How did Diana do in school?

[royalanthropologist]

To me a university degree merely tells us that a person is disciplined and organized enough to attend classes and complete exams. It tells us very little about their ultimate achievements in life. At post-grad, we be begin to note the industry experts and academicians. As Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg have shown us, a degree can be overrated. I am convinced that Diana was not unintelligent. She may not have had the discipline or application, but the brain was definitely working. For example in the Panorama Interview, she remembered her words very well and delivered them with the polish of an accomplished actress. A stupid person would have faltered.

[TLLK]

Interesting, TLLK, if a little unfair to Prince Philip. Although this list concentrates of course on educational achievements, degrees and so on, wouldn't Philip have sat any exams in the course of his naval career, or indeed have had to pass one in the late 1930's to actually enter the Royal Navy?

I have to say it's a rather underwhelming list of achievements compared to other royal Houses. I think the BRF were late starters in taking education seriously

Yes I agree on all accounts. It is a shame that there is little acknowledgement of his Naval training. Regarding the BRF and their education there does appear to be a gap between them and the other royal houses. Of QEII's peers I believe that all of them have a university degree. (I was surprised that Carl Gustav has one considering his learning disabilities.)  Among Charles' equals, I believe that all of the heirs have them as well.

[sandy]

^ I don't think either of Diana's sisters or her parents went to university either. Of course, in Frances's day few women did, and because there was money in the Roche family she didn't have to work.

However, poor old Johnny Spencer wasn't overly intellectual either, though apparently very likeable. His father, with whom he didn't get on, put him in the army. He later farmed. So, apart from her younger brother, Diana wasn't raised in a family where it was taken for granted that you went on to university after school. Both Jane and Sarah apparently worked on the editorial staff of a Society magazine though, so I suppose they had careers of sorts.

Frances was quite young when she married. She was encouraged to marry well.
Double post auto-merged: March 14, 2017, 01:31:52 PM

^^^As far as I can tell not one person has said that a person with a university degree is superior. However one of the many reasons why students are encouraged to graduate from high school and consider post-secondary school education is that most employers require at least a high school diploma. In today's economy often times an associate's degree or a bachelor's degree is now necessary. Those who do not graduate from high school are limited when it comes to job prospects.

I've never understood people who claim the trades are better or that an education is a waste of time. Because, without a BA/BSc you wouldn't find entry level work or internships and will be left with minimum wage jobs that honestly do not pay well. Now with the trades unless you own a business you won't really live that comfortably and working conditions are hard. Plus most factory jobs and mechanical work is being taken over by machinery, so that's not going to be viable in the next 5-10 years. A degree opens doors, now I'm willing to openly state gender studies isn't valuable nor are most of the humanities but some are definitely more worthwhile than others and the importance of post secondary education should be emphasised.

Speaking of Kate she went to university to socialize, that's all.

In today's day and age it is not uncommon anymore for people  to get college degrees. I agree that Kate used it to socialize primarily, she chose a major in art history not physics or math.

That said, people learning a trade can make a lot of money. But for some that does not eliminate the possibility of them getting a college degree as well.

[TLLK]

To me a university degree merely tells us that a person is disciplined and organized enough to attend classes and complete exams

Apologies for going off topic. My father had a decades long career in Human Resources and when he screened potential candidates he took this into consideration as well. He also would inquire about their other activities while in college. Did they have a part time job? Did they belong to a sports team, Greek organization, club, student government etc...anything that demonstrated that they could "multi-task." Sometimes he did not select the applicant with the highest GPA if all they had done was go to class but had not participated in any other activity.

[sandy]

It all depends. Each case is different. Kate did not have to go on job interviews since she did not use her degree. She got sporadic part time work with her parents and at Jigsaw where the proprietor said she had very flexible hours and her co-workers confirmed this.

[TLLK]

Kate did not have to go on job interviews since she did not use her degree.

From what I have read she did interview with various galleries in London but positions in that field are not easy to come by. Also a few years after graduation the world wide economic down turn affected this industry like many others.

[sandy]

There is no evidence of this. If she had wanted a gallery job I believe doors would have been kicked open for her to join. Camilla's daughter got gallery job. I don't think she even tried. She was not working for 18 months until there were rumors the Queen asked what Kate "did". Then she got the job in Jigsaw with very flexible hours, I recall she got a compassionate leave when she and William broke up and never went back after she got back together with him. There were rumors that she was going to start a baby clothing on but nothing came of that. I think it was smoke and mirrors. As William's girlfriend if she had really wanted a gallery job she would have gotten one. Easily. She was riding on excuses for years. Kate's parents despite any economic downturn appeared to have enough money to support their daughter until she got the ring. She could not live on money from those part time jobs.

