Grammar schools - 1960s/1970s

butterandjam

growstuff

All the grammar schools in my area were single sex, so there was no question of giving more places to boys to make sure there was a 50/50 split.

Same here. There were no co-educational grammar schools in our county , they were all single-sex.

My kids were educated in Scotland where all state secondary schools are mixed, comprehensive ( non-selective) and run by the local council (no "academies").

Scotland was the first part of the country to ditch grammar schools and had completed the process by the early seventies. A lot had to with which party was running the LEA: Labour ones were far quicker to move to comprehensivs, which explains why grammar schools disappeared first in Scotland, South Wales and the North East. The areas where the handful of grammar schools remain are mostly Conservative.

growstuff

All the grammar schools in my area were single sex, so there was no question of giving more places to boys to make sure there was a 50/50 split.

Same here. There were no co-educational grammar schools in our county , they were all single-sex.

My kids were educated in Scotland where all state secondary schools are mixed, comprehensive ( non-selective) and run by the local council (no "academies").

Oh that's interesting.
The ones I knew (three of them) had both boys and girls schools operating separately (so six in total) -two had the boys and girls on entirely different sites.

NotSpaghetti

But surely most grammar schools were single sex?

In some areas they were, others not, probably due to the cost of maintainting two seperate schools. The grammar schools local to me were always mixed, even when they were fully selective.

But surely most grammar schools were single sex?

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Mine was a Catholic grammar school.
It had a mix of families - lots of poorer and some wealthier.
Lots of Irish.
I don't remember any Muslim girls but we had some anglicans and several Jewish girls (whose families chose our school over other local grammar schools) one who I was friends with.

I think we were quite a mixed bunch.

I attended a school reunion for my first school- I've outlined the odd 13 plus system Cumberland had until 1984- which was a mixture of a secondary modern and a comprehensive with no sixth form and mostly CSE subjects. One of the comments that was raised was how snobbish some people became when they went to the grammar school and how working class kids who transferred were sometimes looked down on. A couple of us who lived in rented housing had this experience.

Chardy

Allira as far as the 60s goes I can only speak of my own experience. The O level option list at my school could allow you to drop one or 2 of the 3 sciences (that's not acceptable now btw), you could do history or geography or both. Some people did Art, some Home Economics, others did neither. I think you had to choose from about 8 different combinations of subjects.

We had to do at least one science, I chose physics as the biology and chemistry teachers I had were a real let down and bored me with the subjects. You were also encouraged to take at leasrt one language and had to chose either history or geography, or both. Being a grammar school, there were no craft subjects( secondary moderns for those), but you could take a subject called technology, which was like applied physics.

Allira as far as the 60s goes I can only speak of my own experience. The O level option list at my school could allow you to drop one or 2 of the 3 sciences (that's not acceptable now btw), you could do history or geography or both. Some people did Art, some Home Economics, others did neither. I think you had to choose from about 8 different combinations of subjects.

We took 8 O levels, as the school considered this to be enough to give you a broad education and universities never asked for more than 7 ot 8 O levels. I know of schools where pupils had to sit 10 O levels, but surely studying so many subjects could put too much pressure in pupils and many would probably flunk a subject or two they weren't interested in.

Chardy

Granmarderby10

The opportunities were there for the taking if you stuck with it and there were second chances along the way.
Nowdays everyone is pigeon holed from age 11 with these early “choices” and then funnelled through the system accordingly.
I find today’s educational systems repressive.

Granmarderby10 Why do you say everyone is pigeon holed from age 11? All pupils study the same thing until 14 when they choose their GCSE options, same as we did in the 60s with our exams

They do have choice now, although they have to take core subjects. I do believe there might be too much choice.

Back in the 1960s we had no choice, we took 9 subjects at GCE and there were no options.

Myself and my school friend who did day release from 16 fell into the work routine easily after 2 or 3 yrs a year at college we were qualified craftsmen, I went on to an extra year management course. After college some changed direction but whatever they chose there were plenty of opportunities.

Today it’s the transition from school to the adult job market that’s the problem, at school you are learning something new every day, as a junior at work you are repeating the same task which is likely boring and menial, many just can’t handle that away from their mates.

We had a semi selective system, 13 plus, 2 years for everyone in a secondary modern, then 3 years in a grammar school of sorts or stay in the secondary modern. It was some kind of hybrid system the county council introduced in 1967 to avoid going fully comprehensive. It never worked properly as pushy middle class parents made sure their children went to the grammar school even if they weren't good enough and the secondary modern only taught subjects to CSE level wirh less qualified teachers. In 1984, this weird system was finally axed when the county went fully comprehensive.

I left school and didn't do A levels. My dad died just after I started at grammar school and then my mother remarried. He was a disaster and I was very unhappy. He ruined my dad's business, went off with all the money and left my mother destitute. So yes my teens were messed up and at 17 I got married and at 18 I was a mother.

When I sorted myself out I asked my boss for day release to do an HND and went on to a degree. He asked if I could do five days work in four and I said yes so he signed it off. I did four years, had two kids and id be in work at 8 am to make sure everything was done before I went to college. I took work home on top of my college work.

So I agree there were opportunities.

