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

And that has a knock on effect on teaching and learning. Dd got hit round the head with a chair in a class in year 8 and the teacher didn’t notice so dread to think what chaos that classroom must have been in.

Her English teacher in year 10 sat down on the floor and cried due to kids throwing stuff at her and then walked out the class. After a bit someone went to the office to tell someone and turns out the teacher had walked off the premises. She didn’t come back and they didn’t have an English teacher for the next six months, just supply teachers.

agree with you. I went to a bang avg comp. have done well. would have done better if I'd been to a better place. but strongly believe a fair society is to all of our benefit and is one in which all state schools offer the best opportunities such that the private sector is no longer required. I live in another European country now, where things are fairer for my kids, and for society in general. to be charitable, perhaps those who are pretending feel guilty and would like things to be otherwise. to be uncharitable, maybe they're a bunch of grasping, aspirational, middle class cunts who are insulating their kids as they themselves were. console yourself with the thought that they squirm if they have to interact with people outside their world.

The first paragraph of your post and the weirdly irrelevant question just make it sound like you wanted to tell everyone you're an "ultra high earner" despite your bog standard education. Why even mention it.

Anyway, well done you.

My dc are at a private school. I send them because it’s a lovely environment and they genuinely enjoy going every day. I know we are very lucky to be able to choose this.
I obviously hope they fulfill their potential regarding exams but top universities and top high paying jobs are not the ultimate goal. They are currently interested in careers in the arts.
I want happy, engaged kids with lots of choices . That’s it. No gaming going on!

People will prefer to deal with people, always. You think really posh banks dealing with extremely wealthy clients just send emails and updates and let their clients use the big standard bank cards? Guess again. Private banking is ALL about the relationship, as is much of accounting, and really excellent medical care and …

My belief is that the luxury end of goods and services will continue to be the personal touch, just backed up with AI knowledge.

And that fwiw is what you get more of in private education as well - better relationships lead to better learning and there is plenty of research that shows this.

It's a mentality thing. We are from India. We came here. We are in our late 50s. What our school's had was worse than what the comprehensives have in the uk. We still did well. It's just a mindset thing.

We definitely don't just "dgaf" and actively are involved in our DC's education.

I've been thinking about the phrase "gaming the system".

The English education system is quite a strange and fragmented one, full of funding and historical anomalies. I think it's more like playing the hand you've got as well as you can (which as pp alludes to, means doing research). And it is not everyone's priority to spend lots of time and effort on that. Especially if they picked an area in the first place on the grounds the schools were reasonable.

If you've got a child with SEND (as pp does and I do) the odds are seriously stacked against you. I wouldn't blame anyone for doing what they can to mitigate that.

Is it gaming? Or just teaching what they know? What do you think they should be teaching their children?

Some do. Some don't. They don't HAVE to provide wraparound and it doesn't have to have places for everyone if they do. Activities may vary by term and who's available. Some of the provision has criteria (e.g. homework club for pupil premium and SEND). You can't rely on it and it's not there to enable parents to work so much as to address other issues like kids not getting breakfast or for enrichment.

If provision were consistent around the country then the government wouldn't be having to subsidise it and bring in "enrichment benchmarks."

We did extensive research, visited seven secondary schools, and sent our daughter to a school that she needs to take a public bus to as it’s not one of the 3 schools in our local town that would be where nearly every other child from this town would go.

It’s still a fairly average comp, but it’s smaller, and we felt a better fit for our daughter (who has SEN). Is that gaming the system…? Or just doing your homework and making a well informed choice…? 🤔 I suppose the only thing that might be considered gaming the system is that not everyone would be in a position to afford the public bus fare to the next town.

I was staggered by how many families just automatically send their child to the local catchment school, because they don’t realise they have choices. And conversely the number of families who aspirationally apply to schools that they do not have any chance of getting into, because they haven’t looked up the admissions criteria and how they have been applied historically.

I feel really strongly that social mobility is never going to be a thing unless all parents can be equipped to be able to make well informed decisions about schools. I don’t think that’s gaming the system.

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.

I don’t see what you’re complaining about. You say your parents “dgaf” about your education, and you think that “most Brits” don’t prioritise their DCs’ education. Yet you’re complaining about the parents who DO care?

YABU. One of the main things parents should care about is their DCs’ education. Parents should prioritise it.

