Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

484 replies

MyCyanAnt · 25/07/2026 07:51

I can’t be the only one who has noticed this. I went to genuinely average comprehensive schools and had parents who just dgaf like most in UK. I went to medical school where it seemed like this upbringing put you in a small minority, now an ultra high earner from own business but still do part time work as a GP. DC are 12 and 14.

Whenever the topic of education comes up with other doctors/professionals they will say stuff like it’s the child not the school who determines the outcome, we’re not pushing DC, we’re letting DC pick their school etc

However when it comes down to it none of them ever put their money where their mouth is. It won’t always be Eton but it will almost always be either a private, grammar or high performing comp in expensive catchment area instead of a genuinely average comp.

It’s a similar story with paying for tutors and other parents DC being interested in prestigious but completely unrelated careers e.g. Doctor or investment banking who have obviously been guided by parents.

I do the same but I feel like I’m an outlier in that I don’t lie about it, I’m obviously paying/gaming things so DC are much more likely to get a top job. I don’t see what’s wrong with admitting it yet it’s such a sensitive subject with some.

OP posts:
TheKeatingFive · 28/07/2026 18:09

In what sense is it 'gaming'? They are exercising their rights to choose what school their children go to.

Being well to do, they have a lot of options and they're choosing the best of those. The system itself is a total mess though, perhaps that's where your anger should be directed?

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 17:52

The point is, grammar schools used to be everywhere. My old grammar is now just a state girls school. It is very popular with the Asian community, they prefer their girls to go to a single sex school. Not sure what their results are like, but it is oversubscribed, so I assume it is good.
25% of kids went to grammar. Therefore, I assume, 25% of schools/school places were for grammar schools. I would like to see this extended to 30% of schools. I bet loads of academies would jump at the opportunity.
Many of the grammars served inner city areas. They were stepping stones for social mobility. This is a point that is often overlooked.
Eton is actually building satellite colleges in deprived areas, in association with an academy. This is never talked about either. The colleges are only for clever deprived kids, not for middle class kids.
Who said private schools are terrible and shouldn't exist??

Phineyj · 28/07/2026 17:27

I think if the grammars have no/a not particularly restrictive distance criterion, coupled with good public transport, they attract students from a long way off and therefore the local high schools have close to the full ability range.

That the case in Tonbridge (Kent) anyway. The highly regarded boys' grammar there has an autism resource base, although a small one.

Badbadbunny · 28/07/2026 17:03

LilOleMe2 · 28/07/2026 08:13

You cannot by definition have comprehensive schools alongside grammar schools. That is the big problem.
Also you seem fo regard SEN children as one homogeneous blob. Some of them will be grammar school material so how does that work in your grand plan?

Of course you can. Our nearest city has a mix of two grammars alongside 2 comps which were rated as outstanding and have excellent results in their GCSE/A levels. There are also 2 more comps one was rated as satisfactory and the other as needing improvement (or similar wording).

Badbadbunny · 28/07/2026 17:00

Fmgg · 28/07/2026 07:27

Grammars are the solution. Great at helping bright kids reach their full potential

Agreed. They should never have been scrapped. Yes, the entry system was flawed, but things could have been changed to improve the entry system without actually scrapping grammars. It was all politically driven and was a massive mistake.

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 15:13

Obviously, the clever SEN kids would go to grammar. Though there were no SEN kids at my grammar. Or they would be in a high stream at comp.
Many autistic kids are highly intelligent. They often need time out in a quiet area.
Being gifted and talented is a form of SEN that no-one ever talks about. Those kids would be in grammar.
Having taught many SEN kids who have been failed by the present education system , i know what I'm talking about.

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 15:06

LilOleMe2 · 28/07/2026 08:13

You cannot by definition have comprehensive schools alongside grammar schools. That is the big problem.
Also you seem fo regard SEN children as one homogeneous blob. Some of them will be grammar school material so how does that work in your grand plan?

