In the 60s, 40 in a primary school class wasn?t unusual ( we had 42 at one stage, admitted the A class - two had moved from another area, including myself). 30 in a Grammar school was the norm, even in some 6 th Form classes, in the 60s/ 70s.
I taught in a Grammar school. 30 was the norm, a few had 31 or 32 from memory. 6th Form 25 typically although as Maths became more popular this increased.
Plus, in the 60s/70s things like teaching assistants - either general ones (ie the teacher could deploy as they wished) or pupil allocated (some pupils have one dedicated to them, perhaps in every lesson) were unknown. I certainly never saw one. General ones are common in primary schools. Dedicated ones depend on pupil needs - the 1991 Act * led to SEN pupils being taught in main stream schools ( a very good thing) so you find a few per year group minimum- including in secondary schools. General ones are less common in better schools - they may have a few to cover for the dedicated ones being ill etc.
The 1991 Act introduced some very positive things, including the way SEN pupils are taught. Not often Labour gets something right.
My handwriting used to be appalling until I made the effort to consciously think about each letter and how it is formed when writing it down. After a short while it became second nature.
A mistake stemming from ignorance then by the sounds of it...
Indeed, inn most cases (for "normal" people), practice and care and attention can make significant improvements to the quality of the writing. (My late FiL had poor writing as a young adult, but consciously worked on it and taught himself calligraphy, and got good enough that it became his every day writing style. He would frequently be complimented on his writing when presenting a cheque - alas his comment that he "always hoped someone would frame one" rarely gained the appreciation it deserved!)
For many dyslexics[1] however, deliberate action to write clearly can make it "better", but depending on the severity of the problem may still not make it good enough to be readable. More importantly, it will usually make it too slow to be of practical use. In my school, people like me who eventually managed to get to a point where we could write legibly if done sufficiently slowly, they would arrange for extra time in exams. For those that could not, they would have a scribe and dictate their answers to them. (these days taking the exam on a laptop is an option). Some who could write perfectly but not read well enough, may have had the exam papers read to them).
For students with significant dyspraxia (often comes as a "bonus" feature with dyslexia), the jerky hand movements are not voluntary or something that can be consciously controlled. In fact "trying harder" can make them worse.
Writing quality is also hindered by a lack of fluidity - it is difficult to write neat joined up script[2] when you have to keep stopping while you work out what letter comes next. If the brain is struggling to work out the correct sequence of letters to write, that difficulty can be compounded by attempting to carry out an unrelated physical task that also takes significant mental effort, like handwriting, at the same time. The result is not only poor writing but also fatigue (both mental and physical).
This is an incompatibility that I feel acutely when writing by hand, and yet fortunately don't feel at all when typing (hence the ease with which I can bore you lucky people at length!). Many people say they find that writing something down helps them also remember it. I always found the reverse - the "spelling while writing task" left no spare capacity for remembering or interpreting!
[1] based on my personal observations in a school where probably 60% of pupils were dyslexic. Poor writing was not universal - some could produce very readable and elegant handwriting at speed with seemingly little effort (although their written work may have had other significant problems) - but for those afflicted - even working diligently and slowly they might well produce something less readable that that in Adam's example.
[2] Why some find they get better results by printing everything and not attempting cursive writing. Over the years I found that by consciously relearning new versions of some of the basic letter shapes I was taught as a child has helped with legibility a bit. (although it matter less since the longest passage of text I am likely to write these days is on a cheque, and I don't do many of them)
You need to wind back various layers of mental learning to how do you hold the pen, then how to use the pen to draw lines and circles, then how to form letters, then how are words made up to finally representing on the paper your thoughts in your chosen language.
Were you to attempt such an exercise at the top mental layer, that of the thoughts in your chosen language, then you are doomed to fail because you are building a Golem with feet of clay.
I agree as a whole they have dropped I work in a university so I see it everyday. Well weekdays anyway. But not being able to write or even type well or not isn't an indication of intelligence. I doubt einstein or hawking would have made great sign writers, maybe they'd be excellent tomb stone engravers, but those things are an art and being good at art doesn;t mena you are inteligent.
Of course we then have to work out what good art is and that even more difficult to evaluate than inteligence is.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.