To think that it's alot harder to succeed in education / career if you are from a poorer background even if you are a bright child and the opposite of this is also true?

[ReallyGood]

Interested in what MNetters think. I was having a chat with dsis about schools. Unfortunately, because where I live DC will be going to the below average secondary school. They currently go to a primary which is in "requires improvement". Its all a bit rubbish but I have to work with what I have. we are a low income family and live on a council estate in a deprived area.

She thinks my DC can still be successful careerwise despite the rubbish schools and I said yes but it will be a hell of alot harder for them even if they were brighter than an average child from a middle class background. She thinks I'm being ridiculous and everyone has an equal opportunity in the uk no matter your background. If you have the talent and put in hard work it doesn't matter you'd be on an equal level playing field.
Do you agree with her?

@ReallyGood

Interested in what MNetters think. I was having a chat with dsis about schools. Unfortunately, because where I live DC will be going to the below average secondary school. They currently go to a primary which is in "requires improvement". Its all a bit rubbish but I have to work with what I have. we are a low income family and live on a council estate in a deprived area.

She thinks my DC can still be successful careerwise despite the rubbish schools and I said yes but it will be a hell of alot harder for them even if they were brighter than an average child from a middle class background. She thinks I'm being ridiculous and everyone has an equal opportunity in the uk no matter your background. If you have the talent and put in hard work it doesn't matter you'd be on an equal level playing field.
Do you agree with her?

Your sister is very naive.

It's all dependant on parents basically.

You have to support, encourage and give them aspirations. Keep them busy and occupied and away from the negative influences around them.

I came from poverty. Worked at school and didn't fall in with the wrong crowd etc am doing well enough. Have brought DS up to do better than me, and he will.

margot no. Class isn’t as important as parental support. Is school a factor? Yes but a very small factor.
The sis is incorrect that everyone has equal opportunities but school and area are not big factors when it come to educational success.

[quote sst1234]@Ogel

Educational attainment is the most important indicator. Generally speaking, parents who take an interest in their child’s education are aspirational on their children’s behalf. They take other steps to make sure that the children will go on to be more successful than they were.[/quote]
If you can afford the other steps then sure, or if you have the luxury of time- which often many people struggling to stay afloat don't and that's not because they don't care.

I did say that people will be along with excuses in a moment about why parents can’t ‘parent’ their own children. Right on cue.

There's lots of things that can create an environment that allows a child to succeed.

I had a fairly normal upbringing, I didn't have parents that were overly interested in my education but I did have things like access to books at home

I wouldn't usually call myself privileged but definately didn't have the disadvantages of others that I know about now as an adult

I know other children who were young carers, trying to cram study around responsibilities. Children that have chaotic home lives where there's no encouragement given at all, or where the house is very noisy or there's no space to do things like homework. Children who were hungry, having to worry about money etc.
Of course me revising in my room was more successful than my friend who had do it in a living room amongst parents who were drunk frequently, shouty and she was left caring for younger kids

Not all disadvantages and disadvantages are class based, and you might not have all those that advantages or disadvantages that are because of class, but certain experiences are more likely due to class.

She obviously doesn't believe there is no difference or she wouldn't be paying for private education.
So I think she is trying to make you feel OK about your situation, or just doesn't want to get her thoughts dirty by sharing your concerns as she enjoys her gilded life, you know her best.
Sadly the fact is that all her remarks do is invalidate your concerns and make you feel that she is out of touch with you from her privileged position.
It is true that it is possible to be successful (measured by financial success) from any start. But of course social capital (who you know), focused education (not disrupted by bad behaviour in the classroom), exposure to horizon expanding experiences etc etc etc all help don't they.
But personality makes a difference too, I know loads of well-to-do people who squandered their advantages by being lazy and foolish, often bailed out by parents mind you but certainly ending up with a lesser life than they could have had.
But the greatest difference you can make to your child is to care and support and pay attention to their education and life. Make it important in your house they should care and do well, help them see the world has stuff to offer etc etc. Encouragement and attention makes a huge difference.

Absolutely. Reading with your dc and teaching them to do as they’re told doesn’t take a lot of time but will massively influence how successful they are at school.
The students at my school who are least successful are not by any means the least financially well off. They are the ones who are the most poorly parented. They think rules don’t apply to them and they don’t care about passing exams. All of these attitudes come from home. We can’t change them.