We had a comprehensive school next door to our grammar school. So much for that theory.

Rugby has comprehensive, grammar and private schools. They exist happily alongside each other.

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 13:47

lljkk · 28/07/2026 08:05

ps: I can never view grammars as anything but elitist horrors. Sorting kids at age 10-11 is horrible.

There's a little thing called SATs. If you think that isn't sorting kids aged 10-11, dream on.

Kids are sorted with phonics tests, SATs, more SAts, and coming soon - thanks to Bridget, they will be sorted again in year 8, with reading tests.
Kids are well aware of which ones are falling behind, which ones are clever, which ones keep failing. Parents get neurotic about it. Don't you read mumsnet?

Once the kids are 'sorted' not a lot happens. They are shoved into lower sets at secondary. They are entered onto progress charts. But very little intervention. They failed their KS2 sats, therefore, not much is expected of them.

Bridget has announced reading tests in year 8. She hasn't said why. She hasn't said what will be done with the results. She hasn't said what intervention will take place. But hey ho. Tell me that's not sorting kids in year 8. I'm guessing the poor readers will just tick a box saying, poor academic progress expected. Sorted!

MyDarlingRose · 28/07/2026 09:27

Well I agree it’s the child not the school. You think they’re gaming the system and not admitting it… they think they’re behaving completely normally (which they are).

You, much like my sister, both became GPs with a comp education. I have 3 degrees and came from a working class comp background. Of course they’ll choose a good comp vs a shit comp because 1) they can and 2) it’s not the education that’s a problem at those schools it’s the other kids.

EllieQ · 28/07/2026 08:42

Owninterpreter · 27/07/2026 12:15

Google said about 40% of parents first choice school is thier closest school. Not sure how verifiable that is - seems to been reported in the press around 2018/19. But if it were true is seems a lot of people are chosing on things other than distance. Especially if you take into account a lot of peoples closest school is the 'best school' because some parents move for it so it wasnt reallly thier closest school until then. its looking like a majority of parents are actively choosing schools not just on 'its close"

That’s really interesting, and I wonder how much it varies by area?

My local council publishes a spreadsheet of school application data in an anonymised format, so for each application you see the catchment area they live in, the schools they applied to in priority order, and the school they were awarded.

I had a look at it last year when I was trying to work out if my DD would get into our preferred school. It was interesting as I could see that applications from parents living in the catchment area of the ‘best’ school in the city usually had that school as their first choice, and if not it was often the Catholic school as the first choice instead. I agree that some of these parents would have moved into the catchment area deliberately for the school, so although it looks as though they’re picking their closest school, they had moved for it.

However, the applications from parents living in the catchment area of the ‘worst’ schools had more first choices that were out of catchment. I can’t remember the exact percentages though.

To be transparent, we live near a catchment area boundary (about 50m away) and I sent DD to the primary school in the neighbouring catchment area rather than my catchment primary because it had a better reputation and was also a feeder school for the best secondary school, which she got into. So I did ‘game the system’. However, I’m lucky enough to live in a city where even the ‘worst’ schools are still pretty decent, so it wouldn’t have been the end of the world if she hadn’t got in to our preferred schools.

LilOleMe2 · 28/07/2026 08:13

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 07:51

I don't understand why they are politically toxic. (I know they are, with some sectors of society). I would imagine that maybe 50% of society would like to see the return of grammars. Many comprehensives have A band and B band streaming in order to provide for the academic and less academic kids.

My grammar was a step towards social mobility. There were about 600 pupils, much better than huge comprehensive schools. The students came from a variety of backgrounds, some from inner city areas, some from suburbia. None from upper middle class areas. A few parents were wealthy - self employed businessmen. A lot of parents worked in factories. Some parents were teachers. No doctors worth £2 million quid! Maybe they were all gaming the system way back then.

