them in lessons.
They have a zero tolerance uniform and behaviour policy and sometimes the detention room is so full they have to turn students away(!)

No funding in pastoral care.

Tired and worn out teachers

Petty rules

Bullying

Social media

@FrippEnos

• First, teachers are not entertainers. I/we are not paid clowns to dance for the edutainment of pupils.

Secondly, In many subjects, including practical ones, there will always be an element of "boring" curriculum.

Sometimes the basics are boring and need repetition to be able to do the more interesting stuff.*

I never said teachers should be entertainers or 'paid clowns' ffs!! Honestly! am

I was a secondary teacher for 15 years and between my experience teaching then and having kids in the system now, I can see that the curriculum is a lot more locked down and restricted than it used to be. And subject choices have shrunk massively. Many of the schools in my area only offer 1 language, or do not allow students to take more than 1 practical subject at GCSE. I'm guessing it comes down to funding, as all things do. But it stands to reason that a narrower curriculum is likely to appeal to fewer kids.

And in September the school will become a SEMH hub. My LA has the usual problems of too many CYP with EHCPs and no placements. I assume it's a geographical based decision, as there's no SEN provision in 20 miles, but based on the discussions I had with the principal, pastoral care is not their speciality...

I hadn’t stepped inside a secondary school since 1989 when I did A levels. It’s a different world.

An excess of testing I agree with (I think engagement going up in Yr 11 is because GCSEs actually matter). Every 6 weeks in every subject.

This will sound a bit odd, but no textbooks - instead bits of paper all over the place so they stress over where the hell everything is. I also wish they did less online.

Nose to the grindstone - DD went to a lovely, rather hippyish primary and even after several years of secondary she hasn’t ever really got over the change.

We chose our secondary school because, in an area with lots of very high performing, academic, “outstanding” secondaries, it prioritised the children’s happiness and well-being. The head feels extremely passionately about that - says she was miserable at school and never wants a child to feel like that.

They offer a wide range of subjects, both academic and non-academic (still have a fully functional metalworking department, for example; a childcare department; great kitchens, music rooms, theatre, art studios), and the kids are encouraged to find out what they are passionate about. They proactively hire teachers who are interested in getting to know the kids rather than just get them through exams.

Discipline is good though, and our very academic, geeky, autistic daughter has had very few incidents of bullying, and those she has encountered have been swiftly dealt with. She’s found her own group of similarly geeky, quirky friends and is thriving.

Her brother will join her there in September and I can only hope he will have a similarly positive experience.

This isn't going to be popular, but I think blaming the schools is a red herring. I think it's because kids in the UK have a lot less independence than kids in many other countries, and have become frustrated. They start school much younger than Europeans, but they are treated like babies a lot longer.

From what I have seen of families in the UK at the moment, as well as a lot of the a lot of the threads on here, parents in Britain continue to expect to directly supervise their children to a much older age than the average European.

Kids in the UK are expected to start learning to read when they are still seen as far too young to walk to school or play out with friends. Where we are (central Europe) we also have overcrowded, boring schools with too much assessment and emphasis on one type of student. We also have problems with screens, bullying and the rest of it.

BUT our children don't start school until they are 6 years old. They don't start learning to read and write until halfway through the 1st grade. From age 7 they take themselves to and from school. At age 10 they all do a cycling proficiency test (free, organised by the school, during school hours) and from then, they take themselves to sports and activities hang out with their friends etc - like 1970s UK.

We also have plenty of traffic and all the other issues, but we teach our children to manage the risks, and then allow them to manage a lot more of their own lives. We still parent our children, know where they are, and care very much about the risks. But for us, we show our caring by allowing our children to develop the skills and the confidence to manage their own movement.

All of my children could safely cross a road and go to the shop by themselves long before they could read fluently.

We live in an area which is visited by a lot of young backpackers during the summer. It is very noticeable that the European young people know how to find their way around, clean up after themselves etc, whereas a lot of the British ones, at the same age, seem very immature and unsure about how to approach strangers or find their way around, oblivious to picking up their own rubbish etc.

I don't mean to cause offence, but I really do think this is a part of the problem. I grew up in the UK during the 1980s/early 90s and it seems to me that the "normal" amount of freedom young people are allowed there has decreased drastically.

I know it has its own issues, but when I did GCSEs in the 90s, there was a coursework based curriculum with 50% of a lot of subjects coursework. I do think that gave people breathing space and was a fairer way of assessing. When I look at the number of GCSE exams kids are taking now, it's no wonder they're stressed. A lot of them are doing 20+ exams that go on for nearly 2 months.
I know that this is only one year, but really all your secondary experience is building up to this. Nearly all the secondaries in my borough finish at 16, and I would say anecdotally the 16-18 year olds round here that go to 6th form colleges seem much happier.

@PeatandDieselfan I think that a lot of that depends on where you live. I would say my London based kids are far more independent than their Italian cousins, or the exchange students we have had to stay - who all live in small towns and really depend on being driven around. My eldest was getting the tube and train to school when she was 11.

I don't think we can go back to lots of course work really. With AI and parents writing it, it's going to be less useful.

