Nam adipiscing

Times were different doing 1965 – 1972 and children were encouraged, both at home and in school, to accept whatever punishment was administered, as part of a character-building exercise. Applying the standards of the new millennium is a futile and self-indulgent exercise. Undoubtedly, reporting punishments of any hue to your parents guaranteed a more severe retribution than any that you had received in school. Dads who had fought in the Second World War were pretty impervious to the arguments of the bleeding-heart-liberal at that time, had there been such a thing. Few parents challenged the disciplinary measures, which were fair and deserved in virtually all cases. Capital punishment was still on the statute book and parents took a less enlightened view of indiscipline, usually expressed as, "I will kill you if you get the cane in school."

 

The punishment in school reflected the seriousness of the offence committed. There was an individual class or whole school detention that was used sparingly by most staff and more liberally by the school prefects. Serious cases of indiscipline would lead to Saturday detention or a physical punishment. Mr Woodman reluctantly administered all corporal punishment, either with a gym slipper or the cane (baculus). Physical punishment was reserved for the boys, although the primary schools allowed the girls to share in its delights. Although the amount of physical punishment was very limited many a good story has been embellished over the years, whilst sipping a pint of beer and reflecting fondly on life at PC.

 

During my seven-years at the school the only time that I can remember an incident of corporal punishment being used on our class was when we were in the Lower-Sixth. All the boys had been messing around before tthe teacher arrived for class and we were sent to the Principal. Two of the lads had been instrumental in instigating the nonsense but the code of "Omerta"  applied to the rest of us. Guilty by association was spot-on and we were not complaining. The punishment was one stroke of the slipper (an old Dunlop "guddy" that had seen better days) to be administered onto our rear-end by the principal. In truth the anticipation was much worse than the aimed-shot. The slipper was used in less serious cases and bending over whilst supporting oneself on the principal's chair for a seventeen year old was hardly going to scar us for life. A  punishment reflecting the the public school tradition and inspiring countless cartoons in "Private Eye" magazine.

However, I do remember sitting in the PE changing-room in second or third year when two older boys came in to change for PE. They showed us three neat marks on their buttocks. The punishment per se was not contested by the lads, the focus was much more on how to sit down on the bench without flinching. The memory of that day probably saved us from repeating their mistakes during our school days, or more likely in reminding us not to get caught in the first place. I am also fairly certain that these two lads did not share their badge-of-honour with their parents.

 

I do remember a rare expulsion but the offence was rather serious being related to health and safety, whilst we were participating in a final assembly. In essence an end-of-term prank that was ill-judged and, unfortunately, one that escalated out of control during the excitement of the day. I am sure that  evening, after some mature reflection, the culprits wished that they had joined us in the hall on that day, rather than attempt to make their mark in history. It all seems so long ago and the details will remain firmly in the past where they belong.

What we need to remember is that a school of almost 1000 pupils creates a very difficult environment in which to administer discipline. Transgressors did not have to break the school rules in the first place. Growth-spurts, testosterone, hormones and exam pressures can lead teenagers to make some poor choices and rather rash decisions. The behaviour in class was generally very good and transgressions were very low level. The lack of space in the cloakrooms resulted in some pushing and shoving but serious indiscipline was rare. Climbing in and out of windows on the ground floor, whilst the teacher was carrying out a science experiment, for some lads seemed to amuse them greatly and the teacher less so. The perverbial smoker's club, found in all schools, was a sign of rebellion and a rite of passage but on reflection a poor health choice. The smokers had what one might call a "lofty" experience at the home of a well known big-wig from the upper-krust of Portadown society.

At one point in the school's life our year and the one above started to flex their muscles over some long-forgotten injustice. Mr Woodman resolved this issue with a game of "British-Bulldog" held in the gymnasium and refereed by himself. The cane would have been the most obvious solution but he chose not to use it and instead he burned off our surplus testosterone using sport. He did keep a pair of boxing gloves, as an alternative means of conflict resolution, just in case any of the young men had been indulging in unregulated fisticuffs.

The school was a safe environment and bullying was largely absent because it was  dealt with immediatley before it could take hold. The moderating influence of the girls in school must not be underestimated, especially for older pupils, who were often found in the company of their girlfriend oblivious to the world of their peers.

 

The “Deake” was a fair man and administering a punishment of any sort personally affected him as much as any recipient, it was a sign of collective failure. Whilst the "stick" was common practice in all schools it is a period in our educational history best left behind. If he were alive today he would be at the forefront of the pastoral care movement.

Fortiter Et Humaniter