To Think That Comprehensive Schools of the 70s and 80s were "Shit" and did nothing for many pupils and where in many cases just as bad as the "Modern" Schools they replaced

[soul2000]

I suffered terribly at my "Middle Class" Comprehensive in the early 1980s and when I was taken out by my parents at the end of 3rd year I could not even hold a pen correctly. I had forgotten even this basic thing, the Secondary school taught my absolutely nothing , and just left me dreading school everyday ( Not through Physical Bullying) I was able to defend myself that way , but through Mental Torture from Staff as well as pupils.

I honestly believe I would have learnt more in a old fashioned "Modern School" The dreaded words, I believe that they would have at least taught me basic Maths/English and I would have been able to show some ability on the sports field.

I know some people will come on and say " I got in to Oxford from My Comprehensive , as did my 10 friends". There must be many people like me though that received an education that was totally inadequate.

They must be some people who believe like me that believe these experiences put them off Education , and made it very difficult to even contemplate returning to any education ( Why Would you go back to something that caused you so much pain and fear)

A long post I know, but was feeling Crap in bed last night and started "Crying" I know its 30 years ago . ( I have Blocked it out for many years) Since I started studying again Open University) I can get fear and trepidation in bed , thinking about education ( although I am doing ok with the O.U)

Another one who went to a crap comprehensive up to O level and then a better one for A level (which is when I realised how crap the first one was). The second comp was a leafy one and in the 6th form you tend to have the more motivated children so that does account for some of the difference.

I did OK because I was academically inclined but a lot of children were all but written off. Caning was the norm, blackboard rubbers were thrown and bullying was a real issue. Some of the teachers were rubbish and made glaring errors. There was no sense of purpose from a lot of the children nor much inspiring teaching to give them one.

One's education outcome is about parents as well as school though.

There are children in DS's primary whose parents don't even speak much English but are there talking as best they can to teachers, taking the Homework Support Classes (helping them to supervise homework better) and loads more. They're involved and caring. They will pull and push their children absolutely as far as they can.

I agree that comps did not have the monopoly on crap. In those days in particular, there were a lot of middling mediocre and plain bad small independent schools and a ton of others with huge problems, dodgy teachers and bad management.

I went to both an ex-Secondary Modern, and an ex-Grammar (transferred in third year), and they were both about the same, in my experience, the facilities were slightly more modern in the modern, bur the teachers were more involved in the grammar, though they both went comprehensive at about the same time.

I was bullied, and was never particularly academic, however, I did still manage to pick up 13 O'Levels (somehow), and have beautiful handwriting. I'm also now an award-winning writer, a fact I think some of my ex-teachers would laugh their socks off at!

So, it's as much about the individual in the school as it is about the individual school.

My comprehensive was "shit" in some ways. It was full of teachers who went straight from school to uni to teacher training, came from fairly similar backgrounds and really had a very narrow idea of the world and people in it. They were also young and trendy which seemed to be part of why there was a lot of sexual abuse of students by staff. The intake for my school was very working class (although by the time I left after the 80s recession it was less working class and more "under class") with only two children in my year of over 100 having parents who were graduates. The school got results that tracked the national average. They got a good batch of us into decent universities and more into polys. But standards were fairly weak, we weren't stretched and lookng back we could have done a lot more. Most of our science teachers did not have degrees in the subjects they taught. Modern languages were farcical and almost no one got O'level or grade 1 CSE, even though we were basically given the answers to the oral exam. Sport, though plentiful, was not taught or played to a high standard. I was a bit shocked when I got to uni to find just how small fish my top of the class results were and how much more most of my friends there seemed to have done through school (though I was surprised to find how few seemed to have gone to state, co-ed, non-selective schools too). I also realized (much later) that I didn't have a clue how to learn at university.

But my school did well at some things. It was progressive and had programs encouraging civic engagement and outdoor pursuits. We had pretty good self-discipline, we didn't mess around if the teacher wasn't in the classroom and there wasn't significant bullying. We were encouraged to take the initiative and my year alone started up (without adult assistance) a snack shop and a thriving weekend party circuit as fund raisers for student organized class trips to the theatre, science lectures in London and a theme park. Comparing with my friends from similar demographic neighbouring schools, a lot more students from my school went on to do less traditional things and take iniative. We had mountain climbers and north pole explorers, we had students who started bands and a record label and lots of people who started their own businesses. Fewer seem to have stayed local, indicating to me that they weren't scared to go and try something new (though others might see it as us running away!).

When I look at schools for my children I see a much greater emphasis on academics, which I like. But I can't find schools that seem to encourage initiative and self-development in the same way and it worries me.

Hated my schools in the 70s and 80s too.

I didnt do very well at school neither did my brother or sister. Once we'd left though and went went on to college etc we did much better and got qualifications that way. I also went to evening classes.

We had a mixture of children from a variety of backgrounds. The children from the more middle class families got treated far better than say children from families such as mine, alcoholic dad etc. We were dumped in lessons together and basically left to our own devices.