Granmarderby10

The opportunities were there for the taking if you stuck with it and there were second chances along the way.
Nowdays everyone is pigeon holed from age 11 with these early “choices” and then funnelled through the system accordingly.
I find today’s educational systems repressive.

Granmarderby10 Why do you say everyone is pigeon holed from age 11? All pupils study the same thing until 14 when they choose their GCSE options, same as we did in the 60s with our exams

when I worked for British Gas, a significant number of the senior managers I worked for had started as apprentices of some sort or another in the gasworks.

At one time the chief executive had started as a lab assistant and worked his way to the top.

I have never understood why people seem to expect to be encouraged and have approval for everything they do.

Even as a child I knew what i wanted in life and just went ahead and followed my own inclinations and ignored all the doom sayers. I went to university in the early 1960s. Girls from my girls only school went to university to read subjects they studied for A level. It wasn't until my last day at school, when a teacher said something about me being a budding historian that I said that I hadn't applied to go to university to study history, my application was to study economics. The stunned silence that followed this announcment was amusing. I am not sure many of my teachers knew what economics was.

The opportunities were there for the taking if you stuck with it and there were second chances along the way.
Nowdays everyone is pigeon holed from age 11 with these early “choices” and then funnelled through the system accordingly.
I find today’s educational systems repressive.

We weren’t failures and we took advantage of excellent apprenticeships and opportunities to take O and A levels so we could go to university or take professional qualifications without thousands of debt

“Nevertheless we soon became aware, as we progressed through the years, that we were not expected to achieve much in terms of academia or a career. There was never any suggestion that we might aspire to something more challenging than shorthand and typing or shop work”

At my high school were schooled for the times, our aims were certainly not raised high, we all left school at 15 or 16 in my class at GCE 0 level most either went to technical college or started work as trainees or apprentices. All climbed the career ladder, qualified for higher levels as they were working, some became self employed.

Those I know about include Bank Manager, Accountant, Estate agent, Printer, Teacher, Police, Nurse, Builder and many others.
These all failed the 11 plus, those days girls married young and had families some carried on with their career some became home makers it was their choice, my wife was a nurse, had 4 children continuing nursing and midwifing for a full career.

We weren't failures

I read some time ago that there were also significant differences in pass rates according to locality.

I did not pass the 11+ and don't agree with grammar schools - not because the system worked against me but that it entrenched the idea that you could judge at such a young age the inherent abilities of a child. It obviously meant that children who were poorer, had fewer learning opportunities and whose parents had received only a very basic education, were less likely to achieve a pass.

No doubt some people will say it is sour grapes but I honestly believe that, had I passed the 11+, I would still at some stage have realised that it was not a good system.

I was very fortunate in that I went to a secondary modern school whose headmistress was Swedish and she had a much wider view of education. Each year we had a whole week of arts festival that all children could participate and succeed in - individual verse speaking and group verse speaking, all types of dancing, playing musical instruments (including the recorder), solo singing, singing in choirs, etc, etc.

Nevertheless we soon became aware, as we progressed through the years, that we were not expected to achieve much in terms of academia or a career. There was never any suggestion that we might aspire to something more challenging than shorthand and typing or shop work.

Iam64

Lathryus, thsnks. Your summary is as I remembered
It’s dreadfully similar to women in the workplace. How often have we sat in meetings where a woman makes a suggestion, it’s ignored then the same suggestion from a man seen as spot on

I've heard about that happening often - ie a man stealing a womans idea and getting her "reward" for it.

I guess it's down to lack of confidence that many women experience?? It used to be my standing joke whilst I was still working age that I'd got a low-level job for paid work and part of why I had to do so much (unrelated) voluntary work was in order to work at something that was two levels higher (albeit had the downside I wasnt getting paid for it....). I don't recall any man having the nerve to try and "steal" an idea from me there - but I do recall I was next in line to take over being the major Officer in a voluntary group one time and a man thought he'd just nip in and grab it from under my nose - and I soon made it very plain to him "It's MY position - and I'm having it. So.........off". I think there's times when women have to learn to be blunt and not smile apologetically whilst trying to get what is rightfully theirs - praise, a payrise, whatever else.

But I am someone who got to my 30's and thought "Workmen are taking me seriously - at last - re work on my home" and then I moved across country (to what is sometimes called "The Land That Time Forgot") and I think I've finally managed to get the message through to workmen/deliverers here of what I mean when I say "There isn't a 1950s housewife here to wait in for things etc - there's only me and I'm a PERSON". I do get funny looks from them sometimes - but the message sinks in eventually that there isn't a "woman" living here...there's a "person" from the 21st century here.

Lathryus, thsnks. Your summary is as I remembered
It’s dreadfully similar to women in the workplace. How often have we sat in meetings where a woman makes a suggestion, it’s ignored then the same suggestion from a man seen as spot on

Sorry posted too early.
Living in Wales at the time I took my ‘11 plus’ at just ten years old. Good at the time but when I went to art school I had to do an extra year as I was too young to be entered for the Intermediate exam.

I went to a coed Grammar school where I think the sexes were pretty even. Even though it was a coed we were kept segregated if not in class.