Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    I also went to an all-male boarding school for high-school (three
    years).  (Well, it was ALMOST all-male.  In my senior year, they
    admitted one girl.  The joke was "You've seen one Hebron co-ed,
    you've seen them all!"  Nowadays, the school is fully co-ed.)
    
    I agree that the isolation from women really gave me problems, but
    I also find that I never learned to treat women as posessions and
    objects, the same way that many other men do.  Unfortunately, the
    few experiences I did have with women in high-school, all very bad,
    hurt me for a long, long time.
    
    I would not send my child to a single-sex boarding school, even
    if I could still find one (they're very rare nowadays).  I believe
    that frequent social contact with the opposite sex is necessary
    to an emotionally healthy adolescence.
    					Steve

    I went to an all boys high school which was not a boarding school.
    I was involved in enough after school activities and few enough
    co-ed outside activities that I might just as well have been at
    boarding school as far as interaction with girls.
    
    It had some positive effects and some negative. A positive effect
    is that I was terribly shy in front of girls and making mistakes
    in front of them scared me silly. I don't think I would have done
    so well (not that I did all that great) with girls in the class.
    I also never got caught up in trying to impress girls for sexual
    reasons. Thus I never saw them as possessions or objects to 'go
    after'.
    
    On the other hand I did not learn to get over being shy or afraid
    of girls either. I think I would have been better off learning to
    deal with the opposite sex earlier then I did.
    
    I have heard it expressed that women often do better in all female
    schools. I believe that there are some rather convincing arguments
    for this my women in WOMANNOTES. I believe that many of the same
    things in society that make all female schools work better make
    all male schools less effective.
    
    		Alfred

    I went to an all-boy boarding school from 7 to 10, and then attended 
    single  sex  "non-boarding"  schools until going to university (well 
    the  sixth  form  allowed  in 3 girls from the neighboring all-girls 
    school as they didn't have a suitable maths teacher).

    In  general  I  agree  with  the previous views: it made me very shy 
    around girls, a degree of reticence that has never really gone away.
    
    Indeed I suspect that my situation may even have been worse than had 
    I been  isolated:  as  I  said  above the girls school was literally 
    across  the street from the boys school and a number of school rules 
    existed  solely  to  prevent  even  casual contact (they started and 
    finished  30 minutes ahead of us to keep us from sharing bus queues! 
    A boy  caught  in the precincts of the girls school would be (on one 
    occasion  was)  given  12  strokes  of  the  cane and then expelled. 
    Talking  to  them  in  the  street whilst either they or you were in 
    uniform  was  subject to a one hour detention and 500 lines...  do I 
    need to go on?)
    
    I certainly  wouldn't  seek to send my children to such a repressive 
    atmosphere, but in certain circumstances I suspect I might send them 
    to  a good single sex boarding school (perhaps this is a case of the 
    parents  wishing to visit on their children that which their parents 
    visited on them?).
    
    /. Ian .\
                      
    PS:  in  explanation, this was in England, and "6th form" is roughly 
    the equivalent of American high school.
    
    Also  when the girls where admitted protocol was enforced: we had to 
    stand  when  they  entered  the  room,  and  though  we  were always 
    addressed  by  our  surname (ie "Philpott, what is the answer") they 
    were  addressed  by  masters  and  pupils alike as Miss xxx (I still 
    remember their names: Miss Priscilla, Miss Jennifer and Miss Paula). 
    To  avoid them walking through corridors full of boys they arrived 5 
    minutes  after  the period had begun and left five minutes before it 
    ended! 

    A related question:
    
    Why do people send their children to boarding schools to begin with?
    This is entirely foreign to me.   
    
    - M

    I might send a child to a single-sex school depending on circumstances.
    I went to a single-sex school for four years and really enjoyed
    it. The school had some boarding students, and was in a large city.
    We also had a boy's school nearby. Some classes and many clubs and
    other activities were coed, so in a sense, we had the best of both
    worlds. On the other hand, I had the opportunity to attend a girl's
    boarding school in the sticks. The academic qualities were similar,
    but there was no way to get away, and there were no boy's schools
    nearby -- it seemed very isolated.
    
