41st REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 07 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

Amongst your so many interesting remarks, Alan, [reply 33] you mention the being booked in and out to watch as spectators the school 1st team playing against other, mostly public, schools. The practice continued in my day. Well certainly in the 1st and possibly 2nd forms. As one OE reminded me recently we were able to do this as we played games on schooldays other than Saturdays. Actually I recall being forced to attend the touchline for 1st XV matches but cannot recall watching the 1st XI (? fading memory after 50 years). How absurd it all was! As if we would be interested in watching such rugby, which so much consisted of boys from both sides kicking the ball in to touch. All quite different from our kind of rugger, where there was more passing the ball down the line, tackling or being tackled. I recall most of my time on the touchline ragging about with Tim Fawdry. (Much enjoyed!)

42nd REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 10 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

I enjoyed reading the obituary of Gabby Hayes of 37 years ago, which Nick Dean supplied. My recollections of the man were identical to those of yours, Vic [reply 38]. I do remember, though, after one term he did praise my work in physics and my position in the form. It was an improvement from my bottom place in the first form (place 22+). He always did try to praise pupils, usually difficult in my case, and I believe it was the mathematical element of the course that benefited me. He was certainly a modest man and I had no idea at school of his distinguished war efforts on behalf of our country. I have recently acquired a book on Physics and I am going to see if I can comprehend the subject more than I did in my school days. So often even today when scientists speak in scientific terms my eyes glaze over. I do, however enjoy The Life Scientific on Tuesday - Radio 4.

43rd REPLY

NAME: Stephen Giles  

DATE: 10 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: 1957-64 gang

My memory of the forced watching of rugby matches on Saturday afternoons is that when in the sixth form, one or two prefects could be bribed to tick off one's name on the attendance list ! Failing that, it was sometimes possible to sign in, then slip out to Barnet Market to look at the ex- juke box records stall and then slip back into school before the end of the match! I still have a few of those 45s without centres somewhere.

44th REPLY

NAME: Nigel Wood  

DATE: 12 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 1957-64

Thank you, Nick, for posting the obit for Gabby Hayes [reply 42]. It certainly gives the basic facts, though I did wonder how music could be called his CHIEF love outside the classroom, if it was his ONLY love. I worry about this sort of thing. Sad, really. I'm immensely grateful to Gabby Hayes for presenting Physics so clearly and logically. He obviously had an excellent understanding of the concepts. To sixth formers keen to learn, this showed through, and little else was needed. With younger boys, his lack of showmanship and his rather retiring personality probably meant he was unappreciated - clear and logical presentation was not quite enough. Gabby was ahead of his time in writing Revision Physics for Sixth Forms. These days, such books are two a penny, but not so in the early 1960s. I reckon the book has not been bettered. The idea, I think he said in the preface, was to save students mechanically copying from the blackboard. I suspect an even greater benefit was that it enabled him to hone his order of presentation - publication concentrates the mind wonderfully...

Gabby was fond of weak puns. He was very amused by a boy, trying to copy from the blackboard, complaining that he "couldn't see for the Hayes". The only pun of Gabby's I can remember from his lessons was when he wrote on the board "A diabetic changes" instead of "Adiabatic changes". (Adiabatic changes are those that take place within perfectly heat-insulating walls. I now know - inspired in matters etymological by John Finnet? - that the pun is not as much a pun as was intended ... 'Adiabatic' means literally 'doesn't go through', and refers to heat. 'Diabetic' means 'goes through' [in the manner of a siphon] and refers to the need for an untreated diabetic to drink and excrete fluids at a much greater rate than normal. Lesson over. Classical scholars: tell me I've got it all wrong!)

The last pun I head from Gabby was more poignant than I imagined at the time. I visited Founders' Day a few years after I'd left QE, and found Gabby gloomy over the prospect of the school going comprehensive. 'Founderers' Day was his summing up. I suspect that his death a few years later had much to do with his unhappiness in the new school environment.

