Figure 1.-- The unhappy images we have heard of in books and films were not what we found when we visited the schools. There were schools that we would not want to send children, but these were the exceptions rather than the rule. What we usually found were well run schools with caring staff and happy children. |
The unhappy images we have heard of in books and films were not what we found when we visited the schools. There were schools that we would not want to send children, but these were the exceptions rather than the rule. What we usually found were well run schools with caring staff and happy children. Private schools varied greatly in the facilities they offered any many had more limited facilties than those offered at state schools. We were indeed surprised at the limited facilities and often very stark living facilities at many school. This had begun to change in the 1980s, but classroom facilities and dormitory accomodations at many schools were not infrequently stark. Most of the schools we visited were not like this at all. We did find a few schools that seemed less concerned with the needs of younger children than one would expect. The general pattern, however, was quite different. Most schools made a real effort to create a homey, caring atmosphere. As best we can tell, this was still very common through the 1950s. This was not the situation we found when we visited the schools. We noted happy, but well belhaved children that went about their daily activities with no real need for correction or certainly no corporal punishment. We have not doubt that unhappy school situations were once very common at these schools. This is not what we found at the schools we visited. We did find a few headmasters from the old school, but the great majority of headmasters we found were very concerned with making their school a well run and happy school.
Private schools varied greatly in the facilities they offered any many had more limited facilties than those offered at state schools. We were indeed surprised at the limited facilities and often very stark living facilities at many school. This had begun to change in the 1980s, but classroom facilities and dormitory accomodations at many schools were not infrequently stark. Many children had nothing more than an army cot and battered chair in dormitories with beds lined up in a row. The school here is a good example (figure 1). This had begun to change. There were schools with much more comfortable facilities. One factors here were the girls. Mothers often insisted in more comfortable dormitories and the schools could not very well provide facilities to the girls that were not provided the boys. At the school here, girls had just been accepted and they had brand new dormitories. The school had not yet upgraded the facilities for the boys who were complining about the inequity of the situation. Notice how stark the accomodations were. Here we do not mean to suggest that this was not a good school achieving excellent results. It does, however illustrate, the attitude toward dormitory facilities thar were once widespread among preparatory schools.
The image that many people have of British boarding schools are very unhappy places to which very young people are subjected. The image includes Spartan living quarters in which the children pine away for their parents and the comforts of home. Also many believe that the children are subjected to harsh discipline, including physical punishment. English literature is full of accounts describing very unhappy childhood experiences befinning with Winston Churchill as well as countless lesser known individuals. Actually we believe that this image was a not unrealistic desription of many prep schools through the 1950s. The schools began to change significantly in the 1960s. Most of the schools we visited were not like this at all. We did find a few schools that seemed less concerned with the needs of younger children than one would expect. The general pattern, however, was quite different. Most schools made a real effort to create a homey, caring atmosphere. One of the most revealing examples were the dormitories. New boys entering a school for the first time through the 1950s found drab, Spartan dormitories. And he would never dare bring his teddy along. The dormitories we found were bright, cheerful places and the beds were populated with not only teddies, but a variety of stiffed animals that would do a good-sized zoo proud.
Anyone familiar with English literature has read both fictional and non-fiction accounts of schools. Some authors recall r=their schools with some affection. Many more do not. We are unsure if this reflects on the number of unhappy schools or more likely the fact that the more literary minded are more likely to become authors. It is likely that the more sports-minded students were those most likely to have enjoyed their school days. One of the features of these schools often discussed was the discipline. Many schools seem to have been very strictly run with frequent resort to corporal punishment of various sorts. As best we can tell, this was still very common through the 1950s. This was not the situation we found when we visited the schools. We noted happy, but well belhaved children that went about their daily activities with no real need for correction or certainly no corporal punishment. Few schools resorted to corporal punishment and instead used a wide range of more positive approaches. The results was a large number of very happy schools with none of the oppresive air that once marked many of these schools.
There are also many British books who describe very unhappy schools. Here there are descriptions of unsympathetic masters as well as bullying by the older boys. We have not doubt that such situations were once very common at these schools. This is not what we found at the schools we visited. We did find a few headmasters from the old school, but the great majority of headmasters we found were very concerned with making their school a well run and happy school. There are various reasons for this. Perhaps the most important is the simple fact that parebts listen to their children more today and do not tend to keep their child in a school where he is not happy. There are other reasons as well. Nor did we notice any evidence of bullying. The children are very well supervised and the schools do not tollerate bullying. This is more a problem in the state system. Our geberal assessment is that the children get on very well with each other and many form friendships are formed.
