To feel children today have a much more positive experience of school

[callherwillow]

I started school in 1986 and sarcasm and shouting was rife. Punishment involved humiliation - I remember boys in particular being stood in the corner and instructed to 'turn around and face the wall, we do not want to see your ugly face.'

However, more importantly really, I don't think I learned anything worth speaking of throughout primary and most of secondary school. It was all just work from textbooks, barely any English, an endless project on the Aztecs in Y5 and trips to the same local museum every year!

Do others have similar memories or was my school just really bad? :)

Schools are much better at dealing with bullying.

The pressure on kids and the amount of testing is ridiculous. DD has mental health problems as a consequence.

The curriculum is dull and narrow. Many of the things we got to do at school seem like a holiday camp in comparison.

My experience of school (1984-1998) was much more negative than positive. In primary school I'm sure a lot of "lessons" were just time wasting exercises to keep us out of the teachers way. I can state for sure that had I grown up with the current testing regime I would probably have found it quite stressful, but on the other had I wouldn't have spent years 3-6 just coasting away not being remotely challenged. My teacher had decided that the issues I had being left handed were due to me being "a bit thick" and never really went to the effort to teach me anything, even holding me back in things. I wonder how much more I could have achieved at primary school, but for her.
But that's the trade off, isn't it? Bad teachers haven't got anywhere to hide any more, its much easier to keep up with how a child is doing and the National Curriculum may have it's faults, but it means kids wont have what happened to my brother - he was studying A level chemistry with a teacher who didn't have much of a clue and they covered less than half the syllabus in the 2 years. How he passed I have no idea, but quite a few didn't.
My son is in year R and is currently having a great time, learning well and having fun. A potential bullying issue has been dealt with very well by the school. I'm actually a little jealous of him!

Mental health is a massive issue in young people at the moment, massive.

My primary school (state) was wonderful, a lovely atmosphere. Private prep was an endurance test, with a real ethos of cruelty. Private high school was great quality with a wonderful atmosphere. I can't really analyse my own children's state school experience because I only know the private sector beyond Y3. They have a great time and it's very nurturing. They learn far more grammar than I did at that age, and yet haven't learned to write well in the same way. I'm not sure there's much point to all the grammar. I suspect it just provides something quantifiable to test.

I agree with OP. Some of the things that went on in my perfectly normal primary in the mid-late 70s, including in the infants section - would get child services called now. Shaking of children, humiliation as punishment, teachers showing obvious dislike of kids with additional needs. One poor kid was just constantly sent to work in the manly portacabin corridor, where he'd cry and have meltdowns, while the teacher told the rest of the class what a horrible boy he was.

Bullying, especially at junior level, was rife and unchecked. Several teachers were completely incapable of keeping any order in the class, and fights and bullying would happen in front of them. Others played favourites. School work was going through textbooks as others have said, plus a strange system of "SRA cards" for grammar/english. History was random, and kept resetting to the bloody Egyptians every time we got a new teacher. I had ONE really good teacher in the whole time, wonderful Mr Bradley, an ex-naval man who actually provided enough discipline to stop the endemic bullying for a year.

Of course, it could have been worse. My partner, attending six years earlier in the same LEA was taught an experimental phonetic alphabet called ita which continues to bugger his spelling 45 years on.

manly portacabin corridor

I had to laugh at this .

My brothers did ITA-what a good idea that was!

I do rather suspect that people will look back on the phonics screening check in years to come with a bit of a WTF. 'What, you mean they asked the children to sound out fake words with pictures of aliens next to them??!'

I think thankfully provision is far better for SEND children now. When I was at secondary I was very ill a lot of the time with a lifelong condition and off school for large chunks - talking whole half terms at a time. I'm absolutely amazed now that there was no extra support for me whatsoever - all there was, in fact, was a prevailing attitude that I was lazy and thick - so different to primary where I was always praised and told I was v academically able (I was.)

I scraped my GCSES (this was 1988) but at shockingly lower grades than I should have got. My parents now recount how they begged for support but got nothing but a blank wall and 'mhd should work harder' (when mhd was struggling to breathe with bronchitis agakn)

And don't get me going on PE teachers who didn't believe in asthma/lung problems and made me run the 800m at sports day in front of the whole school, laughing at me dragging through the final lap last, then telling me I was an unfit lump....

Schools now are more pressurised to exams. But dd and ds have generally had a better time than I did with some bullying exceptions.

I started school in 1977 and left in 1989, nothing but happy memories to be honest. Had a great bunch of friends and my teachers were nice (enough). First two years of high school were a bit chaotic as classes were mixed ability and there was definitely an element who had no interest in participating. However this is all written from my pov which is as someone who was reasonably popular and very able. I doubt my experience would've been as good had I had any additional support needs. I distinctly remember having to tutor kids in my class who struggled and I imagine the experience of having your peers teaching you wasn't much fun.

I'm cynical about the prevalence of mental health problems in schools that have supposedly stemmed from rigorous testing.