It was very obvious to many of us. I was very anxious when my children started school. It is far better now thankfully!

I went to a grammar school for the first and second year and then we moved location and I went to a (good) comprehensive (1978-1983 altogether). On a sample of 1, I can tell you that I know I would have done better educationally if I'd stayed at the grammar purely because I was challenged more and was surrounded by brainboxes that I wanted to try and keep up with. The comp was good (my father made sure we got into the best one in the area) and the head was scarily strict but as others have said, the quality of teaching was mixed (some excellent teachers) and standards of behaviour and "pastoral care" were a bit like Grange Hill (in fact, very like Grange Hill)

I went to a comprehensive in the 1980's and I did quite well out of it.

However, looking back it really provided an inadequate education for at least 3/4 of the pupils there. A handful of the teachers were clearly in the wrong profession and couldn't actually teach.

Mine was dire too.

At 13 I was offered a full academic scholarship to a leading girls school, which my parents turned down - we were poor working class and they thought I would be bullied there , so I went to the local high school, where presumably I should have done very well.

Nobody gave a shit and when I became distracted by boys and friends and music and parties, the school were happy to let me slide down and down and I ended up with poor O levels. I realised my error straight away and put in a hard year resitting them at a local college, ended up with A's and B's.

My father died in the middle of my time at high school. There was no support, nothing. My mum hade enough on her plate but I don't think she even knew I wasn't performing at the right level. I didn't get reports, there was no communication at all.

After under-performing for many years, the school was forced into becoming an Academy quite early and is doing much better now, especially given the catchment it serves.

I went to a comp from 1976 - 83. It had been a Secondary Modern up til 8 years previously (my sister was in their first comprehensive cohort). It was certainly different from a comp now, but crap? No. There was some bullying, some poor teaching etc., but overwhelmingly it was positive. Many of us got good O levels and A levels and went on to good universities. Pupils played for county sports teams and county and National music groups. There was a good pastoral system. It was in an ex mining town in the midlands, so not really middle class.
OP, your school sounds shit (although I'm not sure about your memory/approach just based on the holding a pen comment - this is the second time today someone has accused state education of actually making people forget things) but you can't write off the education for the whole population over 20 years! How are there any teachers/businessman/bank managers/doctors now if everyone educated in the 70s and 80s went through school learning nothing?

Oh, also - Secondary Modern schools weren't 'bad', they did a specific job often rather well. I don't agree with grammar/secondary modern organisation, but given the system existed, Secondary Moderns were often very good schools.

Yanbu. I too went to a piss poor comp 78 to 82 ( all girls school). Only 20% of the top set even took O levels. I vividly remember a special assembly because one of the girls got into university.
I was bright, my parents refused to enter me for the grammar school as it was too much of a hassle. I never re eived any encouragement at school and quickly learned to dumb down or risk being beaten for being a sucky swot.
Its the main reason I nearly bankrupt myself to send both mine private.
The teachers didn't care, the majority of the pupils had no greater ambition than working in Asda for the staff discount or getting married and having babies.
No one was pushed to achieve. Home economics was a compulsory lesson. They forced me to drop an exam in German to take that subject. But hey at least I can make a blancmange

My school was rubbish I had learning difficulties instead of helping me i was stuck in a classroom with a lot of dangerous children i was bloody terrified when i realised i had maths lesson next , I hated school and couldn't wait to leave in 4th year, my dds go and went to the same school thank god it isn't like that anymore, and their SEN department is amazing and supportive

There have always been good schools and bad ones, and sadly I think there always will be. I hated my comp. but I still left with half decent grades and went to uni. My DCs, on the other hand, I feel have been let down by a school that has focused far more on a brand new building, to sell it to parents, than the standards of teaching . Your experience was crap, and I'm sorry that you feel the way you do , but it doesn't mean that all schools were the same then any more than they are now.

From what I've read, apparently there were a small number of schools in the 1970s which were absolutely appalling, some of them with the best intentions on the part of the staff, to a degree where it's difficult for us to comprehend it now. Quite literally to the point where secondary pupils would not be taught basic skills like holding a pen.

Mostly, there was the normal mix of good and bad schools, with good and bad teachers, but there were a small number of schools which were being run in a really unsuitable way. I think if you were at this type of school, there's no reason at all for you not to feel very scarred by your experiences.

The reason I probably could not hold a pen correctly , was because I have suffered badly with Dyspraxia and other ( undiagnosed disabilities.
I did struggle at Junior School no doubt, but because it was a much smaller environment , maybe I got a bit more support.