    Why send a child to a single-sex school?  It depends on the child's
    preferance and the school's features (academics, activities,
    reputation, location...)
    
    Why send a child to a boarding school?  Tradition, child's desire
    to get away / bad home life, parents' location (one of my classmates
    had parents in Africa -- they wanted her to get a good education
    in the states).
    
    liz
    

    I attended a boarding school because my parents felt (and I agree)
    that I would not have received a suitable quality education at the
    local public high school.
    					Steve

    I agree with Steve, I went to "Prep-School" because the High School
    education I received was quite a 'breeze' but not too informative....
    Better phrased, If you were reasonably intelligent you graduated...
    Private school did quite abit of enlightening though... 

    Let's see; Good re-enforcement of the Basics (reading, writting, ...and
    so-on..), ahh, the ole DRUG culture (boy, you find out why some folks
    that don't want thier kids around do with them, and the result....
    It is probably the WORST reason to send the kids off to school)... and,
    Sports; a requirement here... (I like hockey and Lacrosse so it wasn't
    so bad...)... And also, damn glad I was near NH skiing on weekends and
    had a license and car.... Oh yea, the school was co-ed and the girls
    were interesting but no where as good/nice/interesting/communicative as
    college. 
    
    Summary: If you public school is noticably inefficient at teaching
    your kids, at minimum send them to local private school, don't (like
    myself) end up sending them to an extra year of High School just
    because.... 
    
    Fact of the matter (if I didn't express it before) I hated it, but
    it was the BEST decision I EVER made...
    
    dd;
    

re: .1,.2,.3

Well, I went to a coed public junior high/high school and I STILL ended
up being very shy around the opposite sex!  Sometimes I think that shy
people are born, not made, that way.  (Of course, I was put in the
"college-bound" track, which may have made matters worse.)

I spent part of my last year at Rindge Tech before it went coed in
the merger with Cambridge Latin.  What struck me there was the almost
nonexistent level of participation in classroom discussions by the
males there.  It was as if they had no motivation to show off their
smarts with no females around to appreciate it...

    
    I went to public schools from kindergarten all the way thru college.
    I firmly believe that public schools, as long as they offer a quality
    education, are a better way to grow up than going to private schools.
    The population of public schools is much more diverse and you learn
    to deal with people from all ethnic backgrounds and economic classes.
    Most private schools' student bodies are made up of an unrealistic
    sample of society, and students that go there are lost when they
    get out in the real world. Usually a student can get just as good
    an education at a public school if they really put their mind to
    it. Students that don't really try to get a good education won't
    even if you send them to the best private school that money can
    buy.
    
    Mike

    Mike,
    I partly agree with you. Yes, IF you can get a quality education
    in a public school, you may as well go there. IF the student doesn't
    care about school (for certain reasons), then it doesn't matter
    where s/he goes. On the other hand, if the student has a special
    talent that would be exercised and drawn out in another school,
    then a private school might be in order. In my case, I started out
    in one of the BEST public schools in Washington DC and was sorely
    disappointed (as was my mother).  The school I ended up in had an
    aggressive aid program, so I was able to meet and mingle with a
    diverse crowd in a safe setting. Meanwhile, my friends in public
    school risked physical harm every time they went to their lockers
    (no exaggeration).  Somehow, that atmosphere did not seem conducive
    to learning.

    re: .11
    
    I must admit that I may have lead somewhat of a sheltered life growing
    up in New Hampshire. I went to Central High School in Manchester
    which had some students from tough parts of the city (Manchester
    *is* a city even though it's in NH), but I'm sure it didn't compare
    with the tough neighborhoods in Washington, DC. I was careful in
    my previous note to qualify my comparison of private vs public schools
    with the word MOST. I'm sure there are cases where my argument doesn't
    hold up. 
    