@Alrightqueenie

I think being better educated/higher training gives you a chance to get out of the deprived area you grew up in. This is what I did, in my hometown there's a massive culture of underachievement. People would discourage you from wanting to do better, so some kids never have a chance. The anti work/education ethic in my home town is too strong.

I’ve seen this too. Inverted snobbery towards people who didn’t speak in broad local dialect, or who showed any ambition. Viewing any aspiration to do well, or move away as a personal insult.

Some children really don’t stand a chance.

It isn’t really about money or even the school but the educational background of the parents, access to books, conversations that seems to make all the difference. I have a lot of friends who are academics or artists or musicians by choice who went to top universities. Their DC all doing very well even in less well regarded schools, in fact, many of those DC are getting more attention at school than the DC of other friends who went into the City and paid for mediocre private schools or live in leafy areas. We discuss this all the time, there are some very dedicated teachers in London comps who have taken said DC under their wing and giving them lots of attention and they are thriving! Of course they also have access to top conversations at home, London museums etc - but what I am trying to say is that “educational privilege” doesn’t need to cost money.

You’re right. The system is completely unfair. Poor people are set up to fail.

There will always be exceptions, of course; but not many of them.

And outstanding schools tend to bump house prices up around them, locking out poorer kids further.

Grammar schools are also bad: only children from middle class families who prioritise education get in - usually those that are tutored.

There are statistics available comparing private and state school pupils’ eventual income.

The Tories won’t change anything about the broken system - they wouldn’t be where they are if it weren’t for a tiered education system and “contacts”.

Having worked in schools in a deprived area of London I would say that it’s surprising the opportunities the kids were able to access for free, that I in my more leafy suburban school would have had to pay for.

Links were made with outside institutions in the arts (my subject) and the children were able to meet and work with top professionals. I’m sure the same was true for other subjects. One school even had links with Eton and each year sent 2 students to Eton 6th form to study for the full 2 years. The opportunities are often there - whether kids are interested and motivated enough to take them is another matter.

l think its all down to the individual, how driven they are, because l know of many intelligent people in very ordinary jobs, they have the ability , but not the desire to better themselves.
l also think overcoming adversity whilst in your youth strengthens your resolve to get on, l read one in three of USA presidents lost a parent whilst young, many of the worlds most sucessful people today had to overcome some very tough challenges whist growing up, having it too easy can breed a lazy work ethic.
Plus everyones idea of being succesful is different, some are content with a simple authenthic life, theres nothing wrong with that. " New levels bring new devils" if you are a high achiever you are at a higher risk of suffering anxiety etc.
Education and parents imput only plays a part, it doesn't paint the whole picture. Luck, resolve, desire, attitude are all major contributors.

It's possible, but the barriers aren't just money but culture and expectation.

I grew up poor and went to a 'good' school with mostly middle class students. I was very academic. It was culturally alien. My parents couldn't help me with any of the schoolwork - they'd left school in their early teens themselves (not UK). I was surrounded by people who had music lessons and went to the theatre and on foreign holidays several times a year. I didn't get on there and hated it, but by the time I was 14 I was hearing 'you're lucky, lazing about at school - at your age I grew up and had a real job!' I didn't know anyone socially who had a degree. That was a 'school thing'.

And as a real job was the standard of value, and education seemed to be for these other young people I had very little in common with, at 16 I left to get my real job, too.

(This is not to disparage either group! Just an illustration of very different ways of thinking, which may be present to a somewhat lesser extent in 2022 than the early 2000s, but not, I'd argue, gone completely. I think at a 'bad school' there'd have been less alienation, which would likely have been better for my mental health, but not my prospects.)

@Gosports

Having worked in schools in a deprived area of London I would say that it’s surprising the opportunities the kids were able to access for free, that I in my more leafy suburban school would have had to pay for.

Links were made with outside institutions in the arts (my subject) and the children were able to meet and work with top professionals. I’m sure the same was true for other subjects. One school even had links with Eton and each year sent 2 students to Eton 6th form to study for the full 2 years. The opportunities are often there - whether kids are interested and motivated enough to take them is another matter.