But college kids do seem happier. They have chosen what they want to study and there is a much bigger variety of courses and they can pitch them more at thier level. So you can do a level 2 course in dog grooming or 4 A levels.

First post nailed it - I have twins in their last year and nice schools and likely to go to uni but the UK system is a battle field. It's overshadowed their childhood.

Because the education system
is out of date and these young ones know it.

@Stowickthevast fair point. But would your Italian cousins/exchange students be able to find their own way around in their small home town, or like a lot of small town British kids, would they expect to be driven everywhere there too?

This is a very big part of the problem. The education system hasn’t kept pace with the rest of the world and it’s jarring for young people. They live one type of life outside of school and then another outdated one in school.

I was the last year to do O levels, so no coursework there. But we also didn’t sit anywhere like the number of exams as nowadays. IIRC it was one paper per subject (maybe 2 in maths?), with a language oral and science practicals as well. So for 9 O levels you’d take about 15 exams? Something like that. But the exams themselves may have been longer.

Attitudes towards school and teachers start at home.

When you hear teenagers saying to female teachers "you shouldn't be here you should be in a kitchen looking after a man" what exactly do you do with that?

Some parents are just as distracted with their phones as the teens are, they think they can send their teenager who looks at and is influenced by whatever they like online and won't do any homework and teachers alone some how can miraculously teach them, with another 25+ students in a class, a full GCSE curriculum and ensure that they get a top job being a football agent or whatever as soon as they leave.

When you have teachers saying parental behaviour as one of the MAIN reasons that makes their jobs harder and contributes to them leaving the profession, well it's a spiral downwards.

But no it's because they have to wear a tie.

lessons per week
Main language : 4
1st foreign language: 3
2nd foreign language: 3
Maths: 5
Science: 3
History&Geography: 3
sport: 3
Ethics & Religion: 2
Design/Technology: 2
Art: 2
music : 2
Business, careers and household: 1
IT: 2 every other week

Thats a huge amount of information to take in though. Studying 13 different subjects, most to exam level, with alternate weeks of teaching for some - how on earth are kids supposed to keep up with it all. Then add in the pressure to get high grades in everything, no wonder they’re unhappy.

I did mostly like secondary school - teachers had enough time to go off piste occasionally and some were truly passionate about their subjects and inspired pupils to be passionate too. I only had 8 subjects, which was considered a full timetable, so there was room to breathe.

The school day consisted of 5 teaching periods so you had time to settle in to class, focus on one subject and then move on to something else, where you then had time to settle etc. Some classes had double periods so you could really get into a piece of work instead of constantly starting and stopping. Trying to do 7/8 different classes across the day, changing focus for each one, each one using a different type of learning is very hard going.

It doesn’t replicate any working environment I’ve been in - move desk every 45 minutes, report to a different supervisor and do a completely different task then move on again. It’s no wonder kids struggle with focus when they’re constantly on the move. I’d have been bloody miserable.

Middle school would mean the world to my kids. Both are this age currently and have gone from enjoying school at primary to tolerating and counting down the time at secondary. It’s not a terrible school but the change from a supportive environment to a typical secondary is pretty rough for a lot of kids.

Same. We didn’t get any of the state schools we listed and DD is SEN so I couldn’t risk it. And now, hearing reports back from those who did get the schools - I’m rather glad we didn’t!

Her school is utterly amazing in comparison to what is described on this thread. The kids are happy and engaged, with myriad extra curricular opportunities. Pastoral care is great, food is great, lessons are challenging but fun. She’s in seventh heaven.

First, teachers are not entertainers. I/we are not paid clowns to dance for the edutainment of pupils.
Secondly, In many subjects, including practical ones, there will always be an element of "boring" curriculum.

Of course there are boring bits of everything, but the boring bits can be balanced with bits that are more interesting.

While I don’t think teachers need to entertain kids, having a love for your subject area, teaching it with interest and passion goes a long way. Actually liking kids is a good start.

Too many teachers are burned out, tired and bored so it’s no wonder kids feel the same.

Is this in the UK?

No they haven't unfortunately. They may say they have but many have no see no hear policies which are not enforced. I've heard so many stories of kids hiding in toilets to check smartphones. My local secondary has a great smartphone policy on paper but I know it's not enforced.

Yes, the Head of our nearest secondary was very keen to tell us at the open evening of their ‘no smartphones’ policy. In reality, my friends’ children who go to the school tell me it isn’t enforced at all, and kids will be playing on their smartphones while pretending to read, for example. And despite the ‘no smartphones’ policy, there were an awful lot of videos flying around on social media of one friend’s daughter having her head stamped on in the toilets by a group of bullies.

Behaviour, prison like buildings, uninspiring curriculum, very strict rules on socks and hair colour but teachers have minimal power to actually deal with bad behaviour in the classroom, lack of funding, lack of support, lack of an individualised approach. So many things.

I taught English in a secondary school. Within the first week of teaching, I'd decided that DD wouldn't go to secondary school (and she doesn't; she's 11 now and home educated). It's not the right environment for her - she has more freedom, a better education and better socialising through home ed.