With the rise of SEN children, I would argue that there is a place for the expansion of grammar schools. In my time, 25% of kids went to grammar. It must be a much smaller percentage now. I would like to increase this to 30%. Comprehensives could then teach the academic kids and have a whole stream for SEN kids. SEN parents are always complaining about the lack of help and engagement from schools. SEN kids make up 30% of pupils in my area, most schools have autism units but there is still not enough support.

I would not push the comprehensive kids to take umpteen GCSEs. It is too much for many students. I would retain the core subjects. Maybe the range of vocational subjects needs to be extended. Burnham is talking about it. Students are actually supposed to enjoy school. It should be tailored to their talents and abilities. Although this thread is about middle class parents gaming the system, no-one seems to think that the system should serve the 'other' kids too.
However, I will never be education secretary, therefore this will never happen.

You cannot by definition have comprehensive schools alongside grammar schools. That is the big problem.
Also you seem fo regard SEN children as one homogeneous blob. Some of them will be grammar school material so how does that work in your grand plan?

lljkk · 28/07/2026 08:05

ps: I can never view grammars as anything but elitist horrors. Sorting kids at age 10-11 is horrible.

lljkk · 28/07/2026 08:04

Surely working class parents also look at schools available and think about the best fit?

Yes but... sometimes "best fit" = closest.
"I want to keep them close" is what a lot of parents said to us, when we said we were sending our kids to "better" school in a town 6 miles away, and why the speaker wanted the school only 1 mile away for their kid.

Maybe "keep them close" really meant "I can't afford £700/year to pay for their bus fare to get them to the 6 miles away school"

My step-sister (lives in USA) moved heaven & Earth, started plotting before her son was 12yo, to get him into an Ivy League Uni. It's paid off in that he got there, graduated, got a good job, and has very minimal debts. Nephew makes about USA $85k, the same income as my beauty technician cousin and another cousin who is a welder, all of them are age 24. The welder's parents are the richest people (by far) in the 3 respective families. A lot of ways to set our kids up for financial security.

HarshbutTrue2 · 28/07/2026 07:51

Phineyj · 27/07/2026 21:24

Of course but it is politically toxic so won't happen.

I don't understand why they are politically toxic. (I know they are, with some sectors of society). I would imagine that maybe 50% of society would like to see the return of grammars. Many comprehensives have A band and B band streaming in order to provide for the academic and less academic kids.

My grammar was a step towards social mobility. There were about 600 pupils, much better than huge comprehensive schools. The students came from a variety of backgrounds, some from inner city areas, some from suburbia. None from upper middle class areas. A few parents were wealthy - self employed businessmen. A lot of parents worked in factories. Some parents were teachers. No doctors worth £2 million quid! Maybe they were all gaming the system way back then.

With the rise of SEN children, I would argue that there is a place for the expansion of grammar schools. In my time, 25% of kids went to grammar. It must be a much smaller percentage now. I would like to increase this to 30%. Comprehensives could then teach the academic kids and have a whole stream for SEN kids. SEN parents are always complaining about the lack of help and engagement from schools. SEN kids make up 30% of pupils in my area, most schools have autism units but there is still not enough support.

I would not push the comprehensive kids to take umpteen GCSEs. It is too much for many students. I would retain the core subjects. Maybe the range of vocational subjects needs to be extended. Burnham is talking about it. Students are actually supposed to enjoy school. It should be tailored to their talents and abilities. Although this thread is about middle class parents gaming the system, no-one seems to think that the system should serve the 'other' kids too.
However, I will never be education secretary, therefore this will never happen.

frozendaisy · 28/07/2026 07:34

Fmgg · 28/07/2026 07:27

Grammars are the solution. Great at helping bright kids reach their full potential

Although some teachers from grammar school will say that they have pupils who were tutored just to pass the 11+ but when it comes to natural intelligence they don’t really have it and it shows when they start school.

