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

One of my work colleagues said she wanted to send her kids to private school so her child didn’t have to mix with anyone rough. The most honest conversation I’ve ever had with anyone about why they chose private school for their child.

Having sent my kids to private and state, some of the conversations would be very ugly if parents were 100% truthful.

But did you have a lot of input with your kids? Did they have lots of books? Did you take them to museums? Did you help them with their homework etc.? That might have redressed the balance. Or maybe their sixth form education was very good, like my elder son’s which made up for the poor earlier years?

You may be unusual in that your children are naturally highly intelligent but I don’t think that if you took 100 children of the same abilities and put half of them in private/grammar school and half in the local comp the results would be the same.

I know exactly what you mean OP but “gaming” possibly wasn't the right word. I think some people don’t realise the contrast between what they think is “normal” - understanding what makes a nurturing educational environment, having the confidence that they and their children will fit in a thrive at the “better” schools and go on to have professional careers etc - and what is normal for families who don’t come from the same circumstances or circles. People who study medicine, where one is taught to understand the relationship between poverty, life chances and health/ mortality, are aware that their children are already at an advantage and maybe feel they want to hide their privilege in some way, possibly out of guilt because they understand that their children are not likely to experience many of the mental and physical health challenges brought about by poverty they see in their patients The people I know who are barristers and stock brokers are a lot more up front about their motivation and steer on “their children’s” choices. Eg my friend’s ex who is a barrister was very firm that their children would only be educated privately as he wanted him to be mixing with “the right type of families” ie he wanted the right social networks. At 11 years old, the dc had no idea of who the “right types” might be.
Some of the very touchy responses to your reasonable post kind of prove the point you are making.

not really

Surely it's natural for a parent to try to give the best circumstance for your children, not because they have no "higher natural ability",but because.. why wouldn't you?

It's not a social experiment, who cares if they could or could achieve in or out optimum circumstances, you do give them optimum circumstances because.. it's your job?

@5128gapthat makes sense

@MyCyanAntI would say that moving for catchments, tutoring exist outside of the umc though.

I suppose the difference in attitude from immigrant parents may be down to different ideas of what to be proud of.
For the parents who are open, their source of pride is how hard they work on their DCs behalf, their tenacity and drive to give their DC the best opportunity.
For those who hide it, their source of pride is the inate exceptionalism of their DC, who they want to portray as achieving highly through no effort on their part.

I’d guess the average parent will tell kids to do homework but not do much to help them with it

really?

Maybe ask private tutors and tutoring school how they can't keep up with the demand. Seems that a few families at least are more involved than you think?

Surely working class parents also look at schools available and think about the best fit? Or is this only something middle class people can do 🤣

The proportion who genuinely don’t care at all and give it no thought must be tiny.

I agree with you to an extent. In some ways those at either end of the spectrum exhibit more straightforward behaviour, either sending their child to the local school, perhaps in a more rural area where there is effectively no / little choice and at the other end, where parents have chosen a certain fee-paying route, prep and then public or independent school.

In the middle there is a continuum, starting with moving into catchment, getting baptised or attending Church for the sole aim of getting into a certain school, and ending with frankly fraudulent behaviour involving deception about home address / homes etc.

Occasionally something happens which shines a light on the behaviour of those who love to say they are relaxed and want their child to just attend the local school with everyone in the community while specifically buying 1-2 million homes in catchment of the best local school. Typically these are the parents who are deeply critical of their peers who send their children to fee paying schools. Some local authorities are changing catchments / admission arrangements to extend the opportunities of poor / disadvantaged children who often don’t have access to these very high-performing but non-selective schools, e.g. priority for pupil premium children. Even with demographic changes, some children are likely to be displaced. Reactions can be illuminating.

Are you saying that they're saying one thing "for effect" but actually doing something different? If so then yes you're probably right that they maximising the resource and connections to get their kids into the best schools, plus additional tuition 'push, push, push', when all the while they're acting all nonchalant and casual like they just don't care.

It’s not gaming. But it is offering an education that puts their DC at an advantage over other children. It’s why private school and grammars are so divisive. So to pretend it’s all down to DC ability is misguided, which I think is the point you make

Im from the same background as you, with similar opportunities now. My DC go to private school because it’s the best local option. I’m not gaming anything, but I am paying for an educational advantage… the fairness of which could be debated.