    Mike

    	I also went to a "male only" school...specifically, Military
    School.  My mother did this due to the lack of a father (divorce)
    at an early age.  She felt that this would take the place of a missing
    father.  Although to this day, I feel no repercussions about her
    decision, I am a bit puzzled....when I attended military school,
    I was an A student.  Then, when I started going to public school
    (complete with girls!!!!), my grades plummeted.  I wonder why...
    
    					Phil
    

    I went to boarding school because a, the local public schools were
    considered inferior (by my parents), and b, there were no local 
    private schools admitted girls.  No regrets but I wouldn't do the
    same for my children.

Please forgive my blatant public-school naivete, but....


	how did you boarding-school goers live without your
	brothers and sisters and Moms and Dads around??


Bugsy

    Home life was so bad that when my sister went to boarding school,
    she finally found the space she needed to start growing up. She made
    lots of close friends at school, and was able to choose when to
    see relatives.

Why did I attend private school : my father was "career military" and moving
around (a lot) so he sent me to boarding school to get a stable education.

How did I survive without brothers and sisters etc? not relevant: I'm an
only child and dormitory life was hectic enough that home sickness and missing
family life was unusual (young kids are ungrateful brats...)

Inicdentally old chaps, Public Schools are the ones you pay to attend (private
boarding establishments), the other things are simply rather dreary council
places, don't you know.  :-)

/. Ian .\

    ditto the previous note.  dorm life is definitely NOT lonely.
    
    shl
    

    From the age of 12 to 18 I attended a male boarding school : it was
    a public high school which specialised in agriculture. This specialty
    was the reason why I chose to go to boarding school.
    
    One key effect of the experience was a deadening of my emotions. There
    was no love in the school and (for myself) very little real
    comradeship. Extreme homesickness plagued me for quite some time. This
    was especially magnified since I have such a loving Christian family.
    (I became a Christian myself a year after starting high school : once I
    recognised the difference between my Christian heritage and the culture
    in high school.) 
    
    Like others, I developed some shyness towards females. And I, similarly,
    am very pleased that I avoided the "who can I lay next ?" attitude.

    The key problem I found with boarding school was that I could see
    no valid emotional release. There is a tremendous pressure on young
    Christians - either a pressure to conform to their surrounding culture
    or (if they are serious about their faith) a pressure to be faultless.
    
    I sensed that many people were judging God based on how I acted. So I
    refused to get angry, refused to join in with the bastardisation of
    junior pupils, refused to get involved with pornography or sexual
    conversations. But in doing these things I was motivated by quite an
    incorrect understanding of holiness. 
    
    As any pysch. student will tell you, such repression of emotions
    is dangerous. My boarding school experience caused me much pain.
    
    But I wouldn't like to think what sort of person I'd be if I hadn't
    had those experiences.

    I've tried to keep this brief, but I'd love to discuss these things
    more with anyone who's interested. 
    
    			Mat.

    Re .17 

    Not quite the case, In England the difference between private and
    public schools is that the Public school headmaster sits on a 'board of
    headmasters', where as the private school just has to conform to
    certain educational standards, but both are Fee paying. Then you have
    the comprehensive school's (Simular to the American public school) and
    under some councils Grammar and 'secondary schools' (I believe
    Manchester still has these). 

    I went to a private boarding school and agree with .9, People are just
    shy, in some cases the boarding school can really help develop a
    character faster than a day school, because your on your own, you have
    no mum and dad, big brother or sister to help you with your troubles. I
    don't feel that I'm shy around women, although for obvious reasons
    could not start any kind of relationship until I left school at the rip
    old age of 18. Given the choice (Which I wasn't) I would go again; I
    really enjoyed my school days and look back on them with great
    fondness. 