45th REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 16 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

Yes, Stephen [reply 43] talk of the 45s does bring back memories. I still have a stack of them and used to listen to Pick of the Pops on the radio most Sunday afternoons (DJ Alan Freeman.) Whether I have the record player that used to have a stacker piling up the 45s for playing I don't know. It may be hidden in one of my rooms under piles of other stuff. I even have many 78s and know I do not have a wind-up gramaphone to play them on. I had a lovely rosewood large upright but had to give it away on 1 of the house moves. Plenty of vinyl 33s are still retained and I have 2 players for them. Do others stii play vinyl records and cassette tapes? I also have loads of videotapes as well as DVDs and confess to being a hoarder, though not as bad as those on TV hoarder programmes? In that connection how good is Jasmine Harman on the TV programme she hosts? I have started with family encouragement to tackle some of the mountains of possessions.

46th REPLY

NAME: Jack Coumbe

DATE: 20 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current 6th former

Firstly i would like to state how off-topic this thread has become, it's truly shocking. Secondly, I would like to offer some rebuttal to the arguments stated. As the posts here are mostly by people who left the school up to 50 odd years a ago, I feel like you are out-dated and out of touch with the QE Boys of today. All posts by people with recent contact to the school have said how the school has changed but you still refuse to listen. So let me tell you how it is at the moment. The teachers do not bully any of the children here. There is no bullying between children. The pupils here understand that the school works us hard to prepare us for later life and we relish the challenges they provide us with. Parents who say there son didn't understand what they were letting themselves in for are just ignorant and probably only applied to this school based on its results. How else would such fantastic grades be achieved?! The senior staff are approachable for all boys and people who say otherwise are probably just shy and scared by people with authority. So to conclude, I believe that the school has changed massively and that some of the opinions stated here by the OE's are obsolete and I welcome them to come back to school during one of the open days so that they actually have a clear picture of what the school is like today.

47th REPLY

NAME: Oscar H

DATE: 20 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current 6th former

This is absolutely ridiculous. I'm pretty sure half the people posting here are: a) Jealous and resentful parents whose sons didn't get in to the school; b) Old boys who didn't make it into sixth form because they didn't get good enough grades; c) Old boys who, even though they went to the school decades ago, feel like they have the right to criticise it now.

It actually makes me angry reading some of the ignorant posts on here. The school doesn't 'bully' students, with the exception of year sevens who are harshly treated when they first join the school, but this is just to instil in them a sense of respect towards the staff. And guess what ... it works!  The bottom line is that those who aren't prepared to work hard get rejected, while those who listen in lessons, make good notes and revise hard get rewarded by the school and taken on. There's nothing wrong with that - it's your own fault if you aren't prepared to work hard. I was happy to see Louis and Stuart posting on here, but the responses to two legitimate students defending the school just made me even angrier. (Particularly one who claimed to be a 'prefect' but didn't give his name before he accused Louis of being bribed into defending the school. All I could think was "wow, who would stoop that low?")

48th REPLY

NAME: Vic Coughtrey   Then & Now

DATE: 20 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 1954-59

Jack and Oscar, your defence of your school is admirable and you make one or two good points but I'm afraid you rather illustrate the dangers of not doing your homework! A more careful perusal of this thread would have revealed that there is no evidence that anyone who was at the school in the 1950s and '60s presumes to know what it is like now. Indeed, in the one case of an OE (who has posted in other threads but not this one) who appeared to have trouble distinguishing between the distant past and the present, I took him to task for it and eventually no further posts were accepted from him. Parents who ask me if QE is a suitable school for their children are directed without comment to the Ofsted website, where the reports are of course very favourable.

Yes, most of us are certainly 'out of touch' with the QE boys of today. There is no reason, for the purposes of this site, why we shouldn't be! Primarily, this site is a socio-historical document, in a nice relaxed sort of way, dealing with the impressions and memories of our schooldays from the privileged standpoint of age. It will be up to you to create a similar document when you eventaully retire from whatever careers QE sets you up for. Admittedly, Thread 9 is unusual in this context, in that it is, up to about reply 33 at least, a discussion concerning the school as it is now - but initiated by current pupils and parents, with OEs interjecting only with general comments rather than opinions on the present-day school. It looks to me as though the pro and anti comments from current pupils are fairly well balanced. The comments from parents are a special case, as they involve serious problems which they felt were attributable to the school and only a deep and difficult examination of the facts would stand any chance of approaching the truth. We are obviously not in a position to concern ourselves with any such examination, nor would we wish to.

