Phrase young people when we mean children

I suspect that some secondary aged children will zone out or give the side eye when they are called children so treating them older and using gender neutral people is preferred by them. Pupil or student would cover things just as well.

There are different brackets for categorising people. I am an adult, middle-aged, and in my 50s. My 17yo daughter and my 14yo son are children, teenagers and young people. Being any one of those does not preclude them from being any of the others. Language is subtle and varies according to context. Calling someone a young person is not the same as saying they are not a child in the same way as saying I am middle-aged is not the same as saying I'm not an adult.

I think university students are on the whole less independent than you imagine and school students, more. After all, it's a continuum - one hopefully turns into the other.

A-level's supposed to be 5 hours taught, 5 hours independent study, give or take.

They are not students in the sense that they study in the way university students study solo.

Kids in school revise what they have been taught when it comes to exams.

Well it's all semantics really, but success in GCSEs and A-levels certainly requires study, not just passively 'being taught'.

I taught at one school that had an explicit aim of creating scholars. How's that?

Again, just calling them students would be the most reasonable thing.

They aren't students though, are they? They are pupils.

Pupils are taught. Students study. Children in school are taught, therefore they are pupils.

I teach gigantic teenage boys. It seems odd to refer to them as 'children'. KS3, maybe. A neutral term like students is probably better I guess.

'all parents and carers of our young people from all year groups"

So this encompasses all pupils in the school from age 12 - 18? "Young people" seems appropriate in that case, as it wouldn't be right to use "children" to include pupils aged 16+. If the phrase had been used to refer specifically to your daughter or your daughter's specific age group, I could see objecting, but using it as a broad term for all pupils in the school doesn't imply anything about any one particular pupil's competence. It seems like you're taking a general phrase too personally.

Some sixth formers will be 18 or 9 so I can understand the desire not to use the term children in a context here they are included. I agree pupils would probably suffice though.

I don't know why they don't just say the factual "students".

However, if you're talking about a school addressing all students, which include sixth formers, I can see why they wouldn't address them as children. They want the older students to assume a level of responsibility and behave in a mature way. Referring to them as a child doesn't encourage them to do that.

Again, just calling them students would be the most reasonable thing.

It is a term that is used in other contexts too e.g. www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/protecting-children-and-young-people/definitions-of-children-young-people-and-parents

I am not sure that it is inappropriate. There is a difference as children mature and are able to take more responsibilities for themselves. That doesn't mean that they are entirely responsible for what happens to them, young people are still not treated as adults.

They are young people though ?

its not wrong though they are young people. I’d have an issue with young adults but they are people and they are young. Although I agree pupils is probably more appropriate in this context

Our previous head started using the phrase young people years and years ago. I thought the same as you. they are children.

The new head has reverted to ‘pupils.’