Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

However, CH always been at pains to advertise the fact that it offers places to those children who, for whatever reason would reap great benefits from a boarding environment.

My son and I both believe that this is true for him. He has only been there since September and it has not been easy - either the boarding or the separation - but then we didnt think it would be. On the other hand, he is benefitting enormously. I wouldn't want him to weekly board as I live 3 hours away (except on a Friday night when I live 5 hours away!)

KenHo wrote:I live 250 miles away and can't move to Sussex. If CH starts doing mainly weekly boarding then it will serve the population of Sussex and leafy Surrey. Surrey not being a place well known for its social deprivatiion or lack of good schools.

You know this as fact ? How if you live 250 miles away ?

There has been a lot of very serious debate on this subject, with good points made on both sides.

I fear that those of us who remember CH of years and years ago, have very little knowledge of the current circumstances, either financial or practical, which have caused "Our" School to change so much.
I imagine that the Board of Governors are not idiots -- (How many OBs ?) and are doing their best, with the finances which they have.
In our day, we did not have a big swimming pool, separate accommodation, rather than Dormitories, extensions to the back of the Houses and GIRLS ! (Which demands a certain amount of separate accommodation !)
Despite the natural nostalgia, I am beginning to feel that the School is probably a better place to be educated -- but as to that --- time will tell !

I am looking forward to the 60+ re-union, on March 24th ---when we can all "Moan" together !!!

I dont think any of the points that anyone makes should be thought of as moaning - problems bring solutions so it is important that problems are aired.

I understand what Neill is saying about the students' life being so much easier now than it was compared to previous generations. But I don't think this makes a previous generation's way of doing things better.

I think you will find that CH is still fairly low down the list of 'luxurious accommodation' when compared with other independent schools.

Did anyone see 'Leaving home at 8' on channel 4 last night-filmed at Highfield School, Liphhook? The bedrooms, with 3 sharing, looked very colourful and homely. You couldn't have called them dorms! Incidentally, the staff were lovely, so sympathetic to little ones' homesickness (unlike Hertford Housemistresses!) The headmistress came across as matter-of-fact and rather unapproachable, but that's just my opinion. Some of those on this forum started at CH at age 9 or thereabouts, wonder how they would compare their own experiences with those on the programme?

YadaYada wrote: I understand what Neill is saying about the students' life being so much easier now than it was compared to previous generations. But I don't think this makes a previous generation's way of doing things better.
.

Interesting conversation on LBC radio late this morning, the subject being university degrees, standards etc. and the fact that they expect to walk into the job they want at huge wages. Some woman phoned in to say that she had to work all of 6 hours per week on her history degree and 22 hours a week in paid employment. She was not asked how many hours she spent in the Students' Union
I remember doing over 30 hours homework per week at CH for A levels. A student's life is definitely much easier now - far far too easy IMHO.

fra828 wrote:Did anyone see 'Leaving home at 8' on channel 4 last night-filmed at Highfield School, Liphhook? The bedrooms, with 3 sharing, looked very colourful and homely. You couldn't have called them dorms! Incidentally, the staff were lovely, so sympathetic to little ones' homesickness (unlike Hertford Housemistresses!) The headmistress came across as matter-of-fact and rather unapproachable, but that's just my opinion. Some of those on this forum started at CH at age 9 or thereabouts, wonder how they would compare their own experiences with those on the programme?

I didn't see the programme but your description of the headmistress fits Mr Jones, HM of Prep A. As for the staff, they, like him, all talked gobbldegook - totally incomprehensible. I think that everything depended on whom you had as a nursemaid; mine was pretty OK I think.
The whole thing was scary - I have a number of memories , all of them bad. I was in trouble with Mr Jones because I didn't buy sweets at the tuck shop in the house; I'd never come across sweets before in my life and those funny things tasted so bad I had to throw them away. I was still forced to buy sweets every week without knowing what they were, a total waste of money my mother could ill-afford.
On another occasion I got a stone in my shoe marching up for tea. I was not allowed to fall out and when I got into the dining hall I found a one inch bit of glass. I got hell from matron because my socks were red with blood - no plaster or other treatment - just a telling off for getting my socks dirty and cut.
One grew up very fast in Prep A.

