(I originally posted this on r/JacquelineWilson, but I thought people here would appreciate it too)
—
When Jacqueline Wilson was at her peak in the late 1990s and early 2000s, education was the word of the day. Labour had just returned to power as New Labour after many years of Thatcherism, Tony Blair was the Prime Minister and the political mood was very much surrounding education. The UK Government at that time introduced a new national curriculum, there were the Blunkett reforms, various different schemes relating to children's education introduced and lots of Government ministers and media keen to talk about the importance of children's education.
Whilst children's education is of course vitally important, I think over the years it's often come to be recognised that what politicians understand education to be about (and what is fed to the public by the media) is not necessarily the same thing as children becoming good, wholesome, well-rounded citizens who are safe and happy as they're growing up. There are two books in particular in which I feel Jacqueline Wilson made a conscious effort to explore this disparity: Vicky Angel and Love Lessons. Both of these novels feature secondary schools that in reality appear to have a wildly different internal atmosphere to what they're perceived to be within their local communities, in terms of the experiences the main character has within them. I'll take both of them in the order that they were published.
Vicky Angel (2000)
Vicky Angel takes place at a school called Downfield, which Jade tells us at the start is 'considered a bit of a dump'. The headteacher is called Mr Failsworth (I think Wilson decided on the name of the school and the headteacher using words like 'down' and 'fail' on purpose, to really hammer home how bad this school is commonly understood to be). At the beginning, the school is trying very hard to improve its reputation by adding lots of extra-curricular activities and after-school clubs (and arguing about whether or not to get involved with any is what starts the row between Jade and Vicky that ends in Vicky's fatal road accident and kicks off the plot in the first place). We don't really find out whether or not the school is at all successful at improving its image – Jade is understandably too caught up with trauma for the rest of the book to really think about it or tell us – but somehow I don't get the impression it really does. At any rate, a fatal road accident right outside the school gates is hardly going to help improve anything, even if the school can't be blamed for that. It just creates a negative association.
But the difference between showing and telling really demonstrate themselves here, because I honestly think this seems to be the best school in any Jacqueline Wilson novel. Firstly, there do not seem to be any instances of bullying anywhere, which is pretty much unheard of in Wilson's books or in schools generally (I suppose arguably the late Vicky could be seen as a bully, but even she doesn't seem that bad – it doesn't seem like anyone was afraid of her or that she consciously hurt anyone). Everyone largely seems to feel safe inside the doors.
And as tragic as this book is, it always gives me a cosy feeling that the entire faculty, both teachers and pupils, all rally around and support one another after the accident. The whole year group goes to the funeral together (I don't know if that's normal, but it's a nice touch and probably made Vicky's parents feel a bit better, as well as helping everyone to get closure). Jade in particular is treated exceptionally kindly by pretty much every member of staff. Mrs Cambridge, Miss Gilmore and Mr Lorrimer all go out of their way to help Jade – they all seem to have an instinct for when to try to get her mind off it, and when to just leave her alone to grieve. The other teachers don't take such an active role, but we hear that they're okay if she fails to hand her homework in and recognise the extenuating circumstances.
The pupils too are absolutely amazing. Sam's the most obvious one (and quite rightly so) but I'm always struck by how unbelievably kind Madeleine seems to be. Jade gets pretty nasty to her at times, but Maddy never takes it personally, continues to make an effort with her, shares her snacks with her, invites her out on weekend trips with her friends. Same with minor characters like Vicky's ex-boyfriend Ryan Harper, Jenny, and pretty much everyone else. I don't know how much was of their own volition and how much they were quietly encouraged to by teachers, but either way, it feels like this is a particularly kind and caring group of kids, kids who are always there for each other and understanding. It takes exceptional skill to foster this level of kindness consistently in children, especially angsty teenagers.
Sometimes it takes a tragic event like someone having been killed to show who's really on your side, and I think in this story Jade finds out that her school very much is, in spite of all appearances.
Love Lessons (2005)
Love Lessons takes place at a school called Wentworth, which like Vicky Angel's Downfield is also on a crusade to improve its public image. However, unlike Downfield, Wentworth seems to be doing a much better job at it. It's previously had a reputation for being quite rough – however, Miss Wilmott is the new headmistress, and she's determined to leave behind the old and radically improve things. She's young, eloquent, charismatic and really seems to have the enthusiasm and the energy to make a positive difference. Prue and Grace's mum is initially extremely reluctant to send her daughters there, and only considers it because there's no other school with vacancies – but she seems quite reassured by Miss Wilmott's presence. When Bernard regains his faculties a bit more and learns that the girls are at Wentworth, the mum quickly explains about the new headmistress who's doing such a great job dealing with all the problems.
Wentworth might be improving its public image extremely well, but it does not have the kind and understanding atmosphere of Downfield. On the contrary, it feels like a school that prides itself on not making exceptions for any child, no matter how vulnerable. Prue is in something of a similar position to Jade in terms of what's going on in her personal life; it must surely be on her notes that her father is seriously ill in hospital. But the teachers show very little compassion or understanding of the fact that she might not necessarily be at her best, being frequently told off and criticised for fairly minor things. Bullying is rife within this school, and very few teachers seem at all concerned about it (the one time an intervention is made, when Prue is fighting with Rita, both of them are immediately punished without anyone attempting to find out who started it – and in fact, Prue's actions were only in self-defence).