				Regards
					Mark
    

        I Spent three or five years in an all male boarding school.
        I plan on sending any of my children to the same. I think it
        gave me a very good attitude towards the opposite sex. and
        set me up with a well defined sense of self-sufficiency which
        lasted me well into my years at UNiversity etc.
        
        q
        

< Note 3.21 by POTARU::QUODLING "Oooh!! Nice Software..." >


�       I Spent  three  or  five years in an all male boarding school. I 
�       plan on sending any of my children to the same.
 
        
        Any female children you may have will probably enjoy this...
                 
        
        :-) :-) :-) :-)
        
        /. Ian .\

    Which was it?  Three years or five years?  You had such a good time
    you can't remember? :-)

        re .-1 A round about way of saying somewhere between three
        and five. Hell it was over a decade ago, my memory is fading...
        
        re .-2
        
        Well, most of the young ladies that ended up spending short
        amount of time at our school had an exceedingly good time while
        they were there...  :-) :-)
        
        q
        

In our culture, little boys are expected to befriend other little boys, and
 little girls are expected to befriend other little girls.  Then puberty hits,
  and most kids start paying attention to the opposite sexes.  Unfortunately,
   a whole childhood apart leads to a view of the opposite sex as a mysterious
    alien being rather than a person just like yourself.

Therefore, I'm not all that keen on boarding schools that separate children by
 their gender.

My own experience is that I went to public schools from grades K through 10.
 I managed to get a scholarship to a coed private school for grades 11 and 12.
  <_Jym_>

    I went to a boys only boarding school from age 10 to 13.
    Then transferred to a coed baording school at 13 thru 16 
    
    Life was considerably more pleasant in the coed school .
    
    I think that the lasting memory of the all boys boarding school
    (which was 150+years old and had more tradition than any one needs)
    was one of unnessary harshness and, to some extent sadism.
    I can distinctly identify problems which I have had with relating
    to and with women to attitudes formed in that period.
     
    I'm glad I transferred to that coed school ,and would never send
    my kids to a single sex boarding school.
    I'll add ,however that female friends who went to single sex boarding
    school ,seemed to have a much easier time of it.

    I have some mixed feelings with respect to "one sex" boarding schools.
    
    I was born and raised in the Bronx, a borough in the city of NY.
    life was a struggle for my family, while not unhappy. When I got
    out of grammar school a decision had to be made on where I would
    go to HS
    
    A wrong decision changed my life tremendously.
    My folks, after considerable investigation, selected to send me
    to a boarding school in Bronxville NY in westchester county. It
    was a Luthern, Pre-theological school, supposedly with a strict
    and well supervised educational program and not necessarily focused
    for future ministers. I never had any intention of looking into
    any ministry,anywhere, anyway. They sent me there at considerable
    expense to them to get me off the streets of the Bronx, an easy
    environment to get on the wrong track.
    
    I was the kind of kid who may well have strayed very easily. I 
    was in trouble several times...prank things, nothing serious.
    
    In any event, That boarding school was a house of terror. Not the
    faculty but the upperclassmen. It was a rude awakening for a kid
    who had not been away from home before and at the mercy of bullies.
    It wasn't all the upperclassmen just a handful, but that was 
    enough. I lived on the third floor and had to run the gauntlet
    many times a day trying to stay away from the Juniors (the worst).
    They figured they had gone thru it, now it was their turn.
    
    The housing was a 2 room pair. 1 room for studying and 1 for sleeping,
    joined by a connecting door...as I remember there were 9 such suites
    plus a bath on each floor. The suites were supposed to consist of
    4 students: 1 frosh ,1 soph , 1 Jr and  1 Sr. The lower you were
    on the totem pole the bigger the cleaning duties you had. My problem
    was that my room had 2 Jrs and a soph. I did everything! The other
    problem was that one of the Jrs in my room was the worst bas**rd
    in the school.The stories are endless. I was a street smart kid,
    but I was no match for a pair.They beat me regularly. My grades
    were suffering too.
    