I've just rembered that for the whole of primary school we were in classes that spanned two years. So years 1 and 2 together, 3 and 4 together, 5 and 6 together.

I wonder what the thinking was behind this? It wasn't because of a small school size, there were 3 mixed classes per section, they could easily have separated us out.

Does it still happen?

Kids still have composite classes, my DD's school usually has one full year group class and one composite class. On the bright side composite classes are meant to be smaller.
I remember learning ITA- fab way to confuse infants. Then SRA cards (a lot of trust involved with this as you filled in the work you'd done), finished off with Ginn reading books in p6/7!

YANBU at all. I also started school in 1986 as well and remember the shouting and humiliation. Don't get me wrong I had some nice teachers, but some fucking terrible ones as well. SEN children were treated like shit, kids who struggled were humiliated frequently.

My junior school head master was a miserable bastard who had no sense of humour or fun. Some people would call him old fashioned, I'd call him a
cunt. We didn't have school trips at the end of term, we had 'educational visits' where we would be dragged around a stately home or museum whilst all the other schools were at the cinema or Zoo. I don't ever remember a non uniform day or fancy dress day in my whole time there.

I could also write a book on the shit tip of a secondary school I attended. It's been closed down now, thank God, awful incompetent teachers. Useless head, no discipline etc.

So yes, I agree OP.

It's not really possible for us as parents to judge our memories of school with our observations of our children. The two aren't the same. It would be better perhaps to ask our parents their memories of what they thought school was like for us. It would still be very muddied though.

I was bullied at school but my mother was totally oblivious. I could say that my children went to school that managed bullying much better, but I'm sad to say that my children only told us fairly recently that they were bullied at a school which we had previously thought excellent.

Not sure you can compare academics from personal experience either unless you have taught for a very long time. dh is convinced that ds is learning more advanced science than he did at the same age. I think I'm more honest in saying I really can't remember what I was taught or when with any great accuracy.

Why, willow?

I can only speak for me and my DD. DD is 9, in Y4, and I left primary school in 1980.

I would say that DD is having a much happier, more engaging and kinder time at school that I had. She often comes home and tells me about stuff like 'X cried because Y and then we all talked about how we could help and we came up with ideas for X to try'. There is an emphasis on emotional security and supporting others at her school which I find just wonderful. Quite honestly, any 9 year old who cried at my school would have had the piss ripped out of them mercilessly by their classmates. It was accepted that children hit each other sometimes, that some people were just stupid, that it was OK to engage in what would now be considered bullying. This was a nice middle class primary in leafy greater London (now considered Outstanding by Ofsted though am sure lots has changed - DD's primary is rated Good and is maybe a couple of miles away from my former school).

I also think the space for differentiation is really amazing. When I was DD's age, we all did exactly the same thing at the same time and some people were bored stiff and others were totally disengaged because they had no idea what was going on. DD happens to be really good at one particular thing and her teacher has really gone the extra mile to find stuff that is interesting for her to do, letting her work on projects that she has dreamed up herself and generally making absolutely sure that DD is not bored. Equally, I know from talking to friends that children who are finding things difficult are supported with lots of one to one and small group work to help them catch up. In my day, you just got sent to the remedial class but I do not think that it was particularly effective, judging by the outcomes. And DD is very aware of differences and the need to be kind to those who find things harder. In my day many children called the less able children thick and those of us who were more able were ridiculed as brainboxes and eggheads etc. You had to fit in and be the same as everyone else to be liked (it was OK to be good at sport).

With respect to the curriculum, I don't know what ours was. I arrived at junior school able to read, write and do basic arithmetic. I left in much the same condition four years later. I had studied the Tudors three times and the Romans once without learning anything about any of it. I can't remember any science, any music apart from singing, any art apart from 'paint/draw a picture of X', any geography, any MFL or anything else much at all apart from endless sodding netball/rounders and a little swimming. DD has had a go at hockey, netball, rounders, dance of various kinds, athletics of various kinds, football, tag rugby, swimming, gymnastics. She has had recorder and guitar lessons entirely free so far and will learn the ukulele next year. She has studied several different artists in about as much depth as a child of this age might be capable of (cannot remember all of them but Paul Klee, Monet and Jackson Pollock have featured). She has attended clubs at school that range from yoga to sewing to choir to French to cross country running to science to art to basic engineering (lego with electronic stuff) to coding to chess to orchestra to keyboard (as in piano) to ukulele. There are loads of them. Most are free or cost a quid or two per session. Not only are they interesting but lots are before or after school so are essentially providing v low cost childcare to allow parents to work. I think we had a chess club but nothing else apart from a school orchestra.

It is certainly true that the new curriculum is more challenging than the previous incarnation. Not sure what I think about this. In the days of O levels, only 20% of the cohort passed them. I am not sure that that is a good way to run things. We do need to provide everyone with qualifications that show what they have achieved. What is the point of tons of people coming out with fails that don't show that they have at least achieved basic competence, which most do? DD will be fine with higher expectations but I can see that many of her classmates won't (and it won't be for lack of application).

