by Nigel Molden (1960-66)
I found the article on COHS in the fifties by Mike Brogden of particular interest. It was also of the greatest credit to the Editor that he should print an article in which the nostalgia was tempered by realism. As a result it has prompted me to add some comments in regard to some of the subjects raised.
Although I was very tempted, I have decided against offering observations on one or two members of the staff who, if judged by the standards of today, might well be serving at Her Majesty’s pleasure for some of their activities.
The Intake
My experience of COHS was between 1960 and 1966. It was interesting to hear that the intake in 1952 was sixty which comprised, I would imagine, of three post-war bulge classes of twenty pupils.
(Editor Mike Chew’s comment: There were two classes of thirty pupils. Classes of twenty would have been an unaffordable luxury in the early fifties. Additionally there was not enough room for three forms of the same year. That was one of the reasons given for the removal of the School to the Southfield School site.)
In 1960 the intake was forty-eight to make two classes of twenty-four pupils. I remember congregating by the bastion of the old city wall with Graham Hurley, who lived around the corner from me and another Junior School friend, Keith Halsey, who came on a different bus. The names of Hurley and Halsey were called before mine creating a great feeling of unease as I did not want to be in a different class from them. It did not occur to me that the names were being called out by Mr. Lee “Flea” in alphabetical order.
The twenty-four of us in 1A were directed to the classroom at the far end of the metal (hot in Summer, cold in Winter) extension building that also housed the tuck shop. I have no memory of receiving a talk from Fred Lay although Flea proffered a range of implements with which he would chastise any newcomer whom he might judge to be a recalcitrant.
Although a short digression I feel it might be important – either for history or the unsolved crimes section of the police records – to record that these items included a broken tubular metal door handle, a foot length of black rubber a little like a stick of liquorice and, believe it or not, an old wooden ink pen of the type with a detachable nib. I can see to this day Flea making the gesture that indicated that he would have no hesitation in inserting it in an appropriate part of the anatomy of some unfortunate. I am already regretting the digression….!
The only job I can recall being allocated was that of the register monitor who was chosen to be Chris “Waxy” Johnson. Whether he volunteered or was too intimidated to refuse only others may recall as I do not. The only useful knowledge that I gained from this exercise was that you could tick yourself in the next day if you had been absent the day before regardless of any protestations from Waxy Johnson!
Grading
The question of the selection of the pupils for 1A and 1B is one that I have thought about on many occasions. It was certainly true that those boys who were allocated to 1B were sent off to reside in the old Girl’s Central School – a place that had much in common with the outer darkness – along Bulwarks Lane.
Interestingly at the beginning of the second year a complete swap around took place with half of the 1A boys going into 2S (should that have been 2B?) and half of the 1B boys coming into 2L (2A perhaps). The 2L form moved up the corridor by one classroom to the rigours of the world of Jock Sutton. I seem to remember that the 2S boys stayed in the Central School.
I have formed the view that the initial selection, wildly inaccurate as it turned out to be, must have been based on a recommendation from the respective Junior School. Hurley, Halsey and myself attended Margaret Road School (later the Windmill School) in Headington. which was known to be a forcer of 11+ successes.
To put it another way if you were in the class of Mr. Puddephat (honestly!) you were going to pass whilst if you were sent to the Village Hall at the end of the road in the care of Mrs. Foster-Jones it seems doubtful that you would have received anything remotely recognisable as teaching.
University entrance
I have no memory of any of the pupils from the B/S stream continuing into the sixth form. There may have been some, of course, but there was certainly a peculiar emphasis on the arts rather than the sciences. It would probably be correct to say that around twenty of the intake went into the sixth form – less than half and somewhat worse that the proportion mentioned by Mike Brogden. I cannot recall a heavy emphasis on university entrance and wonder whether the sons of the working class were actually seen as suitable candidates.
Taking into account both the old and new universities with external degrees (which I took) I doubt whether more than half of the twenty pupil intake into the sixth form achieved a degree level qualification in any form. To put it another way that would have been around ten from the original forty-eight pupil intake or some twenty-per cent.
Astonishingly the two out and out top pupils in my class – the legendary Arkell and Bentley – are good examples. One did not go on to university and the other followed a sandwich course with Rolls Royce a year or so later. (So famous were these two that I named a pair of stone lions at the entrance to our driveway after them. Sadly both were stolen and a suitable epitaph to lost university opportunities, I feel!).
I can recall Ralph Bodey saying to me that he thought there was no reason why a “….good, average pupil should not go to one of the new universities.”. As these “new” establishments were clearly seen as something different, and presumably less good, I take some satisfaction that I received my M.Sc from Brunel and, earlier this year, was appointed to the Court of the University.
The Teaching
As with Mike Brogden I did feel that some of the staff yearned for the days teaching the sons of the Oxford middle and upper classes. I can remember Tich Wright openly recalling such halcyon days – although Mike might be surprised to know that he was talking about the fifties!
Mike makes the point that the teachers with specialisms were reserved for the A/L forms and that was also correct in the sixties. However it is interesting that this was only so in regard to the fourth and fifth years when the O level course was being taught. In the previous three years the A/L forms had the games master for both general science and geography and two new and wholly unsuitable teachers to be followed by the music master for maths!
If the resolve of the Editor remains strong he could invite me to reminisce about those members of staff that I believe would have been brought before the Courts in more enlightened times – or at least before the great Educator in the sky! What do you say, Mike?
(Comment from Mike Chew, then Editor: I think you have said enough to make your point. As it stands, your article is a significant contribution to a respectable and overall measured debate. This is a very interesting topic in that attitudes in the general population have changed significantly over the past seventy years. There are many from the fifties and before for whom a beating was a deserved punishment. Accepted, administered and forgotten. For others it was a traumatic experience. I was lucky. I was never beaten, but I feared being naughty enough to be beaten. Why not google ‘corporal punishment’?)