Kids will be kids? Nah....

[sigma]

Worth noting that the number of Under 16 year old girls getting pregnant has more than halved since 1970. 

 

In the 1970's one of my sister's friends was stabbed by a stranger on the way home from primary school.  She survived as the knife tip just missed her lungs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mikes]

Also you could get away with a lot more in the past.  In my school days in the mid - late 1990's, behaviour was better and there was less disruption around the school - but why?   Back then you could truant all you wanted with very little consequence - no texts to your parents, no computers watching where you are going - I wasn't that bad a kid and I truanted Welsh and PE for 2 years with no consequence (they were last period so at lunch I'd just go home! As my parents were working they had no idea the whole time)

 

So the really bad kids who didn't want to be there just truanted, they weren't stuck on site all day every day causing havok.  But what is the solution, we can't just let kids traunt surely?   Well perhaps it needs to go back to the older days where you had grammar schools for the "academic" pupils, and industrial schools for those more physical?  And drop the stigma of the non academics being "bad" - these days most of the non academic kids I know flunked school but do fine working in garages, post office, etc - and the "smart" kids a lot of them are stuck in offices for similar or even less pay, miserable, getting up to 20 stone in weight etc!

[AlistairB1983]

56 minutes ago, mikes said:

So the really bad kids who didn't want to be there just truanted, they weren't stuck on site all day every day causing havok.  But what is the solution, we can't just let kids traunt surely?   Well perhaps it needs to go back to the older days where you had grammar schools for the "academic" pupils, and industrial schools for those more physical?  And drop the stigma of the non academics being "bad" - these days most of the non academic kids I know flunked school but do fine working in garages, post office, etc - and the "smart" kids a lot of them are stuck in offices for similar or even less pay, miserable, getting up to 20 stone in weight etc!

Depends whether you're viewing there being an 'intermediate' stage between grammar and industrial/technical schools. As someone who has worked and lived (and moved away prior to having children) in an area that had a compulsory grammar system, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that without the missing 'middle' stage between the two this system would absolutely not work (as it doesn't currently). A system whereby students are either 'grammar or not' only applies even more pressure to an already pressurised system, encourages (whether it's designed to or not) parents to spend exorbitant amounts of money on tutors just to try and get little Timmy to pass his 11+, as failing it means he'll end up at one of 'those' schools and essentially be written off. (Wife worked in a non-selective school opposite one of the grammars - that first assembly for the new Year 7s she said was just heart-breaking as they all felt like failures before they'd even started!).

 

Having a 'one grammar school per town' that can pull off the very top students, fine. Forcing 11 year olds to be split between the 'can's and 'cannot's is just horrendous and a massive step backwards towards the 1950s two tier education system.

 

Would bringing back technical/industrial based schools potentially be an answer? Absolutely. But until/unless the government (and arguably society as a whole) view technical/vocational qualifications as an equal to academic ones, this isn't likely to happen. 

[E_G_R2]

Rather than Grammar it should be a school that is focused on academia so if as a young person you don't want to go down the technical route you would go down the academic route, no entrance exam just your choice.

 

The technical side concentrate on the 3 'R''s or whatever the modern equivalence is with tasters in key skills for the first 2 years then move to the skill of choice for the final 3 years.

 

Of course these final skills would need to be assessed and more importantly accredited so that they have a real world worth and that is the problem.

 

[Bumhug360]

On 13/05/2025 at 11:02, PotNoodleTech said:

So whats the parents doing about it?  Grounding her?  Throwing her £1000 iphone in the bin?  Nothing?

 

Looked after child (along with her brother), lives with grandparents one of which has dementia and their grandmother also has to look after a disabled daughter. When they get in trouble she does turn wifi off their devices though is an alcoholic and often passed out by 8pm so they just take the phone and remove the block. There is a tonne of safeguarding red flags that school are just ignoring but as they have a roof over their head, are fed and not abused I don't want to be the asshole that breaks up a family. All can do is try and be positive role model for them and they do behave a bit better around me and my partner

[smurfomatic]

It's certainly nothing new. My Dad told stories of when he was at school in the 50s/60s that make modern "troublemakers" look feeble!

 

He was a bright kid but often got into trouble, and therefore punished. Like the punishment of holding a blackboard over your head in the playground, surrounded on all sides by classrooms - if you started to lower the blackboard, one of the teachers would spot it and yell at you to hold it up...

 

Also, the "truancy officer" who was an ex-Paratrooper. A kid came at him with a knife. He was disarmed easily, THEN broke the kid's arm to make a point.