In London sure, do you think children elsewhere have access to this kind of thing?

@Gosports

Having worked in schools in a deprived area of London I would say that it’s surprising the opportunities the kids were able to access for free, that I in my more leafy suburban school would have had to pay for.

Links were made with outside institutions in the arts (my subject) and the children were able to meet and work with top professionals. I’m sure the same was true for other subjects. One school even had links with Eton and each year sent 2 students to Eton 6th form to study for the full 2 years. The opportunities are often there - whether kids are interested and motivated enough to take them is another matter.

Ahem… have you heard of the North/South divide? It counts for schools too.

OP if your dsis really believed what she’s saying she wouldn’t be spending thousands a year on private education.

You are both right -- in a way. You are of course right that children's chances at an underperforming school in a deprived area are worse, she sounds quite flippant and Pollyannaish I can see why you're concerned.

But she is also right in a way, as others have pointed out the single most important influence on children is their parents and peer group, not the schools. She's obviously had an easier path and lacks empathy but she is right about one thing: a positive and disciplined attitude to education on your part will go a fairly long way to mitigate this.

I think you do need to work harder if your kids are at a below average school but it is important to keep in your head that all isn't automatically lost and communicate that to your children as well. To succeed in this sort of environment you do have to have a very strong sense of fight.

I'm from a very poor background and knew from an early age that doing well academically was the only chance I had to escape that. I did well at school wen to uni, am aprofessional etc.
My siblings however, although perfectly capable intellectually, have not done that and have never wanted to retrain/gain further qualifications so have always worked in so called "menial jobs" (nothing wrong with that).
I think that people from my background not only have material poverty but poverty of aspiration which comes from parents.

She thinks I'm being ridiculous and everyone has an equal opportunity in the uk no matter your background

Hahaha us POC are reading this shaking are heads at how blinded she is. Equal opportunity no matter your background hahaha if only

Perhaps not so much a factor at Primary school. But in secondary school, a child has to be INCREDIBLY determined and resilient to achieve in a peer group which is disruptive, scathing of people who do their homework, bully those who answer in class, bully those with aspirations of university, teachers who are spending all their time on crowd control not teaching, etc etc etc.

In my experience the happiest children (well, young adults) have the confidence that comes with a safety net. This is usually linked to parents having enough money to temporarily help in a crisis and enough room for them to move back in.

Two of my friends grew up as one of 3 and one of 4, small houses, and were so terrified of being "poor" as adults that they gritted their teeth through degrees they hated and now both work in high-paid banking jobs - that they also hate.

Are they successful? Yes and no.

Of course it's harder OP, even stuff like pollution, food quality, levels of stress, quality of teaching, class size, time spent outside, all that stuff that you get in a lower income life (generally) can mean kids can be backfooted. They can still shoot the lights out though. But to pretend everyone gets the same start is factually silly.

I believe that you are right OP. However, as others have said, the single factor most determinative in children's educational outcomes is their parents' level of involvement. Reading to, and later with, young kids is so important. Doing their spellings with them, generally setting the expectation that homework is non-negotiable.

My mum was a reception year primary school teacher all her working life and always says you can really tell the difference between the kids whose parents just leave everything to school to do, and those who have support at home. She did so much more for the kids who didn't have much at home but I know not every child is lucky enough to have such a dedicated teacher.

It must be hard to see your sister's kids having opportunities that yours don't, but try not to focus on that and focus instead on all the things you can do to support your children's learning .

Nope. So many obstacles in the way.

The only people who believe there is a meritocracy are those who have never really had to rely on there being one.

There is less opportunity for those from less privileged backgrounds now, than there was 30 years ago. Social mobility has reduced, not increased.
So whilst plenty of us might have done well at school in the 1980s and been rewarded with lucrative careers, it isn't the same economic environment now.

A combination of university fees, cuts in education budgets, higher cost of living, multiple recessions, more graduates competing in a more restrictive job market etc have combined to make it harder for those without the 'add-ons' of family connections, wealth etc.

And we have the government to reflect this. An elitist group of entitled individuals from a narrow sphere of society. Little wonder they have no interest in improving social mobility.