AIBU to feel angrey after Holland Park School open morning?

[GentleMintCat]

I’m viewing a few secondary schools at the moment. We’ve seen some private ones (sadly not an option unless DD gets a huge bursary). Yesterday I went to see Holland Park School — which has always felt like our safest option since we live very close — but came out devastated and rather angry.

Yes, the grounds are gorgeous, with a shiny, modern building, a new sports pitch, and spacious classrooms with lovely views over Holland Park. But the atmosphere? Absolutely grim. The classrooms were deadly quiet — no energy, no spark, no laughter, no questions, no enthusiasm.

Alright, I guess that’s fine in maths or English, but even in drama, music, and art… in art, the children were like in a traditional exam setting, sitting at their desks, copying a dull sketch from the screen in complete silence, while the teacher walked around peering over their shoulders. I couldn’t sense a shred of creativity, joy, or curiosity in that room. It felt almost like a military camp. Even the bell sounded like a fire alarm — the sort you see in American prisons in films.

When I asked students what they loved about the school, they couldn’t answer. I rephrased and asked what was one thing they were excited about coming to school, but they seemed unsure. What they were actually excited to talk about was “refocus rooms,” detention room, and punishments. They really wanted us to see the detention room which was on the ground floor, a dark space with heavy black curtains where you’re sent for forgetting your planner, doodling in a workbook, wearing the wrong colour socks, missing a part of your uniform, or being two minutes late. This lovely, polite girl said she had already been there twice this year - once for doodling because she got carried away 'in a boring lesson' and another for forgetting her planner, which they have to carry with them at all times.

I went in Soviet school and honestly, even they didn’t have detention rooms. If anyone misbehaved, they would do extra fitness classes or some do some gardening and cleaning for school grounds, and parents were called in. I’m not saying that was better by any means, but honestly — how the hell have we normalised this? What are we thinking as a society, treating children like inmates inside schools, and then acting shocked when they go wild on the streets after being in this prison-like environment all day long?

All I want is a normal, happy school for my child. Is that too much to ask? And do I have to pay £30k a year to avoid this 'military silence + constant detentions'? Is that what we call a good education in the 21st century? I couldn’t stop thinking: what kind of young people will come out of this school environment — happy, curious, caring, loving, creative, enthusiastic and empathetic?

I went to a secondary in a deprived area, very loud and rowdy. I recall the classes going silent though if we ever had any visitors come in. I still remember the OFSTED inspection, it was so strange how much quieter everyone was! Maybe you didn't get a true reflection of the school.

Thank you for mentioning 'trust' - yes, absolutely! trust needs to be nurtured and internalised at every level within the system. If you don't trust and rather expect bad behaviour, that's what you going to get.

Interesting — the secondary schools we saw which were like this (different area) were also part of United Learning!

I attended three Russian unis in Soviet times. (Short course - one month; five months; three months.)

I recall being told that if there were behavioural problems at school, the child's parent might find himself being called in by his manager at work to ask what what was going on...

If things got really bad, said pupil might be removed from the mainstream state school completely. I guess things must now be very different in Russian schools.

That school is particularly crackers but this is what inner city schools are like-move to the burbs, because schools are gentler when most kids behave well basically. With tough catchments there isn’t much choice but have zero tolerance.

Your reaction seems wildly disproportionate.

It wasn’t the one for you. Fine, move on.

I recall my lecturers telling me that there was a common curriculum which was so strict that a child could be moved from one school to another and simply pick up from where the previous lesson left off.

This would obviously be slightly different in non-Russian speaking states, given that children were educated in their native language as well as being taught Russia. (I had an Azeri roommate who was scornful of the claim that the Soviet Union had gifted the Azeris an alphabet and literacy: Azeris had used an Arabic script prior to having Cyrillic imposed on them.)

Where exactly? I’d love suggestions or recommendations in West, SW or NW London. I only have a few non-religious schools within my catchment.

This sounds like academy rules. I used to work in education welfare for a while and the academies sounded very much like this! Hopefully you view some more schools and find one that suits your family.

Isn't Holland Park the famous comprehensive where Labour politicians and famous people send their children so they can say they have had a state education, but they don't actually have to mix with the hoi poloi?
I guess this has something to do with the strange tone of this post.
The black curtains thing is extremely odd, by the poster, I mean.

The Soviet Union ended December 1991. I was 10 when the Berlin Wall fell, I remember it.
So when did you go to school in Russia? And you are saying living in
West London is worse? At least you are free to choose here and complain to your heart’s content. Pick a different school if you don‘t like it. Or go to church if you must. Value what you do get within the system here. Nobody would force your DC to go there and most of us cannot afford 30k for private schooling. We make do. The good thing about London is that if you arm yourself with knowledge there are always educational options.

I agree, my DD’s independent school is like this - they don’t need to be strict with them because the kids are well behaved and motivated anyway, so beyond the odd lecture about skirt length or remembering kit they don’t actually have to be strict with them. If the girls are allowed a bit of makeup or some plain earrings or occasionally talk in the class it’s not a big deal because there’s no disruption or impediment to their learning.

The pupils genuinely seem to like the teachers, and there is no “reset room” or “refocus room” or list of “infractions” (in one United Learning academy we visited every room had a huge list of “infractions” written up on the wall with points for verbal and written warnings and so on. Even the polite kids get detentions so easily that they get cowed and discouraged. Whereas at DD’s school there are rarely any detentions or order marks because they just don’t behave badly enough!)

