"I learnt to teach in the 1980s when all that mattered was the child"

[fridayohfriday]

Just saw that quote on Twitter, attributed to the Guardian teacher network (but link didn't work so don't know who said it).

Well, like many parents of school-age kids, I went to school in the 1980s and want better for my children than I experienced ..... a mixed bag of good and bad teachers, many uninspiring lessons, incompetence in following the exam syllabus, casual humiliation and many of my peers leaving school with no qualifications or skills into a world of sky high unemployment (north east, post miners' strike).

I would have mostly been in secondary school in the 80s. My memories of primary are a bit patchy and I suspect not terribly accurate. I went to a very good Catholic school that had a very enthusiastic music teacher and a very good dance teacher. So I remember school productions as being fantastic fun. I also remember everyone being bullied by school dinner ladies, the emotional blackmail applied when someone pooed at the local pool (Mary will be very sad if you don't confess type stuff), teachers thumping rulers down next to children they were cross with, or having their work thrown out of the window.

Work wise I remember lots of SMP (schemes which you completed on your own for maths and spelling), everyone reading aloud with the teacher in from of the class, and subsequent bullying of the 'remedial' children. dh's parents thought he was at a really good school until it was closed (falling rolls) and the next school told them he was a year behind. This was probably the reason why his older sisters ended up at the local 'sink' school whereas he passed scholarship exams (his eldest sister went back to education 15 years later and now has a masters, so definitely bright).

My children's schooling has been a mix of good and not so good. I wish that ds had started school a year or two later and not been subject to mixed reading methods.

Extra curricular for me was ballet (which I hated and there was a fee). I don't recall anything else. After school everyone went home.

There was no extra-curricular for me in the 70's. Maybe it was just the school.

Apart from the male teacher who used to take us swimming on a Friday. The same teacher who used to ping the girls knicker elastic.

I was in Secondary in the 80's and it was not impressive. Poor differentiation (with the exception of an excellent Maths teacher), children routinely caned, hopeless lack of discipline in some classes etc. That's before I comment on the total absence of support for my bright but dyslexic brother!

70's primary - fun and although not strong on basics it was nurturing and mind-expanding!
80s secondary - very low expectations.

HAHAHAHHA

Primary School in the 70s was lovely- child centred and gentle paced.
Bog Standard Comp in the 80s- lazy and uninterested work to rules.

Is being "child centred" the same as having low expectations. I feel the biggest difference between the 80s and no is expectations. In the 80s roughly 50% of people left school at 16. University was for the exceptionally bright only.

ReallyTired, I work in a non-mainstream setting and we are very child-centred. This means ensuring we start from where the child is currently "at" and then make sure that they learn what they need to know next as rapidly as possible rather than what Gove says he wants them to learn because they are in a certain year group. Their confidence, knowledge and skills improve quite dramatically in many cases. It is about having high expectations for each individual and pushing them to achieve them.

bigTillyMint

In the past a massive criticism of special schools was that they had low expectations of their pupils. Special schools have got better, but children with special needs often lose out because of lack of expectations, lack of opportunity and choice. Infact the problem of low expectations is reason that there has been a move towards inclusion.

Surely there has been a happy medium between what Gove wants and being completely child centred. A special school has the massive advantage of small classes. It is easier to get to know the children well and differentiate with a high ratio of staff to children.

In the 1980s there was the belief that certain groups of children were incapable of achievement. I am glad that those prejudices are disappearing.

The problem with inclusion is where there is insufficient funding and poorly trained/supported staff.

In fact, I work in a provision where the pupils are dual-registered and attend both our provision and their mainstream school

"The problem with inclusion is where there is insufficient funding and poorly trained/supported staff. "

Massive progress has been made since the 1980s in the education of people with special needs. It has to be remembered that in the 1970s that there were some children deemed completely uneducatable who lived their lives insitutions.

Some children need a special school, but other children are better off with inclusion. In the past a child could be denied an education for simply being in a wheelchair. Nowadays people with cerabral palsy can attend university.

The will has to be there for inclusion to work. Certainly inclusion is not a cheap option and you need staff with the right kind of attitude. I worked at a mainstream school which was very good at inclusion and I have had experienced of a school which was terrible. So much depends on the attitude of senior management.

In an ideal world I feel there was would be more units on the the site of mainstream schools. Children with learning difficulties benefit from tailored lessons, but they also benefit from being in their community. In the past special schools were a bit of a ghettto where children with disablites were shipped off to.

Totally agree!