Miss Wilmott's 'reforms' mostly just seem to involve being far more strict with everyone. Attitudes like that of the unpleasant English teacher, Mrs Godfrey, are probably exactly the sort of thing the school is being praised for doing – there's probably been a memo somewhere that says 'pupils should say the name of the teacher they're speaking to after every sentence', because this supposedly commands respect. I think the clearest indication of this is with the PE teacher, Miss Peters. She's a teacher that's quite difficult to get the measure of, because initially she seems very kind to Prue and is one of the few teachers who makes an effort to talk to her. However, a second later she prevents Prue from getting changed in the toilets and when Prue's bullied about her (admittedly inappropriate) underwear she only comes down on Prue for it. But when you think about the abrupt switch here, I think the underlying problem is that Miss Wilmott's policies don't allow teachers like Miss Peters any agency to find a diplomatic way to handle a difficult situation. The initial kindness we see from Miss Peters is probably a closer reflection of her actual personality – but the trouble is, Miss Wilmott has introduced policies saying things like 'pupils must change for PE in the changing room unless there's a religious exemption' (and there are all sorts of reasons a child might feel uncomfortable taking their clothes off in front of their peers) and that enforcing correct uniform always takes priority over dealing with bullying. If that's the school rule, there's not really anything Miss Peters can do about it, even if she'd like to be there for the new girl. This also emphasises the importance of teachers being allowed to use their discretion in how to deal with pupils, rather than expecting them to stick to a rigid script all the time.
Miss Wilmott reminds me quite a lot of Katharine Birbalsingh, who commonly appears in the UK media and is frequently dubbed 'Britain's Strictest Headmistress'. Her school, the Michaela school in Wembley Park, London, is known for its unusually strict rules, which include the pupils being forbidden from talking to each other at all apart from at break and lunchtime. Jacqueline Wilson almost certainly didn't base Miss Wilmott on her because Birbalsingh wasn't a public figure at the time she wrote it, but there have been many headteachers who have had similar approaches, going off the public perception of the way education should be. And the important thing about this is, Miss Wilmott's approach and the way the teachers react to it is what creates the circumstances for someone like Keith Raxberry to be able to groom pupils (and I do not believe Prue's the only person he's groomed – I think Sarah stood out very much as someone who either had been groomed by him in the past or that he would go for next, and there are probably others). The first technique he uses to groom Prue and probably other pupils is that he has created a reputation for himself as being the school's resident nice teacher. It's very easy to be that, because none of the other teachers even come close. His encouragement to the kids to call him Rax, for instance – that perhaps wouldn't be so bad in some schools, but in a school that is so draconian and strict, it sets him apart from the other teachers significantly. It creates the impression of 'I'm on your side, don't tell anyone!' And from that point on, he can be the teacher kids confide in, and then get an impression of which kids don't have strong support networks at home and are easy to lure into a trap. If the other teachers weren't like this, Raxberry would have been caught out a lot earlier. Take Mrs Godfrey, for example – she probably would have been quite close to Prue if she'd only been nice, because Prue was good at her subject. So Prue would at some point have mentioned to her that she goes to Mr Raxberry's house to look after his kids (remember, Prue doesn't know this is wrong – for all she knows, the kids hang out with the teachers outside school all the time). And then Mrs Godfrey could have said, 'Hold on, Prue, he's not supposed to invite you to his house. I think I might have to have a word with the headmistress about this.' And then it would have all come out, far earlier.
The end of Love Lessons is very controversial – but I like it, because I think it's a commentary on that kind of education. Prue is victim-blamed, disputes she's had about irrelevant things are brought up, and she's quietly shunted out of the school, whilst her abuser gets off scot-free and is allowed to continue teaching there. The really, really sinister thing about this is the fact that if you look at it from Miss Wilmott's perspective, you can see her logic and it makes complete sense because of what her priorities are. She is there to improve the school's image. The governors chose to employ her, as opposed to a different head, precisely because this is what she would be good at. And the course of action she elects to take with Prue achieves just that. She knows that if it gets out that there's a child molester on the staff that it won't look good for the reforms she's trying to make, and she's correct in that, it would make the school look awful. Just as she has done at every other point in the book, she prioritises that over the safety and comfort of her pupils, and kicks out any pupil she perceives as a threat to it. She'll get great exam results probably, and be heralded for saving a failing school. But at what cost?
There are a lot of headteachers like this, and I really hope that in real life they would not take their priority of maintaining their school's reputation quite as far as this (although I really don't want to say categorically that's the case, there are so many awful real-life instances where kids have been let down badly by people who were meant to protect them). But even if a headteacher would draw the line at turning a blind eye to grooming and inappropriate relationships, it still creates the circumstances in which they could happen. It still creates an atmosphere in school where no child would feel safe confiding in a teacher about something they're going through, for fear of getting into trouble themselves. That creates a situation that makes children profoundly unsafe, even if they wouldn't in reality be blamed for it.
—
It's absolutely fascinating to think how different Vicky Angel and Love Lessons would be if the schools in them were switched, isn't it? And I think it really says something about what we believe should constitute a 'good school'. It doesn't matter if you have great exam results and well-behaved kids if the kids are potentially going through awful things and you're doing nothing at all to support them. Likewise, no matter what flaws you have as a school, it goes an awfully long way if you've got a kind support network and a community spirit where everyone is there for each other, like in Vicky Angel.
by georgemillman