    I could go home on weekends, others did not have that option. The
    next year I was a day student. The following year I went back to
    the city schools. That lasted for 2 years and I was on a downward
    rollercoaster. lousy attitude toward school. One last try was the
    New Hampton School in New Hampton NH. It saved me from a life of
    mediocrity and crime for sure.
    
    I got into all sports - I was a good athlete anyway but did not
    have the opportunity to participate except on the streets. I never
    took any more sh*t from anyone, joined the Glee Club, Choir,etc and
    met other guys from NYC up there for the same reason. We're still
    friends. I became sort of a leader in the Dorm because of my street
    smarts and found a lot of underclassmen looking to me for advice.It
    did the old ego good. It was also an all boys school then..has since
    gone co-ed.
    
    I'll sum up (sorry I had a lengthy note , but I needed to show the
    WHY behind my feelings) by saying that Men need to form a strong
    bond between men as women need to form that same bond with other
    women. Its difficult to get that bonding in a mixed environment.
    Man to Women bonding is a whole other ballgame.
    
    To support my belief I believe Notre Dame, and the Service Academies
    and other all Male and all Female institutions have lost some of
    the closness which were once theirs by becoming co-ed. So too have
    boarding schools.
    
    	Thanks for listening,   ___GM___
    
    
    
    

I attended a single-sex 50%day 50%boarding school that had a companion
girls school a short distance down the street.
Classes from 7-8th grade were single-sex.  From 9-12 coed.

The reason was for the educational quality...I wasn't very motivated in 
elementary school.  As a day student, there wasn't a lot of seperation
from my family.  Since there were coed classes in the upper school, females
are not totally foreign to me.  And although the environment was primarilly
well-to-do WASP's, the school did sucessfully recruit minority students,
resulting in some exposure to other ways of life, if not diversity.

I would do it again, and would send children to a private school -- 
maybe not single-sex....

J.

    My Mother was a Head-Mistress of a state-run primary school, and
    recognised the obvious deficiencies of the state education system
    in England. I was 'opted out' at the age of nine and sent to a non
    boarding prep school in West London, and following that, at the
    age of thirteen, to a Public School in Devon as a boarder.
    
    The school was boys only, although girls were admitted to the sixth
    form a couple of years before I arrived. I can identify several
    issues for and against this type of education. 
    
    Having girls in the sixth form only, is probably worse than having
    a boys only environment, Boys at 13 entered into a very hard
    environment such as this, at that time when they are starting to
    discover what makes the world tick, (or what ought to be making
    it tick if they could get into the real world) look at the only
    girls they can see, and start to indulge in a form of hero worship
    which I am sure is not healthy. 
    
    My particular school was run on traditions going back 350 years,
    these seem to be the most guarded possesions, and nearly all of
    the traditions are based upon power and status, eg you can't cook
    in the house kitchen in your first term, or you can't go in to town
    until your second term, dont walk on the grass unless you're a monitor
     etc. Most traditions are based upon supression.
    Power is sought after, and manifests itself purely in the number
    of people you can control, this is probably the reason why most
    of the top management and powerful positions in the UK are filled
    by ex public school people.
    
    The schools tend to be all about money, if you are there you are
    assumed to have come from a rich family, the idea of families making
    sacrifices to send their children to these schools seems to be a
    fairly recent one. 
    
    I came out of my school very hardened and very independant, both
    things that I have found useful. ( when I went away to Polytechnic 
    in England, I couldn't understand how people of 18 could be homesick 
    and so unhappy). I was (am?) also obsessed by money and the 'how
    much I own ' syndrome
    
    I am frightened not of women, but more of relationships, having
    missed that part of life where you are supposed to experement with
    relationships while they are still un-important enough to be able
    to recover from getting your fingers burnt. I have found that I
    can easily form good and very deep female friendships, from the other
    entries in this notes file, this seems to be a common thing.
    
    The time I spent there was quite painful but I had good times second
    to none, tried all sorts of things that you would never get to try
    in a state school, and learned a lot about myself, and a little
    about other people.