Sadly this attitude to education is very fashionable at the moment. At least in London you have some choices. Our local rural secondary has this attitude of punishing kids for forgetting a planner (a day in isolation for a repeat offence) having shirt untucked etc. Didn’t seem to do much about actual learning in lessons and thankfully we’re just about able to afford private for a few years, and post-16 is much better. Many people are completely stuck with this model.

This is in Essex, so would be out of catchment. I did look at a whole variety of different types of school including grammar (which I a really didn’t like), one independent and 3 comprehensives. We were really lucky that the school my daughter really liked was within catchment.

I didn't know anything about this school until I just googled, and oh, how the mighty have apparently fallen. From what I presume, based on reviews I've just read is that the staff are inefficient which perhaps leads to misbehaviour - you say it's an open day, so by all accounts I can only imagine there's a reason the children seemed joyless - people are looking round, be on your best behaviour. But the reviews (not necessarily ofsted, as I'd want to see for myself) for me would have been enough for me to not really consider it. The last ofsted report highlighted a number of issues, and that was 3 years ago, but since it "reopened", there's no indication of how it might have changed.

I went to private school myself - one which, 30 years later, appears to have gone from strength to strength. In my area, that school did give the best education. I have to wonder if that's the case with the one you've looked at.

I see you've also said you only have a shot at 2 of your six local schools because you're neither Catholic nor C of E. Is that more because you don't want to send a child to those sorts of schools? Because both accept children of any faith. If it's more that you don't wish for your children to attend those sorts of schools, you can legally withdraw your child from the religious aspects, including RE (though despite being an atheist myself, I feel it's important to have an understanding of other religions from an anthropology standpoint).

Yes, I agree - its this idea that if you crack down on the small behaviours you will have control if anything big happens. Never mind that loads of kids have no intention of ever doing anything big and are in a constant state of anxiety and the SEN kids who literally can't manage this level of conformity.

Why can’t your children go to KAA that’s a really good school?

The children were probably all told to be quiet while there were visitors. I would not be unhappy that there are consequences for 'bad' behaviour, Some schools seem to be on the verge of riot some of the time. By all means go for a less controlled school environment but you may regret it.

@Kikogub I think it depends on how popular the school is. My cousin only got her daughters into a C of E girls' school because she was an active member of the C of E.

On the other hand, the Catholic schools in my area will happily take non-Catholics, but only if they are not full to capacity.

I've taught in As, Bs and Cs.

Cs are lovely if all goes well... but they're not automatically the best if you have pastoral issues and certainly in the past they could be a bit complacent in their policies/ support and too reliant on nice easy kids and nice easy families. (Although likely that they've had to tighten up in the past 10 years, and I've certainly known some shock OFSTED results locally). If you're not in catchment for one, tough luck.

As are awful, soul-destroying places for the nice kids who want to learn and have a quiet life, and soul destroying for the teachers in daily battles for learning and order. There's often little support for the teachers and I've known too many schools where staff are treated with open contempt by senior management. Oh the relief to drive out through the gates for the final time. I did multiple terms of supply in a few, but the worst had me in tears and vowing never to return after 4 days back in the 2000s. It was notorious and frequently blacklisted by supply teachers. 4 days was longer than average. (The girls' school where many sisters went so same catchment, just filtered by sex was lovely. Not easy, but supportive, nuturing and firm and I always enjoyed working there)

Bs are not automatically the worst option. Clear structures mean everyone else knows where they stand. Excessively punitive is clearly not healthy, but strong boundaries can be established with care and compassion. They can still have fun and extra-curriculars.

There are too many children raised putting their own happiness first and with weak boundaries. Learning can not happen in a room with 30 people with that mindset, so discipline in its broadest sense (not just meaning punishment) has to be present for that mini society to function.

My DCs are at a B- a nice B, but the rules are very clear nonetheless. I've had very few issues with them there despite their additional needs. They do their homework, bring equipment (despite executive function issues), wear their uniform neatly etc, and by y10 and y8 neither has had a detention/ isolation etc.

An A would mentally break them.

(I also work in a B. If there is any slack, the system will fail and it will revert back to an A)

What exactly is odd? Can you elaborate a bit? About the black curtains — yes, that’s what I saw yesterday. Children themselves confirmed that they’re sent to detention for small things. Is it odd that I’m sharing what I saw and how I felt about the school, or is it odd that someone shows a bit of critical thinking? And Labour politicians sending their kids to this school — what exactly does that tell you? Also, school had massive problems recently and they are working to improve, but this is not the way to improve, as I believe. I'll send the letter to governors and the head teacher. If we don't speak up, nothing will ever improve.

Nope most kids don’t feel awkward unless they are concerned as to how the response will be viewed.

To be fair if you can't manage behaviours you can't teach, it sounds easy to say let the children do what they like, but the majority suffer if the minority disrupt everything. In the 90s you probably didn't have so many 'difficult' students in main stream schools, now almost all children are expected to attend main stream and the teachers can't cope.

@WearyAuldWumman Agreed - to be honest, I only found out Catholic schools take non-Catholics when my best friend suddenly went to one. Did see they prioritise Catholic families while C of E apparently prioritises area. I thought I'd try to find out reason, though, in case OP's one of the apparently many (I've seen a lot of them!) who didn't know their rights when it comes to the religious element. After all, in that situation - if you don't know so you're looking for non-denomination - choices can be very daunting.

I don't agree.

I think it can be very unsettling for kids when strange, adult visitors are in the class.