I remember doing over 30 hours homework per week at CH for A levels. A student's life is definitely much easier now - far far too easy IMHO.

And the point is? My second form works very hard.....he would actually like a bit more discipline around prep time as he sometimes can't conentrate because of others being noisy. But I don't understand the point of a conversation or thread which simply says, "It was better in our day" or "the young have it so easy these day".

Off topic but did anyone see this?

http://www.graziadaily.co.uk/talkingpoi ... -birth.htm

englishangel wrote:Off topic but did anyone see this?

http://www.graziadaily.co.uk/talkingpoi ... -birth.htm

Way OTT. I agree that she should bond with the child even if she was so fit and the birth so easy that she was medically fit to go back to school. (and it's a man writing that!)

Reminds me of reports of career women in the City who employ others to find them a mate so that they can get pregnant, have a baby and go back to work leaving the child with a nanny; it was the IN thing (at that time) to have a baby.

Not terribly relevant, but what struck me was that DR was also only 30 when she was appointed head at Hertford!

YadaYada wrote:

I remember doing over 30 hours homework per week at CH for A levels. A student's life is definitely much easier now - far far too easy IMHO.

And the point is? My second form works very hard.....he would actually like a bit more discipline around prep time as he sometimes can't conentrate because of others being noisy. But I don't understand the point of a conversation or thread which simply says, "It was better in our day" or "the young have it so easy these day".

Whilst it`s great to hear about the experiences of older OBs , we have to remember that time marches on, and just as society itself has changed, so things at CH have had to change (refurbs to meet social services guidelines etc) .

Many younger or more recent members of staff seem to regard a position at CH as merely a step on the ladder, not as a lifetime`s commitment to a unique educational establishment, as it probably would have been "back in the days" - life`s just not like that any more. Maybe with the retirement of long-serving and committed staff, the school is begining to lack a bit of cohesion and no-one seems to "understand " the place in the same way

Or maybe the future seems to be a bit too fragmented and uncertain at the moment - talks of weekly boarding, day-boarders, bringing in the IB, lack of funds........ all very unsettling for many within the school.

Difficult times for all , but everyone needs to pull together to support the school and keep the wheels turning

I don`t agree with everything that`s said and done here at CH, just as I don`t agree with things said and done by this country`s leaders, and I don`t expect the majority to do so either but, and I hate to say this, if you`re not happy, do something about it - otherwise "get over it!"

Just let it be said though, although thing may go askew at times, you can`t please all the people all of the time, and I believe that CH still strives to deliver the best education in the best possible environment.

(rant over!)

Fjgrogan wrote:Not terribly relevant, but what struck me was that DR was also only 30 when she was appointed head at Hertford!

That hit me too.

I felt so great after my second birth (the twins) that I could have done that. With hindsight I would probably have died, my blood pressure was so high and I lost so much blood.

The baby is OK but what about the other two who are still very young after all?

fra828 wrote:Did anyone see 'Leaving home at 8' on channel 4 last night-filmed at Highfield School, Liphhook?

Yes, I saw it. I must admit to having reservations about sending girls to board at such a tender age.

It seems Highfield predominately caters for children of the members of the armed forces. (Presumably, 'Hofficers Only, for the use of....')

The school staff seemed caring and relaxed. Not a touch on my first day in Prep B in January 1958, but as Janet, (Mrs C), said above....

.... times change.

JR, why do you specifically refer to sending girls to board at such a tender age? I know the programme featured girls, but surely the same applies to boys of that tender age - and bear in mind that it is generally believed that girls mature earlier than boys (not just my personal opinion, although being a woman with only daughters I might be accused of bias!?). Somewhere else on this forum there was a discussion with Katharine whose boys were sent home to school in England while the parents were in the Far East with the British Council; they survived ultimately but it was difficult for one in particular who was dyslexic.