To think that this government wants to prevent social mobility?

[lottieandmia22]

They peddle sound bites about hardworking people and then close all the children's centres. Therefore stopping disadvantaged children from starting out on a more level playing field. Of all the things I hate about the Tories this issue makes me the most angry.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/20/childrens-centres-closed-austerity-council-cuts-tracy-brabin?CMP=sharebtnn_fb

There is a stigma around getting help from services among those people who most need it.

try that again with the Tory haters. They never accept that anyone else can have a different experience or... wait for it... disagree with them.

If the read the thread most posters have said they are used by parents who don't really need the help. Typical Labour I would say.

Perhaps because of what kinkajoukid said : "it can sometimes be a mixture of imtimidating, frustrating, embarrasing etc etc to attend somewhere where you are the poorest poor in the village surrounded by people doing better than you, being confident and aspirational. Becasue many poorer families will also be struggling with poor health and poor MH as well as less education and opportunities, and the usual alienation from and suspicion of the system and authorities."

I can certainly attest to those sentiments, as someone born to the working classes living in a middle class world.

" in France & Germany names and DOB are removed from cvs for example) "

ah yes France and Germany those bastions of equality and good race relations...
In Germany you are expected to attach a colour passport photo to your CV...

to be fair, France is so much better in term of equality and race relations than the UK. Probably too much, which is why the situation is so explosive now.

They have nowhere near the same elitist school system or the class system that we have here.

There is no such thing as social mobility and the haves like to keep it that way.
There is no excuse for austerity. Removing austerity does not promote social mobility, but austerity measures are unChristian and unjust.

What's the problem with all parents, regardless of social class, accessing Children's Centres, as they were originally intended?

They were meant to be set up like schools are: accessible by all and an essential part of the community. It's a service that should never be means-tested or targeted for only certain types or classes of people.

Nothing wrong with middle class mums using children’s centres. It enables everyone to mix. The people it’s aimed at are hardly likely to use it if it seen as something aimed at ‘poor people’

I asked Michael Gove about children’s centres at one of those ‘meet the electorate’ type things in the 2010 GE. He said he thought they were fantastic and the work would continue. Sadly that’s not been backed up by any funding.

I used to attend a group which cost £1 per family. It was full of polish ladies who ignored everyone else and spoke Polish. Another lady had a severely disabled boy and another lady who was a lone parent to 4 kids under 5. She was knackered and very hard up. She used to say to me, you'd never believe i was 21! A young mum with her funny, boisterous boy and another with 2 lovely boys.The group wasn't used enough and i have no idea why. It was cheap, right in the local shopping mall and run by extremely welcoming, helpful and hardworking staff.
No middle class parents attended.

The best most well attended baby groups I attended were run by the Salvation Army. The local childrens centre wasn't brilliant. It was free but in too small a room, with not enough toys or activities and the staff were very middle class and sneery.

The SA ones were always full to bursting. A billion different toys. A singalong session, different crafts out for the older dcs and a nice baby area too.

The staff and volunteers at the SA were absolutely amazing. They helped a lot of families out. They didn't judge or sneer and didn't push religion either.

I remember the lady who ran the sure start centre coming up to hand out flyers and looking shocked that so many were there. I don't think it helped that the HV used to do a drop in session at the sure start one.

Saska The vast majority of Europe has significantly worse race relations and more racism than the UK. Just one empirical example

The 11+ was the biggest creator of social mobility and we all know who to thank for the bog standard comrehensive system. And they aint wearing blue. Grammar schools admitted a few of the brightest from less advantaged backgrounds. The rest went to secondary moderns where they were unable to to take the same 16+ exams; once school leaving age was raised they had their own set of exams which were not held in esteem by employers. That's not social mobility. Social mobility isn't about the few, it's about the average; when an average child born to advantaged parents can find a well paying job through his/her parents' contacts, and an average child from disadvantage parents is on minimum wage, you do not have a socially mobile society,

Rubbish about MC mums putting off the the lower class mums (for want of a better term)

Childrens Centres were spread out across areas, aimed at theiir demographic. Some in affluent areas, some in deprived areas. Thereby parents would be mixing with others of similar needs. It was the fact the CC's in deprived areas weren't been used - not the MC parents were taking over. They just used the ones in their neck of the woods.

The ones in deprived areas are closing because they are under used and the ones in MC areas are closing because the parents do not need the type of help on offer.

I used to attend a children centre when my DD1 was young. I often felt like the left one out because, the other mums were all "middle class" and I didnt even feel working class. (On disability benefits) I also attend a different baby group when I moved down south which was packed to the rathers of all kind of mums.