[TLLK]

On this we'll have to agree to disagree @sandy.

To steer us back on topic I was thinking about Diana post-finishing school. She had her odd jobs with housecleaning, baby-sitting, and as a part-time helper at Young England nursery school. The school continues to exist. Young England Kindergarten - Home

If she had not wanted to marry at a young age, where could she have been employed full time?

[SophieChloe]

Diana did not start off clever, she was very innocent and naive, but man she trounced the lot of them - because IMO it came from her kind heart. 

Never to be seen again.  Sadly. 

Now we have a fake and her hubby who are grabbing stuff like there is no tomorrow.

[amabel]

To me a university degree merely tells us that a person is disciplined and organized enough to attend classes and complete exams. It tells us very little about their ultimate achievements in life. At post-grad, we be begin to note the industry experts and academicians. As Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg have shown us, a degree can be overrated. I am convinced that Diana was not unintelligent. She may not have had the discipline or application, but the brain was definitely working. For example in the Panorama Interview, she remembered her words very well and delivered them with the polish of an accomplished actress. A stupid person would have faltered.

She can memorise speeches, she probably had as many retakes as were necessary. I don't say she was stupid but I don't know if she was very intelligent either.

[TLLK]

Diana did not start off clever,

I believe it was Mr. Edwards the well known royals photographer who pointed out that Diana was very clever in his opinion. When he was trying to take photos of Diana and Charles fishing at the River Dee, he observed she pulled out her compact mirror to track his movements and to avoid him photographing her face.
Double post auto-merged: March 15, 2017, 10:54:10 PM

https://books.google.com/books?id=5pPyJZ-ANd4C&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157&dq=charles+and+diana+fishing+at+dee&source=bl&ots=ri59wcUUOo&sig=7jxGI4TPunA11-PBxlFL4ZtNwEM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij2t3izNnSAhXJiVQKHSAvAGgQ6AEITDAN#v=onepage&q=charles%20and%20diana%20fishing%20at%20dee&f=false
Double post auto-merged: March 15, 2017, 10:54:50 PM

Here is an excerpt from Andrew Mortona's book describing the day.

[royalanthropologist]

Interesting interaction with photographer. Just goes to show you that even at a relatively young age, Diana was no naive amateur when it came to dealing with the press. A person who is not clever could not have achieved and done what Diana did.

[amabel]

Interesting interaction with photographer. Just goes to show you that even at a relatively young age, Diana was no naive amateur when it came to dealing with the press. A person who is not clever could not have achieved and done what Diana did.

quick witted ins't necessarily clever. Diana didn't have te discipline nor IMO the mental furniture to study anything in depth...

[sandy]

If Diana were not intelligent, she would have fumbled all the years she was in the royal family. She was a smart young woman and in many ways smarter than Charles. I think she had the discipline to succeed at her role and she did not just walk up to a microphone with no preparation. She got public speaking lessons and realized unlike William that her speech could use improvement.

[amabel]

Public speaking is not an indicator of intelligence... and in any case Diana's public speaking was never considered very good...

[TLLK]

If Diana were not intelligent, she would have fumbled all the years she was in the royal family. She was a smart young woman and in many ways smarter than Charles. I think she had the discipline to succeed at her role and she did not just walk up to a microphone with no preparation. She got public speaking lessons and realized unlike William that her speech could use improvement.

Both mother and sons public speaking performances have evolved over time.  IMO William and Harry have greatly improved over the past few years as they've delivered more public addresses.

[amabel]

Not that its any indication of her intelligecnce or lack of it, I don't think she was ever considered to have improved beyond a certain point. She gota bit more confident, but she always sounded "over produced" in her speeches.  however the content certainly improved as she got more into her work and learned more about issues.

[sandy]

The point is not just about public speaking. Diana was willing to learn and improve her work skills as a royal and did so. I don't see the same willing to learn in her sons. I don't think she was overproduced. Her eldest son keeps using er ums and ahs in his speeches. I guess he does not think he needs improvement.
Double post auto-merged: March 17, 2017, 02:40:05 AM

If Diana were not intelligent, she would have fumbled all the years she was in the royal family. She was a smart young woman and in many ways smarter than Charles. I think she had the discipline to succeed at her role and she did not just walk up to a microphone with no preparation. She got public speaking lessons and realized unlike William that her speech could use improvement.

Both mother and sons public speaking performances have evolved over time.  IMO William and Harry have greatly improved over the past few years as they've delivered more public addresses.

I think Harry seems more confident in his speeches. William still is awkward and admitted he did not prepare for some of his appearances.