    If I have any children (and I can afford it) I will send them to
    this type of school, but only if its fully co-ed. Most of the Public
    schools in Britain are gradually going co-ed, and not a moment to
    soon.
                                                            
                                                                   C.J.B
        
    I

    Re. 3.4 I believe they send their children to boarding school for two
    possible (or both) of these reasons:
    
    1. They believe the child will get a better education.
    
    2. To get rid of them.
    
    Jeff
    

    re: .30, getting rid of kids....
    
    A friend of mine is assistant headmaster at a private school.  He
    was telling me once about a girl who came into his office crying,
    a week or so before Christmas vacation.  Her parents were divorced;
    her dad was in Texas someplace, her mother was going skiing or
    something in Colorado over Christmas, the school was shutting down
    for two weeks, and this girl HAD NO PLACE TO GO.  My friend reassured
    her that if necessary, she could come home and stay with his family
    for vacation; I guess eventually she found an aunt to go stay with
    over Christmas.  But, some parents do indeed dump their kids in
    boarding school to get rid of them.
    
    Steve
    

    I spent 1 year at Sacred Heart in Sharon MA (all boy boarding
    school) and on year Thompson Accadamy on Thompsons Island Boston. My
    parents sent me to Sacred Heart because I was getting into a lot
    of trouble in public schools, my teachers were always complaining about
    me. My parents never had much money and three other kids, but because
    they really beleived this would help me they sacrificed many things
    to send me. It was the first time in my life I got all A's & B's,
    but after the first year I pleaded with them not to send me back, they
    did'nt. Two years later the court suggested I go to Thompsons Acadamy.
    As soon as I was back in public schools I was getting in trouble again.
    I did'nt do very well at Thompsosns Acadamy, probably because because
    most of the kids there were there for the same reason I was, only much
    worse crimes. One of the kids even kept a gun in his room. I did'nt
    feel too good about going there, and my grades were worse than in
    public school.
    
    So I think they can be both good and bad. The difference between the
    two schools were like day and night, and both schools had kids who
    had rich parents and sent them there during school days and camp during
    the summer. You have to feel bad talking to these kids, they just feel
    like there nothing more than a pain in the neck to their parents.
    Just my $.02
    K.C.
     

    FROM WHAT I CAN GATHER OUT OF ALL THIS:
    A) MOST OF YALL ARE FROM ENGLAND
    B) MOST OF YALL DIDN'T LIKE THE EXPERIENCE (60/40)
    C) IF YOU WERE MEANT TO BE SHY YOU WILL BE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR 
       LIFE EXPERIENCE(I WENT TO PUBLIC SCHOOL ALL MY LIFE, I'M 37 AND STILL 
       SHY AROUND STRANGERS. MALE AND FEMALE ALIKE).
    D) I DON'T THINK I WOULD HAVE LIKED PRIVATE/BOARDING AND I WOULD NEVER
       SEND ONE OF MY KIDS TO EITHER. EVEN IF MY DAUGHTER IS A ROYAL PAIN
       AT TIMES. HOWEVER MY SON IS LOOKING TO GET AN APPOINTMENT TO WEST
       POINT. ANYBODY HAVE ANY INPUT ABOUT THAT PLACE? I'D APPRECIATE ANY
       INFORMATION.  
    
    
    

A.  I doubt it.

B.  So?

C.  So shyness is genetic?  One could have a good argument about that.  I
    don't believe it.

D.  West Point hasn't been a "single sex boarding school" for a long time,
    possibly never depending on your definition.  It certainly isn't what's
    being discussed in this note.

