AIBU to think upper middle class professionals downplay how much they game education?

It depends what you believe the system to be.

Part of the narrative of our system is that we are a meritocracy where people in positions of wealth and power are there because of there hard work and intelligence. This is very much the story told by those who benefit most from the system

The loophole in that system is that parental wealth buys unearned privilege, in education and elsewhere.

Is part of this not because on medicine there can be 2 extremes.

I’d argue that if your parents dgaf they are at one end.

At the other end there would be medics who’s parents very much expected them to become doctors, were strongly pushed in this directions and frankly never really had a choice.

I went to a grammar school for 6th form and remember a friend who had got pretty much full marks in maths, further maths, physics and chemistry absolutely besides herself because she got a B in biology. All her parents could do was tell her that she could never be a doctor now and she’d let herself and her family down. She’s now a paediatrician in a London hospital.

But I can see why people who grew up with that level of pressure to go into medicine would think they weren’t pushing their children whilst still giving them a high level of educational privilege.

This is such a funny thread - a common-or-garden doctor, who has to work for a living, in a hierarchical structure, being shouted at by the managers, having to fill in forms, shaking in their shoes about a disciplinary hearing and being struck off by the GMC for using hurty words, and googling symptoms being a GP is referring to herself as 'upper middle class'. Priceless.

I think recognising unearned privilege takes away from your own achievements.

Many people often like to think they are well off or own their own home or whatever, due to their hard work and wise choices. Not because e.g. they were lucky to be born in a period where they experienced the most favourable ratio of earnings to house prices in history, or because their socio economic background by lottery of birth meant they ended up in high paying graduate jobs post university.

Most people will acknowledge of course that it's a unmeasurable combination of your background/privilege/lack of privilege, how hard you work, how clever you are, the times you live in, how determined you are and what your stress responses etc are that determine where you end up.

Some people have so much drive and capability that overcomes their background, and this is what people like to identify with. On the other hand there are thick numpties from upper middle class backgrounds who end up in jobs way above their capability level because they sound clever than they are due to their accent and know how to handle some situations with bullshit.

It's just mentally more comforting to put less emphasis on the unearned factors because it allows you to feel superior to those who have or achieve less (as they must be less hard working, less clever or arseholes).

And I think this inclination extends to the conversations about their children that you mention.

I think your own parents were unusually uninvolved in your education @MyCyanAnt. You should also try to do something about the chip on your shoulder too

The question in the OP isn't why do people do it. Its why they pretend they're not doing it.

Making your own choices doesn’t mean choosing from every experience available. They are talking about which courses and extracurricular activities the child might prefer.

I don’t see any of this as gaming any system. Gaming the system is leveraging loopholes in a system to your personal advantage.

Do you mean your friends are hypocrites instead?

Having money will always give benefits.

Whether that's private school, tutoring, paying for resources, a bigger house so children have own rooms to study etc.

Even things like exam appeals - you have to pay per paper. As I said to my dc, if we had to appeal every paper, we could afford to risk money on doing so; someone who doesn't have £40 (I think that's the minimum) might say to their child, that yes, they could see that they should have got another point and gone up a grade, but they don't have £40 to pay upfront - and they certainly can't risk losing £40. So they won't appeal.
Our dc's (comprehensive) school did have a pot for people in that position, but it was limited, obviously. But you could had the right to appeal if you could pay for it, so that immediately you can see how people with money can get two bites of the cherry.
I'm glad that the appeals system changed to reduce down the above, but it still will have the element of money talks.

Thing is, you can't take away that advantage totally. And, as someone who couldn't afford private school, I have no resentment on people who do choose to pay for it.

What I think is lacking now, is there is an attitude of, at best, apathy towards education. I'd say a lot of the times it tips into contempt. No longer is education seen as a way out of poverty, and something children should aspire to. I suspect removal of the grammar schools (and those that are left becoming very much sharp-elbowed middle class) has contributed to that attitude.

I remember talking to someone who ran a charity out in the Philippines for children. They'd bought new computers for the school, and someone asked that surely in such an area of poverty, a lot of drug use, crime etc wasn't it almost certain that someone would break in to steal them for money. No, there was such a respect for education and knowing that it could take the children out of the situation their parents (and the potential thieves) were in, that they wouldn't touch the school.
We've lost that respect for education.

Who are they who are doing this, @MyCyanAnt?

I bet you know zero such people. Hang on, I've read your responses. You're just making shit up.