In September 1983 when entered High School , support consisted of a "Woman following me round tying my shoe laces" and speaking to me like I was a 6 year old. The next two years , at the school were a daze , where I just turned up , said as little to anyone as possible and just waited everyday until 3.30 PM for misery to end for the day. There was not one teacher who helped or tried to see why I was unable to contribute in class I never actually wrote anything for three years " Once I Got A detention" .
The one occasion I showed , was I think in the second year 1984 ,and an assembly , the Deputy Head Teacher held an assembly and asked "Does Anybody know what happened 40 years ago today and what D Day stands for" I put my hand up in front of 300 1st and 2nd years, and stated it was Landing day ( Cue the Teacher announcing actually D Day stands for Democracy) The whole assembly start "laughing at me". Another time n Pottery , great for someone who can't hold a pen asked to try a make some well of cause the putty collapses in my hand ( cue the Pottery teacher to make a comment " Who Let me out" next a barrage of "SPAZ"
Joey from the rest of the class.

It was not until the end of the 3rd year ( When My Wealthy parents actually acted) when my mum was informed the school would not let me take the newly created Gcse exams. I was only to undertake the Certificate Course, basically going to Old people's homes making cup's of tea and learning how to put food in the oven E.T.C. Finally my mum acted and moved me out.

The only Private School that would take me, was considered as a "Bit of A joke" ,to me in comparison with what I had endured it was every bit as selective as Colyton/ Chelmsford Grammar's . I ended up with 4E Grades and 1 D at Gcse and then in to Btec's and City and Guilds and have been moderately successful in business.

The point is at the time , you did not think you were suffering trauma, you just used coping strategies and got though it the best way.

The trauma is there now you can look back and actually think how you were using coping strategies to get though and masking the reality of your misery.

Another Time in pottery , the teacher asks me to make some pottery , (great for someone who can't hold a pen) (Guess what , putty collapses in my hand).

I went to the local comprehensive in a working class town. 180 in our year, several straight A students and over 60 of us went on to uni -which in those days was not so common- several engineers, doctors, lawyers, accountants and a vet.
Only thing I remember being bad was the strikes meant few extracurricular activities.

Oh Yeah the Strike of "1984" . They just let a load of 11,12,13 Year old's run riot around "Cranford" ....

I went to a comprehensive school in the 1970s. I ended up with 9 O levels and 2 A levels. It was a pretty good school with pupils from a mix of backgrounds and cultures. Being in the 6th form was brilliant, and by the upper sixth (sounds so much better than year 13 doesn't it?) everyone was having 18th birthday parties.

I had a whale of a time

I went to a rubbish comprehensive 1989-1996. It wasn't chair-throwingly bad, but there was a very pervasive atmosphere of low expectation and mediocrity, and unpleasantness.

I was talking to my brother about how it would have been if we'd done as much on equality & diversity and so on as children do now, and he gave the imaginary exam question which fitted the ethos: 'Here is a picture of someone who is Different. Deride him/her'. Which pretty much sums it up.

We did alright, but it was a rubbish place. What I find positive and reassuring is that it isn't allowed to get away with that any more - it's been in Special Measures, and looking at what was identified there, it was the same list I would have written in 1992 - low expectations, no differentiation, poor teaching... but the difference is that now, schools just can't get away with that.

I was all ready to panic when dd1 was ready to start secondary: my views on comprehensive schooling, although I always thought it was A Good Thing in theory, have been sharpened and tweaked considerably in the last 6 years.

I am always very careful to remember that I am sending my children to school - not to 1989.

NormHonal hits the nail on the head in saying when she says different children had widly different experiences if the same school.

I mostly liked school desoite a bit of bullying in Y7/8 and being the butt of all the biology teachers jokes.

I'm clever and we were a bright cohort, we all wanted to go to uni and the school gave us the best teachers.

Our experinces were a milion miles away from the low expectations and very variable teaching my DSIS got.

The Special needs teacher was nice, but there was non of the knowledge there is today. One girl was thrown in special needs because she had speach difficulties and sounded thick. She wasn't and I think she had very similar experiences to the OP.

I went to one excellent comp in the early 80s, then moved to another area and went to two crappy comps - had to leave the first because of bullying and was bullied all through the next one and left at 16 with PTSD.

DB was almost certainly an undiagnosed dyslexic (my DC are dyslexic and its quite clear that DB has a similar range of difficulties) and the school offered him no help or support at all. He left with few qualifications but the big difference was that he could still find a practical job which suited him without decent grades. He worked his way up and studied whilst he worked.

SEN support was weak but they got away with it because there were jobs people could go to at 16.

Pastoral care was non-existant.

It's worth reading David Kynaston's social history books on postwar Britain, especially "Family Britain" for a view of what secondary moderns were like. They were often pretty grim places.

My comp was good - it was an amalgam of the old grammar and secondary modern, with teachers from both. (I was able to do O-level Latin.) There was some bad behaviour and bullying but generally kids were well behaved, and there were plenty of good teachers as well as a few execrable ones. Results were good - lots going to Oxbridge and other unis. We had a debating society, thriving rugby team, annual eisteddfod in which we were encouraged to participate etc. I suspect it didn't do so well by the less academic children.

Of course I realise that not everyone's experience was the same as mine.

My comprehensive got me a scholarship to Oxford. It had many failings, but I and many others did rather well.