E.  Please unlock your shift key.

				Steve

    FROM WHAT I CAN GATHER OUT OF ALL THIS:
    A) MOST OF YALL ARE FROM ENGLAND

   no

    B) MOST OF YALL DIDN'T LIKE THE EXPERIENCE (60/40)
   
   no. I feel my experience in a one sex college empowered me

   C) IF YOU WERE MEANT TO BE SHY YOU WILL BE NO MATTER WHAT YOUR 
       LIFE EXPERIENCE(I WENT TO PUBLIC SCHOOL ALL MY LIFE, I'M 37 AND STILL 
       SHY AROUND STRANGERS. MALE AND FEMALE ALIKE).
     
  no, I was shy and am not now, I think that is a question of  maturity

 D) I DON'T THINK I WOULD HAVE LIKED PRIVATE/BOARDING AND I WOULD NEVER
       SEND ONE OF MY KIDS TO EITHER. EVEN IF MY DAUGHTER IS A ROYAL PAIN
       AT TIMES. HOWEVER MY SON IS LOOKING TO GET AN APPOINTMENT TO WEST
       POINT. ANYBODY HAVE ANY INPUT ABOUT THAT PLACE? I'D APPRECIATE ANY
       INFORMATION.  
    
    
    
I think that such a decision should beong to the child, not the parent...

and

E) PLEASE STOP SCREAMING AT US!

 thankyou

Bonnie

    
    Sorry to be critical; I don't mean to wind anybody up about this, but
    from what I can see in the notes in this topic, a "better" public
    school education certainly didn't extend to spelling and grammar.
    
    What's happened these days to the three "R's"?
    
    And what's all the big emphasis on sport at American and English (yes,
    I mean English, not British schools)? I can't help getting the
    impression that going through college in The States or a public school
    in England leaves one with little more than a degree in
    football/basketball/hockey and a picture in a yearbook. Can anyone
    clarify or justify?
    
    Cheers,
    
    	Les, South Queensferry, Scotland

    re .36
    
>    And what's all the big emphasis on sport at American and English (yes,
>    I mean English, not British schools)? I can't help getting the
>    impression that going through college in The States or a public school
>    in England leaves one with little more than a degree in
>    football/basketball/hockey and a picture in a yearbook. Can anyone
>    clarify or justify?
    
    Actually I think that publicity and visibility have a lot to do
    with that preception.  Other than the bad parts of the educational
    programs, the sports activities get all the press.  Sports programs 
    are intended mainly to help generate a little excitement/enthusiam 
    in the school, and as an outlet for emotional energies in the school.  
    For all the bashing they take, American schools still turn out some 
    *&^% good students.  If you go by what you see in the press, you'd
    think the U.S. of A. was fixing to fold any second.  The 
    self-examination/self-correction aspects of our society, however, 
    are one of the reasons America is and will be the place people
    die to get into ranther than die to get out of.
    
    fred();

    re.36
    Too close of attention to spelling and grammar in a conference of
    this nature could possibly squelch the input of a contributor that
    has something worthy of being said. That atmosphere would be stiff,
    boring and petty I think I'd much rather pay attention to content than
    gradeing the delivery.
    
    -j

    re: .38
    There should be a period after "petty", and "gradeing" is misspelled.
    Otherwise I agree with everything you said.  ;^)  - Vick

    re: .36, .38:
    
    As I said, I don't mean to be critical or wind people up, but I feel
    that in the context of this particular topic at least, there should be
    few excuses for either.
    
    I know what you're getting at in .38, believe me, but I do wonder at
    times how some people in "important" positions actually got through an
    interview.....what happened to Spellcheck anyway?
    
    I'm sorry, I won't comment any more on the subject, but it DOES get me
    wild. These are the fundamentals of the English language, and when
    mis-used in a business context, look very unprofessional. Maybe some
    people don't mind in a conference like this, but I'll bet there are
    countless others like me whose teeth are set on edge at the sight of
    such mis-use.
    
    Promise_not_to_mention_it_again......

    re: "teeth set on edge": at which time I hit <next note>
    
    ed

>    ... but I'll bet there are
>    countless others like me whose teeth are set on edge at the sight of
>    such mis-use.
    
      Count me in.