I dont think working class people are encouraged to improve their status. With increasing bills, increasing house prices and stagnate wages its getting harder.

" The 11+ was the biggest creator of social mobility and we all know who to thank for the bog standard comrehensive system. And they aint wearing blue. "

it really wasn't you know.

My mother went to a grammar school and her careers advice consisted of 'girls you can become librarians or teachers'.

IMO grammar schools were designed to churn out teachers, and low level civil servants who would be so grateful for their grammar school education that they would then work to maintain the status quo.

And what about the children from the 'top sets' of the secondary modern? being written off as 'thick' when they were far from it?

Social mobility my arse.

The 11+ was the biggest creator of social mobility and we all know who to thank for the bog standard comrehensive system. And they aint wearing blue.

This is demonstrably false.

It is very difficult to think of anyone who was working class at my grammar in the 1960s. Never happened even then but we did all get tuition in the papers at school for free. At least that was fair!

We also know Sure Start didn’t work. We know that children get behind if parents don’t talk to them, don’t read to them and don’t play with them. Sure Start centres were supposed to spread good practice. Parents who do nine of the above are less likely to attend. They also have no ambition for their children and don’t function well themselves in society. However I do agree that we need to ensure the most disadvantaged are given a better start.

We need more deprived young people to be able to access the best higher education courses at university. Poorer students do go to university but are not ambitious about which one. They choose local because it’s easy. That’s where we can make progress. Be ambitious.

11+ doesn’t work in my area. The people that pass are the coaches tutored ones therefore only available to the wealthy.

11+ doesn’t work in my area. The people that pass are the coaches tutored ones therefore only available to the wealthy

Exactly the same here. They have also become so competitive that without the proper training for the exams, even a bright pupil has no chance.

This is demonstrably false.

Indeed. The largest number of grammar schools were closed by that little known education secretary Margaret Thatcher.

The greatest agitators of social mobility are sharp-elbowed parents who want better for their children. That they tend to be middle-class is not the failure of the Conservative party.

True, Germany and France are behind in terms of true race relations, however if handing in a cv devoid of a full name, date of birth etc allows for someone at least to get an interview, then it is a step ahead being not called at all because their name's "a bit forrin' " despite being born and bred there.

The grammar system is Germany is not as abused as in the uk, people cannot just up sticks to move into the catchment area, taxes for buying houses are sometimes 40% on top of the house value. In France the selective schools are a bastion for the Tricolore - read white French kids. The postcode wars are just as bad if not worse in France.

It's easy to sit and say that everyone else has got it wrong, but we have to look and learn and see where we can improve the employment process. Employment / promotion can lead to lifting families out of poverty. If bright Freddie / Jimmy isn't even being called for an interview (and in the meantime is getting demotivated), whereby Matty who is nicely educated but positively dim is on a management fast track program, then something needs to change.

That they tend to be middle-class

A few generations ago, there were a lot of working class people born 1900-ish who would have gone to university under a less inequitable society, but didn't. They joined the WEA and similar organisations, and took huge advantage of the 1944 Act to push their children through higher education. Those children became middle-class. The same happened, but more so, as higher education expanded post-Robbins: aspirational working class parents encouraged their children into university in the 1980s, and they became middle class. The pool of aspirational, sharp-elbowed parents who didn't themselves go to university gets smaller each generation, as more people go to university.

And it's an iron law of education that whatever you do to improve access, the middle classes game the system for their children's benefit.

if handing in a cv devoid of a full name, date of birth etc

I'd be willing to bet that if you showed me a complete CV devoid of name, date of birth, etc I could tell you their age to within a couple of years and their class and probably race with let's say 75% accuracy.

Indeed, I'd go further, and suggest that for someone under 40, I could tell you their class - with wide error bars, but a great deal better than chance - based solely on the subjects and grades of their GCSEs.

bright Freddie / Jimmy isn't even being called for an interview

Bright Freddie/Jimmy isn't applying for the job in which Matty is on the management track. It's hard to offer jobs to people who don't apply. The same goes, probably more so, for university.

Ethnic minority applicants get offers for Oxbridge at a rate higher than white applicants, and are admitted at a higher rate, although not as much higher (ie, they are disproportionately likely to be made an offer, but then are slightly more likely to miss it). Unfortunately, they either don't apply, or apply for the most wildly oversubscribed courses, so the absolute numbers are vanishingly low. The same's true, pretty much, in RG universities.