Because they want people to view their DCs achievements as being due to their inate intelligence. Its pretty obvious that someone like the OP who achieves with the most basic of input has higher natural ability than someone who can only achieve similar when they are placed in optimum circumstances, and recieve extra bought in support. They don't want to admit their DC are in the second category.

Most Brits dont encourage their kids to do well at school?

Do you have evidence to back this up?

I understand what you’re saying. It’s almost vulgar to say that you have a razor sharp ambition for your kids to do well to do academically and in life generally. It feels elitist, so it’s fluffed up.
I went to a comprehensive school in a bad area …where no one expected you to achieve. We send our son to private school. We’re not wealthy, the fees take up a big chunk of my salary …but I think it’s worth the sacrifice and will give him a good start in life. A better start than I had.
I don’t talk about it though as you get judged as being elitist, in society generally, even my own working class family are critical. So I get why they fluff it up!

it’s the child not the school is complete bollocks

I think most UK parents will just send their DC to the closest school
what make you think that? All I have seen is parents moving specifically to an area to be in the right catchment

so I think most is not really realistic. And good for them, if your kids education and future is not one of the priorities to pick where you live, it's a bit sad. What else is important?

But gaming education is not really accurate either.

Why not be open about it though?

I live near some of the London grammars and find immigrant parents are far more open about trying to get a place, what they do etc.

There is a lot of truth in what you say but there are exceptions out there too of which we are one. Both sector employees and with 4 kids there was no hope of sending them all private/public school. They all went to the local comp which was even in special measures for a few years and all succeeded academically - think medic, Oxbridge PhD, Russell Group 1st class honours type thing. We never paid a penny for a tutor either. You need to have faith in your children but believe it or not most state school pupils come out fine in the end. A lot of our social circle sent their kids to independents and would justify it by saying that their kids were “special” in some way and wouldn’t cope at a state school for some reason. Basically they were in it for the social benefits and so their kids didn’t have to mix with ordinary kids.

So half come from comprehensive schools so won't be shocked to come across someone who grew up on a council estate. I know what OP means because DH went to a sink comprehensive and now works in a very competitive field but I don't think anyone is very aware of his schooling. Most people are too busy thinking about themselves.

Having educated my children entirely in the private sector, I have never come across a single parent who made the statements you reference. Most people are entirely clear that they have made choices to ensure their children have the best education. They do make choices within the private sector, that the children contribute to, but I don’t think there is any suggestion that an under performing state school was ever on the list of options ?

It is definitely the child not the school. My parents never pushed me at all and even did my homework for me as a child. They sent me to good schools in the neighbourhood but not private (they were tempted too, but didn’t want me to feel pressure!)

now I’m doing a PhD at a RG university. I’m driven by an internalised pressure and I’ve done well enough I think. I’m also a working member of a well known society as a volunteer and I’m genuinely quite outgoing and well rounded (as in, I’ve got hobbies and other pursuits and I was balanced academically at school).

however I’ve got crippling anxiety from a need to succeed and imposter syndrome. And I’m a people pleaser (and an absolute doormat). So if I’d been pressured I think I would have exploded :(

I don’t think they realise what they’re doing, I don’t think they realise what advantages they have and I don’t think they realise what reality is for others.

Having said that, I don’t have children, but I’m fairly sure that if I did, they’d be my first priority and I’d have the sharp elbows of most other parents. That’s why we need a national and fair system that everyone trusts will do the best for their child. And the commitment by the taxpayers and the government to pay to keep it that way.

OTOH I know several generations of different families who have been to state schools, in different areas in England. All those that have done well have done well because their parents valued education, whatever their financial, working or cultural background. It comes down to the home environment, so schools have to be able to make good what doesn’t happen at home. That’s the way as a society we can have a decent and educated citizenship.

I’m also against the massive competitive aspect of most schools, which tells children that they only do well if somebody else doesn’t do well. The research shows that cooperative and group learning is learning that sticks and benefits children but teachers don’t seem to know that and government policy ignores it.

Sorry I don’t think that really answers your question OP.

Yup, there are many known comps that are in the richest parts of the country that move very differently. That’s why you have some parents who are willing to buy a flat over a house just to be able to afford to live in those catchment areas.

People can be very misleading about how they talk about comprehensive schools. They also love to downplay how much rich people care about school with the stat that most go to comprehensive schools, as though they are going to the same ones as the rest of us lol.