 

Didn't get much better for our generation. My older sister and friends once staged an incident both hilarious and terrifying. One of the science teachers had a phrase if you were misbehaving - "get out, either through the door or the window, I don't care" (room was on the first floor). They borrowed a crash mat from the sports hall next door and laid it underneath the classroom window. When one of them kicked off, he used his standard phrase and they jumped out of the window. Crash mat was then rapidly pushed out of view, leaving a body sprawled on the playground...

 

I wasn't much better. Early on in my secondary school, I nearly pushed someone who was picking on me, out of a first floor window (directly across from the science building my sister had used years before) - the kid involved was lucky, as the window broke but he didn't fall out. 

 

More of the damage I've seen in a previous role at a school was just mindless, no purpose other than damaging things. Hate to think what would have happened if any of them realised the lock on the science storeroom was broken, the place would have probably burned down and there'd be one kid who did it for a laugh.

Edited May 15, 2025 by smurfomatic

[PotNoodleTech]

30 minutes ago, Bumhug360 said:

 

Looked after child (along with her brother), lives with grandparents one of which has dementia and their grandmother also has to look after a disabled daughter. When they get in trouble she does turn wifi off their devices though is an alcoholic and often passed out by 8pm so they just take the phone and remove the block. There is a tonne of safeguarding red flags that school are just ignoring but as they have a roof over their head, are fed and not abused I don't want to be the asshole that breaks up a family. All can do is try and be positive role model for them and they do behave a bit better around me and my partner

Blimey wish I hadn't asked now

[Rob_D]

10 minutes ago, E_G_R2 said:

Rather than Grammar it should be a school that is focused on academia so if as a young person you don't want to go down the technical route you would go down the academic route, no entrance exam just your choice.

How would you deal with someone who wants to go the academic route, but would clearly get more benefit from the technical one, or visa-versa?

 

Maybe more vocational courses in school generally would could work so you can have everyone taking the same academic core (Maths, English) but can mix and match academic and practical classes to their own preference or skills.

Seemingly odd combinations like plumbing and advanced maths might go together really well for some people.

[E_G_R2]

10 minutes ago, Rob_D said:

How would you deal with someone who wants to go the academic route, but would clearly get more benefit from the technical one, or visa-versa?

 

Maybe more vocational courses in school generally would could work so you can have everyone taking the same academic core (Maths, English) but can mix and match academic and practical classes to their own preference or skills.

Seemingly odd combinations like plumbing and advanced maths might go together really well for some people.

How do you assess that they get more benefit from going down the other route?  But yes maybe more vocational in schools might be the answer but again the qualification has to have some recognized worth in the real world.

[Rob_D]

25 minutes ago, E_G_R2 said:

How do you assess that they get more benefit from going down the other route?

 

I assume we'd be talking about this happening at secondary phase. So you've got their performance at primary school as an assessment tool. Plus you could ask the parents. They've known the kid for 11 years and probably have an idea of where their aptitude lies. 

My worry if it were separate schools and wholly down pupil/parent choice, is that they'd just want to go where their friends are going. And even if guidance from schools and parents did push them the other way, would they get more benefit from going to (for example) academic school with their friends where they don't do very well but enjoy it. Or trade school where they do pretty well but hate it.

Ultimately, you'd probably only find this sort of thing out in hindsight.

 

I don't disagree with anything you're saying and completely agree about them needing to be proper, recognized qualifications. I just think it would offer better flexibility if both sides were taught in the same school. 

[sigma]

Do you not think that a single school that offers diferent routes would be better?    There needs to be some kind of fluidity and crossover between the different streams to best serve the needs of those such as late developers and pupils whose aspirations change.  (I went to a grammar school).  

 

 

[E_G_R2]

There is that problem of people wanting to go with their friends.  Had that with my step daughter many years ago where the ex relented and let her go to school with her 'friends' we ended up taking her out and moving so that we could get her into a better school.

 

Would a normal school have the facilities to include extra curricular stuff like brick work, joinery etc.. Would probably have to build new schools or send the pupils to the local college.

 

I don't know but from my experience of kids in school who are not academic, they were better off doing stuff with their hands rather than things like history or languages where they were not interested so inevitably misbehaved.

 

 

[Rob_D]

1 hour ago, E_G_R2 said:

Would a normal school have the facilities to include extra curricular stuff like brick work, joinery etc.. Would probably have to build new schools or send the pupils to the local college.

True, the govt would probably have invest a bunch in schools help to create these facilities, but that sounds less expensive than building whole new schools.

 

[sigma]

Yes but..... just about everybody needs some maths and some basic IT and critical thinking skills.  I think that for pupils that find maths difficult, it needs to be framed into different subjects - where their interests and aspirations are so that it becomes relevant rather than abstract.

[nicholab]

Problems is with education you would need to do a Steve jobs quadrant.

 

Cleaver kids want to lean/cleaver kids that want to be naughty.

Less gifted kids that want to learn/less gifted kids that want to be naughty.