It’s the parents who don’t who are the problem, not the the parents who do.

Paying fees has no impact on state schools other than to reduce demand for places in them.

Tutors only affect selective schools ie grammars which are very much in the minority. Anyone can sit the papers they’re free.

Buying a house in a particular catchment - that’s playing the system.

No one pays to disadvantage other children. But they will do what they can for their own

We do private purely because the behaviour is so much better. No other reason.

No. You live in such an echo chamber you don't even recognise that you are doing it!!

State schools have catchment areas. That is your normal school.
Paying fees, or tutors or to move to a better catchment is gaming the system. Yoj are paying to disadvantage other people's children!

I think you are using the wrong words to describe it. However, my child went to grammar because she wanted to. Did I want her to yes of course but it was her choice to try. However if she hadn't then we would have sent her privately.
I am not in any way middle class though!

If you need to work long hours, you want your children in nurturing environments which state schools, with all the best will in the world of its staff, really cannot provide
Not sure where you live but that's totally wrong where I am. All primary school offer morning and afternoon clubs, either in their building or in collaboration with a social centre. These offer brilliant activities. My kids did cooking, drama, IT, sport activities. They had a great time. Secondary schools offer after school activities every day too.

Yes but when the DC said they wanted to be an architect they were told to consider graphic design as it was easier. I think that’s quite sad. Good for the DC to ignore the advice.

Isn't gaming the system in any form The way people get on in life? For good or bad. Legal or illegal.

Just wait until AI really kicks in, and starts to wipe out hitherto, unaffected professional jobs. It won't matter what sort of fancy, expensive school you went to.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

"Educated, responsible adults want the best possible education for their children" shocker!
And I mean "education" in its broadest sense, not just academic but values, resilience, social skills etc.
Good for these professional parents, I say.

It's really not the school that makes the child. Kids going to private school might get a better education overall because of the options offered, less disruption from other pupils, more attention etc....but they won't get better teaching.

Clever kids with parents who teach their kids to be tenacious, ambitious, and most importantly who learn the notion of investing in the present to collect the rewards in the future will do just as well in a comprehensive school.

If private school prepared pupils so much better for medical school, they would score much higher in medical school exams than those coming from state schools. It is not the case.

65.1% of students in UK get English and maths at Grade 4 or above. Grade 4 is the 'standard pass' grade. At grade 5 over 50% of students get English and over 50% get maths; the crossover group getting both is indeed around 45%, and not a majority - but grade 5 is the 'strong pass' grade.

Learning disability is used to refer to students with marked limitations to their learning capability - applies to under 3% of students. Students with specific barriers to learning like dyslexia are probably about another 15%.

The way GCSEs are structured mathematically means about a third of students will obtain grades under 4 by design.

I would suggest your idea that 'anyone without a clear learning disability is capable' of grade 5 in English and maths is inaccurate.

I would describe moving into the catchment of better state schools as 'gaming the system'. I would not call giving different reasons from the ones you approve or believe for sending children to private schools 'gaming the system', although it could be lying. But I don't understand why it is a problem for you. People can send their kids to whatever schools they like and can afford and they don't actually owe anybody an explanation or excuse.

You just mean some people aren’t honest about the privilege they fight for their kids to have.
yes this is true
actually I am far more annoyed by the people in my area whose kids went to the excellent state school because they live nearby telling me off for sending my kids to an average private school even though my kids original state school was uber shite and by the time we left had teachers picketing outside

I recognise my privilege coming from a medical family although did not follow this career path myself. Paid for both DC to go to private school and both went to RG universities which I must admit is what I expected. We liked the arts side to their education. Both have postgrad degrees but finding it very difficult to start a career. I think it’s probably my fault … should have urged them to go for law or medicine etc instead of fannying around with the arts . So it’s not that simple … tbh I have many doctor friends and I think it is a particular thing that medics children go into that profession. Let’s face it …it’s v hard work but had status very good pay and fantastic pension. Hence any new immigrant family knows it’s worth it .So yes you can support your children and have ambitions but I think it’s more nuanced than post suggests

You keep talking about "most parents" sending their children to the nearest school and not being particularly ambitious for them.
I don't know anyone like that. Most of my friends send their children to state schools, but there is a huge attempt to get them into the best ones, whether that is an entrance exam, music exam or regular church attendance.

@Brokeandoldwell done him!