      Unfortunately, you picked the wrong target. This particular string
      is comparatively free of the grammatical and spelling horrors
      exhibited elsewhere. And contributors to Mennotes in general seem
      reasonably literate (with some very notable exceptions). But 
      standards of writing elsewhere in Notes (Soapbox being the
      obvious example) are pretty much non-existent. The argument
      that "if the message gets across, who cares about grammar"
      doesn't hold much water for me. Oftentimes, syntax and
      spelling are so tortured that no meaning does come across.
      Written communication has traditionally been held to higher
      standards than speech, if only because the writer has the leisure
      to think about what to say and how to say it. 

      But any attempt at criticism is usually met as yours was, with
      cries of "nitpicker" and "rathole". That's a pity, because it
      does seem to be an area where a little constructive criticism
      could usefully be applied, without contravening the Notes 
      "rules" against personal attacks. There is a Grammar conference,
      but it clearly doesn't have wide influence in the Noting community.
      Spell checkers aren't a lot of use for people who don't care about 
      the difference between "their" and "there".

      I, too, shudder to think of some contributors exhibiting the
      same writing "skills" in their business communications. One
      really wonders how some people got through high school and
      even college without ever learning the basics of sentence
      construction.

> One really wonders how some people got through high school and
> even college without ever learning the basics of sentence construction.

Actually, more often one wonders how one's colleagues have survived to their
present positions within DEC seemingly failing to realize that degrees are not
required and not held by many of their coworkers.  One recognizes that despite
some coworkers' lack of formal language skills, their status as human beings
with ideas and thoughts worthy of respect allows one to transcend one's own
preferences for the rules of standard written english, while attempting to
evaluate the content of those coworkers' notes.

Where's that note about degree bigots?

DougO

It's true that I shouldn't assume any particular educational level 
of those participating in Notes. But in picking up on my reference 
to college education, you seem to imply that writing skills need only 
be expected from those with degrees, and that a high school education 
wouldn't necessarily include any instruction on correct grammar.

What was that about degree bigotry?

...Robert

    re a whole bunch
    It is really very rude to ascribe some kind of weakness of character to
    the authors of replies with grammatical and/or spelling mistakes.
    That kind of insulting insensitivity is simply uncalled for.
    Furthermore, in addition to be rude and insensitive, those kinds of
    attitudes are often based on inaccurate premises.
    Some people CANNOT write well, some people CANNOT spell correctly.
    There are learning disabilities that are sometimes associated with
    these characteristics.

	Who said anything about weakness of character?
	I certainly didn't.

	...Robert

	<Who said anything about weakness of character?>

    
    I can't imagine any reasonable person considering that statement
    exculpatory.
    
    In the event that you get your jollies picking nits, perhaps you would
    have preferred the phrase 'weakness of character' to have been in
    quotes?
    
    
    

>But in picking up on my reference 
to college education, you seem to imply that writing skills need only 
be expected from those with degrees, and that a high school education 
wouldn't necessarily include any instruction on correct grammar.

nonsense.  my note did not draw any explicit correspondence between
degrees and language skills.  My first sentence made the point that
not all DEc people have degrees.  My second sentence discussed the
worth of those who lack formal writing skills.  Separate sentences,
separate points.  In your backpeddling, you seem to agree that there
is no need to cast aspersions at any noter for lacking some skills.
I suggest you drop your counterattack excuses right there.

DougO

	>	<Who said anything about weakness of character?>

    
        >>    I can't imagine any reasonable person considering that statement
        >>    exculpatory.

    Well, here's one for you.  There was absolutely no implication
    of weakness of character or "weakness of character".

    Di

        
    
    

    re a whole bunch
    I think it is really very rude to criticize replies that contain
    grammatical and/or spelling mistakes.
    
    I think that kind of insulting insensitivity is simply uncalled for.
    Furthermore, in addition to being rude and insensitive, the implicit
    attitude on which that kind of criticism is often based is wrong.
    
    Some people CANNOT write well, some people CANNOT spell correctly.
    There are learning disabilities that are sometimes associated with
    these characteristics.
    
    				herb