To think education wasn’t actually any better in the past?

[educationnow]

I keep saying this, but no one seems to believe me so it might well just be my perceptions!

I started school in 1985, so I did start in the glory days (apparently) when there was no national curriculum.

Teaching was TERRIBLE! We learned nothing about SPAG, Maths was ‘work through a textbook’, teachers were sarcastic and cutting, bullying was rife. I’m sure there were many decent ones, but safeguarding wasn’t a thing and some of the things the teachers said and did in primary school were awful.

I started secondary in 1992, and bullying was still a huge issue, as was behaviour. We had SATs in Year 9 and a lot of our GCSEs had a heavy coursework weighting, so there was a lot of cheating.

I then started teaching myself in 2003. Behaviour was dire and I joined the TES forums where teachers kept commenting how much better behaviour had been ten/twenty years ago. My subject had coursework - cheating went on.

Then controlled assessments came in in 2010/11 (I think!) endless stress getting them in and up to standard and marking the things.

Now … very content heavy curriculum. Behaviour still an issue. Endless systems relating to technology - show my homework, Frog, ClassCharts. I wish we just used one.

I don’t think there’s ever been a golden age. I think every age has had problems, some unique to that time but some like poor behaviour has just always been an issue.

It’s been quite eye-opening for me to see that my kids aren’t scared of their teachers. We were terrified of ours as they hit all classes down to reception with the metre stick up to the day it became illegal in 1987. Pre national curriculum we also wasted several hours a day learning bible stories off by heart. If there had been a Catholic secondary school in our town I’m sure I never would have caught up. We didn’t know even the basics of science.

Starting younger doesn't necessarily mean its better ir they learn more though. I mean I think in some instances its really just not a good use of anyones time..having to spend multiple lessons teaching kids things they do not have the capacity or brain development or the language understand to get it. Maybe wait a bit and get done in 1 lesson what would usually take 4 or 5 lessons.

Reading is probably a good example. I learnt quite quickly but bless dd2 didn't grasp phonics at all. She failed the screening the first time and at 11 she still can't spell much. Despite all the effort at home and at school. She was probably year 3 befire much started to become a little easier/more fluent. I do wonder if all the effort teaching her phonics and all the extra help was just a waste of time and resources. Shes more a sight reader. Once she passed her phonics test after some intense practice ajd desperation on the schools part they were quite happy after that to let her learn to read in the way that suited her better.

Other countries would not attempt to teach 4 years olds to read. In fact 4 year olds in school would be seen as strange.

We weren't scared of ours. Although corporal punishment was legal I never heard of it being used. I suspect that the schools I attended had simply stopped using it years before.

Discipline at my primary school was very good, and at my secondary school it was not bad. There were some troublemakers but I don't remember them disrupting the class. Weren't there more special schools back then?

I think approaches to education, and the strategies employed reflect the social, economic and political context of the time.

I have a few of my grandfather's school exercise books from 1907. His drawings of local plants (probably taken from plants picked on nature walks), and of maps, are beautifully neat, and clearly labelled. The maps he drew are also traced and coloured skilfully. They show all the parts of the 'Empire'. He was six years old, and I would be astonished to see a six year old today with those skills (or exposed to such a level of indoctrination).

Yet, he had to learn the three 'Rs' quickly because he left school at 13 to work on the farm. neatness was also important in a world where handwriting was still the dominant mode of everyday communication and calculation.

My mother went to a private school and wanted to study theology. However, she had to leave to work before her School Certificate. It was war time and they needed her at home (again on the farm). She was 15. My father left at just 14, during the Depression to work in the family business. They never had the opportunity to return to education.

I started school bang in the middle of the swinging sixties, but the discipline and teaching was from another century. We had to stand behind our chairs until the teacher told us to sit down. We had to work in silence. Breaches of rules were punished by being slapped by the teacher or sent to stand in the corner with your face to the wall. A lot of work was copying. Yet, there was a focus on reading (which I loved) and learning to spell (which stood me in good stead later, but had no sympathy for any child with dyslexia or other SpLD). There was no National Curriculum and most of the pupils at the village school failed the 11 + because they were not taught all the subjects the exam covered.

Anyone who (miraculously) passed the 11 + went to a grammar school and was taught with a view to going on to university or entering the civil service (so we were told). Those who went to the secondary modern could study for a trade.

However, the secondary modern school that I attended was pretty dire, and as others have stated, bullying was rife and not dealt with. There were divisions according to gender (girls did needlework; boys did woodwork and metal work, and girls could live in a flat and learn life skills towards the end of their academic career). There was also streaming (CSEs or 'O' levels). If anyone has watched the film 'Kes', that was a pretty accurate reflection of my secondary school.

Yet, to some extent, you could still leave school and pick up a job and take further qualifications at 'tech' college and so on.

By the time my children went to school (early 2000s), children were being educated for a world very different from the world of previous generations. The internet brought new ways of learning, working patterns had changed and our status as global citizens was being embraced. Yet, I should imagine some of the material and approaches used then would now be outdated.

So, when I hear my peers talk about the 'good old days' when teachers were respected, discipline was accepted and children knew how to read and write. I think of it as nostalgic nonsense. There were some things that could be admired , but the system was there to process children to fit a certain model of society. Education still does this, but I believe the model is one which embraces diversity and respects the creativity of children to a greater extent than it has ever done in the past.