Yes, of course the school has changed radically, or many of the staff would be in prison for things that were perfectly legal and socially acceptable in our day (flogging, for example). The whole education system has changed, no doubt for the better.

As for going off-topic, it's my deliberate policy to allow the gradual evolution of threads, with one or two exceptions, as that is what the majority of contributors like [see Thread 109, reply 36] and it is exactly what happens in everyday conversation. In any case, the back-referencing system allows you to answer any points made at any stage of a thread, without causing confusion - something which could be unique to this site!

49th REPLY

NAME: Stephen Giles  

DATE: 22 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: inmate 1957-64

Jack and Oscar - I'm not sure that we as children of the '60s are really too fussed about what you think lads!!

50th REPLY

NAME: Oscar H

DATE: 29 June 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current 6th former

You deleted half of my message [reply 47] defending the school. So much for this website being unbiased.

WEBMASTER'S REPLY: The deleted part was an unfinished sentence - you went over the limit on the form. When I tried to contact you to tell you how to complete your message, my email bounced. Normally I will not publish any message if the email address given on the form turns out to be invalid, but I made an exception in your case. Incomplete sentences are always deleted. You can easily complete your reply 47 on another form - with the correct email address!

51st REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 03 July 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

Dear Oscar H, I do think you should apologize to Vic both for the implication that the website is biased one way or the other re pro or anti QEs and for the implication that he cut you off, when in fact you did not count the number of characters to see that you kept within the 1000 word limit. I would say that there is a fair number of views both pro and anti on the various threads. In regard to word length you have about 16 lines of 60 characters to keep within the limits and you may always add an additional reply to increase the volume of reply. It would be good if you could read VIc's reply carefully and absorb the points. As to your comments, Jack [reply 46], about visiting the school, I for one have attended the last 2 Founders Days and the OE Annual Dinner, as a lot of other OEs have also. It would be good to see more there but it is not compulsory for those who want to be nostalgic about the school and life generally 40 to 60 years ago.

52nd REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 06 July 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

In respect of my reply 42 on this thread I recently enjoyed watching a TV programme on the measuring of light and heat. I noticed in the end credits reference was made to Editorial Consultant Seton Bennett and think the person concerned is my old classmate, who also appears on this website (thread 32) This was a real blast from the past and especially as there are few chaps of my school years contributing to the site so far. Seton Bennett is referenced a fair bit on Google and is or was a director of the National Physical Laboratory, very much involved in the making of the programme. He was also Director and Chief Executive of the National Weights and Measures Lab from 1990-2001. Maybe he will revisit the site again and add some contribution.

53rd REPLY

NAME: Anon

DATE: 08 July 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current Pupil

I think Oscar H is totally wrong [reply 47] and has been conned by the school into thinking they are a wonderful academic institution. Some teachers have a detrimental effect on students and have a profoundly negative impact on boys' attempts to enjoy school life. Despite there being supposedly 'excellent teachers' there are plenty who lack inspiration and can't control a class environment.

54th REPLY

NAME: Stephen Giles  

DATE: 09 July 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: inmate 1957-64

Let me tell you Mr Anon that in what ever career you choose to follow, you are not going to find everybody to your liking. Indeed you will find some work colleagues (reminds me of Sainsbury's!) who are very nasty indeed - that's life and you will have to deal with it, as indeed you must deal with it at school. The alternative is to leave at 16, have your tattoos done and work on a building site .... innit!!!

55nd REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 11 July 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

Stephen is right to tell you [Anon, reply 53] about some work colleagues being very nasty and the need to keep going and survive, as indeed is the case at school. I thought with all the previous postings on the subject of pro and anti QEs the subject had pretty well been put to bed. If a survey was taken, as with hotel and travel questionnaires (Are you very pleased / pleased / not at all pleased / positively anti?) then I suspect the main response would be towards the pleased direction. Maybe there should be some box for positive suggestions like at our local leisure centre, though I suspect too critical censure of the teachers would be excluded. Maybe bad teaching should be spotted at the OFSTED inspections, though of course the latter remain rare. In my time at school I think there were no inspections in 7 years. Perhaps a review should happen besides OFSTED.