Fmgg · 28/07/2026 07:27

Grammars are the solution. Great at helping bright kids reach their full potential

Supersleepysheepy · 28/07/2026 07:23

Comtesse · 28/07/2026 00:25

And if grammar schools were still an engine for social mobility that would be one thing but as another way of cementing middle class privilege (for those too tight to spring for private school) it’s a dreadful idea…

Some people also don't believe that a private education is better than a state one, it isn't necessarily always about the money.

basketsmash · 28/07/2026 05:39

Too tight to pay for private school? They are 30k per year, the vast majority cannot afford it!

Comtesse · 28/07/2026 00:25

And if grammar schools were still an engine for social mobility that would be one thing but as another way of cementing middle class privilege (for those too tight to spring for private school) it’s a dreadful idea…

Phineyj · 27/07/2026 21:24

HarshbutTrue2 · 27/07/2026 20:08

Someone previously mentioned the lack of grammars in the UK.
From reading this thread i would imagine that there would be a lot of demand if they were reintroduced.

Of course but it is politically toxic so won't happen.

HarshbutTrue2 · 27/07/2026 20:08

Someone previously mentioned the lack of grammars in the UK.
From reading this thread i would imagine that there would be a lot of demand if they were reintroduced.

HarshbutTrue2 · 27/07/2026 19:59

Badbadbunny · 27/07/2026 10:58

There is nothing stopping anyone in this country being successful. I have gone from free school meals to a high earning City professional. And the comment that still sticks in my mind now, which was made by my first boss twenty six years ago, is that you get on with everyone. That’s been my key to success.

Likewise, I left a crap comp with literally not a single "pass". That was due to extreme/prolonged bullying throughout my years at the crap comp. I'd gone from a friendly/confident straight A pupil upon leaving primary school to a mere shadow aged 16, no friends, no qualifications, no future really.

I dusted myself down and got a crap basic admin job in a local small accountancy practice (father and son!!) under the YTS scheme! Close enough that I could walk to work as I couldn't afford bus fares etc. The dizzy heights of talking the post, making the teas/coffees and filing! There were a couple of older people working there (50+) who took me under their wing and without me realising it were bringing me out of myself, starting to build my confidence etc., even just by talking to me like normal human beings (such a difference after most human interactions during school being abuse and bullying!). They must have realised I'd had traumatic teenage years! They started "forcing" me to talk to other people, i.e. other staff, clients, suppliers, etc., in just simple ways at first, but it was all baby-steps to boost my confidence. I started to realise that lots of people were actually "normal" and nice, and that abuse and bullying wasn't normal in the way it had become normalised for me at school! Part of that was telling me how to be friendly and nice back to people and urging me to be friendly and to get on with everyone. I really took it on board. I went from being a timid "mouse" who tried to avoid people (unsurprisingly!) to being quite sociable, friendly, chatty, and my self confidence literally improved week by week!

At the end of the YTS period, the firm kept me on. Even the father/son owners started to "see" me, the opposite of when I started when they had no part in my recruitment as they'd left it to the senior receptionist to "deal with" the YTS recruitment firm to take on a YTS! To cut a long story short, I did O and A levels by a mix of self study and evening classes. Then I did accountancy exams and finally qualified as an chartered accountant. Not bad for someone who left school with no O levels!

Over the years I'd met loads of people, always been friendly with them. That led directly to two fundamental job changes where I got offered jobs that weren't even advertised to anyone else, as I was a "shoe in" just by knowing the manager/owner respectively. Neither I'd say were "friends" in the true sense, but they were people I knew, and had been "friendly" with at the time.

Same when I started my own business. At the start, I was advertising madly for new clients as I'd left work and needed an income! I noticed someone who I'd met years before through work had set up his own business, and I popped into his office one day when I was passing just to say "hi". I'd only spoken to him a couple of times, work related, but I'd been friendly and pleasant (as always!) and he'd been the same back to me. That led to him appointing me as his accountant, but more importantly, over the subsequent years, he recommended me to several of his friends/relatives/clients, and he/his recommendations ended up forming a huge portion of my client base - about a third!! All because I just happened to pop into his office one day as I'd met him previously. I'd never have had the confidence to walk into anyone else's office who I'd never met!