[TLLK]

Her eldest son keeps using er ums and ahs in his speeches[/quote

It is funny how we all can perceive things. I was just watching some old videos of Diana, William, Harry, Charles and QEII today.  When I listen and watch William give a speech, I see and hear Diana (with a lower voice.) Their facial expressions, pauses, pronunciation and body language are very similar. When I hear and see Harry he's a bit more like his grandmother QEII IMO. Though he tends to grip the podium and she doesn't. I find that QEII's and Harry's speech patterns are similar. '


Oh well...my favorite BRF speakers are Andrew and especially Edward. You can see how Edward has put his drama training to use when he speaks.

[Curryong]

^ Gosh, I can't see the similarities in Harry and the Queen when public speaking at all. The Queen reads her speeches from notes and glances down at them on every few words. She's a wonderful Queen but a very poor orator, with not much emotion in her voice when she speaks, IMO. Charles is a much more confident and interesting public speaker than his mother I believe.

I think Harry's had professional training in the last few years. He used to display obvious signs of nervousness when speaking publicly but has improved tremendously over the last couple of years. He memorises some of his speeches, which the Queen never does, and on several occasions has had a mike in hand and walked around the stage talking to the audience.

I have never seen the Queen do that, nor for that matter William or Kate. Both the Cambridges tend to recite speeches rather woodenly as if by rote, and um and er, though Kate has certainly improved since the days when she used to flick her hair around during a speech.

[TLLK]

^ Gosh, I can't see the similarities in Harry and the Queen when public speaking at all.

There is something in the cadence and rhythm to their speaking that I find similar. Don't know any other way to describe it.

I agree that Charles' style is different from his sons.

I have this theory that Charles and Anne have pronunciation and speaking style that is distinctly different from their younger siblings Andrew and Edward. IMO television has influenced the younger ones more.

[sandy]

IF you see the Matt Lauer interview from 2007 and other interviews later with the boys. Harry speaks more confidently and clearer. William seems to swallow his words. Charles studied theatre and performed in plays at his University so he got speech practice and lessons back then.

[amabel]

^ Gosh, I can't see the similarities in Harry and the Queen when public speaking at all. The Queen reads her speeches from notes and glances down at them on every few words. She's a wonderful Queen but a very poor orator, with not much emotion in her voice when she speaks, IMO. Charles is a much more confident and interesting public speaker than his mother I believe.

I . He memorises some of his speeches, which the Queen never does, and on several occasions has had a mike in hand and walked around the stage talking to the audience.

I

NO I don't think the queen's a great speaker either, considering her experience.. it isn't IMO a sign of intelligence.. its a knack that can be improved by training.  Diana didn't have the knack, though she did improve with training and practice.
but the topic here is how well she idd at school and she didn't do well at school.  I am not sure, really if it was due to a mild leanring disability, or if it was due to a lack of willingness to work, or simply that she wasn't all htat clever and didn't learn much and then got more and more reluctant to try.  Or I think most likely she wasn't stupid but she wasn't highly intelligent either, and she was during her teens unhappy with her family, and coped by focussing narrowly on certain things.. (which  I think was a pattern in hr later life) and because of that she didn't do well at school.  Perhaps with counselling at the time, she would have learned more and then not felt "thick as a plank" and been willing to study and learn when she became Princess of W.  I think that her refusal  to read much when she was "learning the job" as Princess, was due to a mixture of embarrassment that she didn't know a lot and feared having her ignorance exposed, and perhaps a bit of arrogance as she realised that she was naturally good at chating to people and felt that she didn't have to do any more to win the public's affection..

[sandy]

Diana was a natural in meeting and greeting people on appearances. I don't consider Charles intelligent and he did not have the greatest grades. Diana used the term "thick as a plank" to a little girl trying to put her at ease. She did not mean she REALLY was. That should not be held against her considering the way she used the term. Diana was not "ignorant" nor "arrogant." People catch on when public figures are "arrogant." Diana was not "arrogant" nor ever had that charge leveled against her.

[amabel]

Diana was a natural in meeting and greeting people on appearances. I don't consider Charles intelligent and he did not have the greatest grades. Diana used the term "thick as a plank" to a little girl trying to put her at ease. She did not mean she REALLY was. That should not be held against her considering the way she used the term. Diana was not "ignorant" nor "arrogant." People catch on when public figures are "arrogant." Diana was not "arrogant" nor ever had that charge leveled against her.

well if you don't think Charles is intelligent, I don't see how you can think Diana was, when she didn't even pass the basis school exams.
and yes people did think that Diana was arrogant.  They might not have literally used that word but many people thought that she had come to think of herself as more speicail than the rest of the RF because she was popular.