>

56th REPLY

NAME: Anon

DATE: 09 November 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current Pupil

Stephen [possibly replies 7, 18 & 54 above?] I am sorry to say that you delude yourself about the grandeur of an academic institution that had already begun rotting away soon after you left. You are simply too outdated to voice an opinion relevant to the school today although your anecdotes are quite amusing. Nevertheless the ethos of this school is totally wrong - I mean we don't even have a school production or anything deemed fun like that anymore (I reckon that was the case when you were there).

NOTE FROM WEBMASTER: I understand why current pupils should wish to be 'anon' but if you could at least make up names for yourselves, we could tell one anon from another!

57th REPLY

NAME: Vic Coughtrey   Then & Now

DATE: 09 November2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 1954-59

Anon, as another outdated model (in more senses than you may imagine) it seems to me that the only thing Stephen has implied about the school as it is today is what is there for all to see in the OFSTED report, which is that it's academic achievements are considered to be pretty high. The report (which is admittedly five years old) also enthuses about many other aspects of life at the school but these, of course, are more subjective. If I may turn the tables, on what historical evidence do you base your claim that the school started 'rotting away' in the '60s?

58th REPLY

NAME: Anon

DATE: 22 November 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Current Pupil

What I meant [in reply 56] is that the school has gradually diverged from being an average state school into something far different. The students are ruthlessly bullied while the higher order culls any teacher who fails to match their astronomical expectations. I don't care if OFSTED deceive themselves; the school's true colours will show eventually and by any standard, QE is definitely not the best school in the country. The school's activities must be thoroughly investigated.

59th REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 26 November 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

You say, Anon, in 58th reply: "by any standard QE is definitely not the best school in the country" but in terms of A Level results and indeed GCSE results it is clearly one of the best schools in the country and in some years in respect of state rather than private/public it has been the top school judged by the standards of qualification mentioned in the papers and in most years is in the top 5. The current headmaster, Neil Enright, boasts about this on the school website and at OE annual and 40 club dinners. Comparison is made with Henrietta Barnett and other nearby private/public schools. I do however agree with you that there are other aspects besides exam results in making a good school overall. I do agree that re your reply 56 it is a pity if there are no school productions or anything deemed by you as fun anymore. Certainly in my and Stephen's day there were many productions and lots of fun.

60th REPLY

NAME: James (Jas) Cowen    Then & Now

DATE: 09 December 2013

CONNECTION WITH QE: Pupil 56-63

I have been reflecting further on the question of fun in schooldays. There should I think be a middle way between the activities of St Trinian's and the extreme privations expressed in schools in various of Charles Dicken's works. On my last visits to the school I sense a lot of activity at school you should be able to have fun in, such as the various sports, music groups and opportunities for debating as well as relating to other pupils in general, larking about. At the end of the day, though, you have the opportunity also to excel in academic work with good teaching and diligence in homework. I used to enjoy many activities inside and outside school but reminded myself that if I did not get good A Level grades I ought really to leave school and begin occupational work. This is a lesson I also had to apply when completing my CA exams - Part 2. I had to cancel some of my many other activities in order to buckle down to passing the final exams.

In regard to schools being judged on their academic results it is not just schools like QEs endeavouring to challenge and outdo notable public schools but our local comprehensive schools are expected to improve, especially when there has been a large input of money for capital building and improved facilities. Our local comprehensive, which is also an academy (Wellington Academy in Ludgershall, Wilts) has seen its Head dismissed for poor results and oversight now being undertaken directly by the Head of that distinguished public school, Wellington College, which has been the original sponsor of the Academy. The pupils (girls and boys) who wend their way past our house every morning in term time do still look very smart in their uniforms and well-behaved, other tokens I would suggest of a good school.