What was your school like?

One theme running through the replies is that the further back you go in time, the worse children were treated by teachers.

Corporal punishment is an obvious difference, but also just plain cruelty, like the tales of being forced to face the wall.

In my junior school a punishment was forcing boys to stand in front of the class and having books piled onto their hands, and not being allowed to drop them.

I was pulled out of the class by my hair by a teacher in my junior school.

Physical punishments such as spanking were the norm at home in those days too but going further back my mother got 'the strap'.

An old saying my mum often used: 'children should be seen but not heard'.

A good thing in the junior school is that they had people come in to test children's eyes, so at the age of 9 I could see properly for the first time with my NHS specs

Junior school wasn't as bad for bullying as the senior but I did have some physical fights with boys.

A theme that persists throughout our experiences, with some exceptions, is social isolation, no matter what the era.

aye but modern schools the children run amok and even attack teachers. in modern high schools.

i dont agree with the old schools physically assaulting kids with canes lol thats a bit much maybe.... but the fact kids in high schools are so insane and run riot attacking teachers in class tells me that a ballance between both is required, there needs to be some form of discipline. a balance between old and new, as new is a bit too loose and allows kids to destroy the school structure and ruin learning process.

Caelus said:

but the fact kids in high schools are so insane and run riot attacking teachers in class tells me that a ballance between both is required, there needs to be some form of discipline. a balance between old and new,

The trouble is what is acceptable and what isn't.

I don't really approve of any kind of physical punishment, but without it, children don't know any barriers.

I suspect though that if you look at private schools, the discipline is better without physical punishment.

I worked in one once and the children did seem better behaved and in fact I have an acquaintance who moved from a comprehensive to a private school as a teacher, and is far happier now.

So, it's a class thing too probably.

Caelus said:

but the fact kids in high schools are so insane and run riot attacking teachers in class tells me that a ballance between both is required, there needs to be some form of discipline. a balance between old and new,

The trouble is what is acceptable and what isn't.

I don't really approve of any kind of physical punishment, but without it, children don't know any barriers.

I suspect though that if you look at private schools, the discipline is better without physical punishment.

I worked in one once and the children did seem better behaved and in fact I have an acquaintance who moved from a comprehensive to a private school as a teacher, and is far happier now.

So, it's a class thing too probably.

I went to Glengorse prep school from 1965-1970,and Felsted public school from 1970-1975. Prep school was better than public school,but both were rather awful.

Independent schools main advantage is that they can expel students and hand them back to the state sector. Most education authorities have a committee of head teachers and officers who place students who have been excluded. If a schol expels one of their problem kids, they just get another problem kid to take their place. We can be talking muggers and rapists here ... literally.

One of my last roles before I retired was working for the part of the LEA that had to "broker" the horse-trading. In a few cases kids did make a fresh start at a new schol and go on to make a success of their education. But often kids will go through several "fresh starts", then on to a Pupil Referral Unit, then graduate to a Young Offenders' Institution.

Parents who send their kids to independent schools care enough about education to make economic choices. A lot of parents are not rich  (admittedly they are not exactly poor either) but choose to forgo spending every evening down the pub and a fortnight in a villa in the Costa Paquet in order to invest in their kids' future.

Caelus said:

i think its the desire to be there and the free choice to want to have a education that determines the level of violence among students.

I agree although not all pupils at private schools will want to be there.

A lot are pushed there by pushy parents.

There are other factors like background and poverty etc that affect children's behaviour.

From my experience in senior school, the teachers make a huge difference re discipline.

It's partly I think down to the personality of the teacher as to whether they can control children.

My niece worked for a long time in an inner city comprehensive (in recent years) and she was fine with it and could control the boys.

She has a 'strong' personality.

i think with private schools too though its a effect that the kids there want a education.
while in anything free, its more a prison camp and the kids hate being there, they are not there to learn they are forced there against their will so they get aggressive.

this is also why when you go to college later on college isnt like high school, everyone is nice in college as college was a optional thing and people only went there out of free choice and want of pursuing education.

i think its the desire to be there and the free choice to want to have a education that determines the level of violence among students.

a paid optional school will have more discipline as the kids want to be there to learn.