A thread based on supposition. i.e. fuck all.

I think most people want their child to have the best education possible, its just many cant afford private or good catchment. I don't think this is an exclusive umc thing

They just don't want to brag too much, essentially they don't want to say "I didn't want to send my child to your childs crappy comprehensive" when realistically I think most parents would want to do what they've done if they could afford it

You’re right OP. And it’s not going to get better whilst private education exists, as even those who choose a comp will try to give their kids advantages if they can to bridge that gap.

My kids go to comprehensive schools but I will
admit it’s not the full story.

First of all, by virtue of having an Italian grandfather I am nominally Catholic, so they got to very good Catholic schools. Then if there’s a subject where they struggle we can get a tutor.

My DS has ADHD and is dyslexic. We could go for a private assessment which meant we got in before yr 5 with the assessment and could therefore pick a school- he likely wouldn’t have had the assessment early enough otherwise.

That also means I’ve had loads of time with SENCOs discussing him and have learnt the phrase cultural capital- all the things he does outside school that contribute hugely to his education.

Its not a level playing field by any means!

"Everybody lies."

I've reflected about this post and actually I think everyone I know who sent their children from age 4, did because they could and/or it was how they were educated or to consciously ensure their DC mixed with people like them. Also, having done state to 8, the indy gates were much easier and far less chippy - everyone was on the same page.

If the great grandad owned the land, the grandad was a stockbroker and the dad is a barrister, the child is destined for a similar journey. It extrapolates to blue collar or vocational jobs. For a little while, the grammar schools provided a route out of the mines, docks and factories. When they went, so did a little honesty.

It’s not a Game we’re in a middle class area with a top comp it’s regular conversation here… Grammar School catchments, scores, 11+ tutors.. then entrance exams for private schools etc.

To be honest you can ask most parents round here and everyone talks about it.

Considering your example, by the age of 10/11 parents and schools can make a huge difference so a previously academically more average child outperforms their naturally brighter but disadvantaged peer. That is why high quality graduate led early education and continued nurturing during the primary years is so important.

I think I see what you're saying OP, and I think I agree.

My situation was similar to yours - I went to a top university and have had a pretty respectable career. But my parents didn't care and it was sad and very hard having to organise all my achievements totally alone.

I think you have a small point that some parents are disengenuous, but if I may, I think what might be driving your frustration is personal sadness that your own parents weren't supportive.

It's ok to look critically at what our parents did. You don't need to tell them and hurt their feelings. But if their behaviour made your life harder compared with your peers, it's healthy to work though the resulting sadness and anger. It's justifiable and anyone would feel the same in your shoes.

Which is the best school though? My DC are/were in comprehensive education. Eldest DD has dyslexia so we didn't want to push the grammar school route for her. It turns out, in any case, that the kids taking the most antidepressants are the ones at our local grammar school due to the undue pressure placed on them. Would you really want that for your child? As it turns out, DD was in all the top sets at her comprehensive and got all 8s and 9s in her GCSEs and is now in a prestigious 6th form....so I think we made the right decision.
Also, my DB is a Dr and went to our local Catholic comprehensive. If a child is going to succeed they will succeed. I don't agree with elitism.

Yeah this is the norm, downplay.

Not really

I just don't think it's accurate to pretend it has to do with *upper middle class professionals *

Class in the UK is absolutely not bullshit. We are riddled with it. I'm no fan of the US but at least they don't deny everything they do is about money.

It's not gaming. It's giving your kids the best chance. We've done it with both our kids, just straight forward encouragement, applying for good schools, tutoring. It's not unusual.

In this country we seem to sometimes have a thing against striving (hangover from historic class system, know your place etc), so this is maybe why people downplay how much tutoring they do to get into grammar school etc.

People might also be fed up of little digs that imply you’re somehow hothousing them by taking an interest and that’s why they keep quiet about it

I sent my kids to a private school. Yes I am trying to give them the best start in life like we were given. It’s not “gaming the system” more that state education is parlous.

We can afford it and I really don’t care what others think.

I will never understand parents who hand important life decisions over to their children. There is nothing wrong with involving them in family decisions but to burden them with choices which could affect them throughout the rest of their lives is a bad idea. Parents should be there to nurture & guide children on a path which will prepare them for the responsibilities of adulthood. Allowing a free for all to make their own choices & decisions imo is simply lazy parenting which ultimately results in a lack of respect for rules & boundaries.