I got my office in the same way. I'd been looking for a small office close enough from home to walk, but anything decent was too expensive or got snapped up as soon as it hit the open market. I mentioned it to a random client, who knew someone who was closing his business, and made an introduction - I went along to see the guy, and we agreed to me taking over the office, buying his equipment, etc., he introduced me to the landlord who was happy to transfer the lease to me, all done and dusted within an hour! No estate agents, no open market competition etc - everyone happy! All because of a mutual business contact!

I think life is all about meeting people and making contacts. Whether work, social life, romantic partners, etc - you need to get "out there" to meet people, be friendly with him, get on with them, etc. You don't need to be immediate "best friends", just make contacts, talk to people. More importantly don't give them any reasons to dislike you, i.e. don't be nasty in any way. People won't forget if you've ignored them, been unpleasant to them, in any way, etc., and that may cut off a future benefit to you. Yes, lots of people you meet you'll never see again, but if and when you do come across someone again, they'll remember you if you were pleasant to them and more likely to "help" you out, however tenuous/brief your previous encounters were.

The old adage of "it's now what you know it's who you know" is very true! Doesn't matter what social class you are, where you live, your background, your education, your job, etc. You CAN improve your lot by getting out there, being friendly with everyone, etc., make contacts, etc. It may not guarantee huge success, but certainly improves your chances rather than staying in your own small circle, never trying anything new/different, never bothering to meet new people, etc.

That's a lovely story. Thanks for sharing.
However, it highlights why parents going to the shitty comp.
I think schools are much too large, as well as classes being too large. They are like exam factories and the students are just little pieces who are being processed. Smaller schools treat children as individuals.

Owninterpreter · 27/07/2026 12:15

Google said about 40% of parents first choice school is thier closest school. Not sure how verifiable that is - seems to been reported in the press around 2018/19. But if it were true is seems a lot of people are chosing on things other than distance. Especially if you take into account a lot of peoples closest school is the 'best school' because some parents move for it so it wasnt reallly thier closest school until then. its looking like a majority of parents are actively choosing schools not just on 'its close"

NorwichMom · 27/07/2026 12:11

There’s also the fact that some parents might feel up to the job of helping their dc themselves. I remember buying 11plus revision type books as was aware dd needed to know the format of the questions to have a chance. We sat down most days over the summer holidays and practiced.

when it was her GCSEs I went on the exam board websites and downloaded past papers and again sat down with her to help her/make sure she did stuff. “Marked” her papers against the marking criteria…..was science papers so easy to mark. It paid off. One of the six mark questions on a previous paper came up in her actual exam, exactly the same. She hadn’t had a clue the night before but said she could remember the answers perfectly.

There was lots of other smaller examples over the years. Buying various workbooks aligned to different key stages and subjects over the years. Encouraging stuff like the bbc bite size website.

so there are different ways of showing an interest in your kids education. I do feel sorry for the kids who don’t get even that level of support.

cantthinkofagoodusername2026 · 27/07/2026 11:47

MyCyanAnt · 25/07/2026 08:07

I think sometimes they don’t recognise it but more often it’s pure denial. As if it reflects badly on them or DC.

I think most UK parents will just send their DC to the closest school or let their kids truly decide which will normally be the one their friends go to. They might encourage them to do well at school with no real expectations or guidance. It’s just not a priority for most Brits, even those who are loving/good parents overall.

This doesn't mean it's not a priority for most Brits. IMO it's more likely that they can't afford private education or tutors. So if you are in that situation, you probably have little choice but to send your child to the nearest school, because catchment rules. They may also be unable to provide real guidance. My parents couldn't - not because they didn't want to or didn't care, but because neither of them finished high school, so how on earth would they be able to advise me on higher education options?