In case you think I am bragging about DD's school which, despite a few niggles, I find mostly incredibly good, this is the least popular school in the area. And it's the least popular school because it doesn't give a stuff about results expect insofar as people are achieving their potential. I know for a fact that other schools locally are not focused on quite the same things. So it's interesting. I chose a school which is considered bad by most local parents. But actually it's worked out as the very best I can imagine it could. Although more than a few days' notice of dressing up days etc would be really good, thanks.

It is definitely true that even with the more challenging curriculum and higher expectations, schools can still achieve an environment that's a happy place to be for children.

Orange

Largely because it's something that has become rather 'trendy' and dare I say 'faddy' at the moment. There have been a number of newspaper headlines in recent times which have made much of the supposed mental health crisis in young people, but these tend to make use of the same sources repeatedly which are suspect in themselves.

There is no evidence, as far as I can see at any rate, that mental health conditions amongst the young have risen or fallen significantly in the last ten years.

However, where something is whipped up into a frenzy, there is money to be made and sadly there are a number of organisations without requisite qualifications who are moving into this area, confidently informing head teachers and school leaders that their course - should you choose to pay several hundreds of pounds of taxpayers money for it - will help teachers identify mental health conditions and 'cure' them. Many school leaders have fallen for this fad and as with all things it becomes circular - no school wants to be the one without teachers trained in identifying mental health problems, so some people get very rich, some teachers have their time wasted, some tax payers money is thrown down the drain and no child is actually helped.

It looks good on the school website, though.

YDNBU. When I was at school. There was no SN. If you couldn't do something you were stupid, and the teachers took delight in telling you, and those class places..WTF were they all about. Just there to knock a struggling child's confidence even further.
I remember I came last one year and I sobbed for about 3 hours. I left school with 8 GCSEs, though, so I can't have been as "thick" as they thought.

Just to clarify, Willow, in case you thought that I was one of those 'leaders who has fallen for a fad'; I didn't attend a course where I was promised a 'cure' for children suffering with mental health (and in fact have heard of no one pedalling such in my locality, although I'm sorry if you have in yours).

The meeting I went to where we identified that the mental health of children is suffering because of current pressure in education was one made up entirely of heads/deputies/middle leaders/pastoral staff etc who all wanted to get together a say "what is happening to our young people and how can we help?"

I don't doubt that there will always be individuals trying to make money off of schools. And I don't doubt that each generation has its own educational issues. But what I do know is that many, many children suffer from the pressure that is put on them by education today.

I didn't think for a moment you were one of those leaders, Orange, however I would be interested to know how you know that many, many children suffer from the pressure that is put on them by education today.

I went to secondary school in 1988, and it was as you describe OP. My English 'teacher' in years 8-9 used to have us draw endless posters and gave chocolate bars to the boys. My geography teacher used to scream in the face of the boy next to me with his halitosis breath. Certain teachers would write you off and I'm only just finding now that I'm actually very strong in science subjects and maths. My life would have been quite different had I been confident - I wanted to be a physiotherapist but felt I'd never get more than a C in science and no one ever tried to convince me otherwise. There was no encouragement for someone like me who would now meet a number of pupil premium indicators.

My mum's education in the 60s and 70s was worse. She was bright but largely due to her parents indifference and insistence on herding the family around, she and all her siblings ended up in secondary modern and she detested school. She came out with virtually nothing and yet the next year gained o levels in biology and English at tech - just like that, apparently. No natural ability here folks, nothing to see at all

I think accountability improved education for about a decade from maybe the late 90s onwards, but that now it's gone waaaaay to far. Enrichment and enhancement were encouraged and students benefitted from a broader and more rigorous curriculum, but now it's all about the tests and exams and nothing else, especially not interpersonal relationships (recently ex-teacher here).

now it's all about the tests and exams and nothing else, especially not interpersonal relationships

There are still schools that prioritise this. As I said before, DD's school is really good at it and seems to produce children who are good at looking after other people and taking care of their own and other's mental and emotional health. I think it's not an accident that they have not been as highly rated as other schools in the local area by Ofsted, though. It's a trade off, really, now. Be an outstanding school or be a school that makes all your children happy, not just the clever compliant ones.

What is ITA? Some sort of reading scheme?

Surely it would be massively unprofessional for school leadership to claim that teachers can either identify a mental health problem or cure one?

Unless you are using identify to mean have a concern and raise it with the relevant professionals and/or the parents.

I don't believe numerous teachers are that stupid.

ITA - initial teaching alphabet. A totally different phonetic alphabet. I did it. It was bonkers! It had the 70's idea of making it easier for children to write creatively as spelling with iTA was much easier. It didn't help that you then had to learn an entirely new alphabet (the correct one) at 6 or 7

Here: enjoy the toy poodle & sea horse in ITA

forumeuropa.net/archive/index.php?thread-3294.html