To be outraged about fee-paying schools and social inequality?

[coffeerevelsrule]

I have a ds in Y11 who has been researching potential careers and degrees and it has brought home to me what a horribly unequal society we still have in this country. Apparently 70% of barristers went to public school and there are similar stats for other desirable non-stem roles like journalism and the civil service, as well as medicine. It's a bloody disgrace - what a joke for a supposedly modern society.

And it seems that certain schemes like blind recruitment might also feed into this as although going to Oxbridge might have become slightly more attainable recently thanks to contextual offers and an awareness that those institutions shouldn't be filled with people from certain schools, now blind recruitment means the advantage a state school student may have got from going there is pretty much cancelled out.

To me it seems that ds is most disadvantaged in a way as he wouldn't qualify for schemes aimed at people who are the first in their families to go to uni and we aren't in a deprived area, but he has none of the advantages that would have come from going to an independent school. Everything about us is just average!

He is very bright (predicted all 9s and got that in his mocks) and wants to achieve but it seems that the odds are against people like him having prestigious roles. Obviously when he is quoting these stats at me I'm telling him not to be defeatist and that he has every chance of doing something amazing as long as he keeps working hard, but inside I'm wondering if how true that is.

I've always been against fee-paying schools but him reeling off all these stats at me has just been sickening and yet when Labour make noises about doing something about it there's outrage when in my opinion there should be daily outrage about the current situation.

Can anyone who cares about fairness honestly say I'm BU?

The tax payer like it was when I went to university. I am fairly confident had I been going to university when fees were introduced I most definitely would not have gone because of the worry about the costs.

I was one of the lucky few - fees paid for by tax payer and a full maintenance grant - all means tested because my dad did not earn enough money etc.

I would happily pay more tax now to ensure other people have the same opportunities I was given thanks to the tax payer.

Presumably Private, Grammar, Secondary Modern

Tripartite System of education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland - Wikipedia

I am absolutely fine with charging overseas students more. Charging home students is another issue as I've said in another post.

Just look in any Sociology textbook and you will see we do struggle to educate our children... listen to business who are always telling the Media that school leavers are not up to it - are they being untruthful?

Yes we need to raise standards for all and to suggest that those who learn towards the left are not interested in that is frankly disingenuous.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves
More research you say?
Well you can start with the recent documentary on this with statistics that 8 out of 10 pupils in secondary schools who were sexually assaulted were girls.

Or the fact there were 500 rapes reported in the last few years in mixed schools.

Or that boys as young as 11 have access to porn on their phones.

Now apart from the fact my DD13 is SEN and needed better provision than the shithole of a local comp can provide I was never going to subject her to those kind of statistics.

More research you say, good! I totally support that but whilst nothing changes me and many other parents of girls will go single sex private school path so my daughter doesn't get disadvantaged for being a girl.

I mean people bang on about the advantages of private school, I don't see it that way, I see it that I will be disadvantaging my DD by putting her in the current state school system.

Come from a working class background. I have 3 barristers in the family - they got through bar and obtain a pupilship by making themselves available for near-volunteering local training opportunities throughout school and uni while the rest of us supported them. If you have a supportive and tight knit family anything’s possible. But it may involve you needing to support her by scouring vacancies.

That's fine @jeaux90, we all do what we feel is necessary in the best interests of our children. My dd feels - rightly or wrongly- that she has benefitted from being in a mixed sex environment. Maybe she is one of the lucky ones.

By more research, I was thinking about research on the longer term impact of single sex education on society as a whole.

Scotland is a good example of levelling down on standards via altered curriculum.

That kind of thing probably sounds good at the start to many, but it is concerning.

Most of mumsnet children go to private school so you won’t get much agreement I feel.

I do agree with you though about the inequality and unfairness

You need to find a way to get that chip off of your son’s shoulder - he’s what, 16 years old, not actually worked towards any of these “prestigious careers” yet and is already complaining that others are more privileged so he doesn’t stand a chance? That kind of attitude isn’t going to get him anywhere. Bit of a side rant but at my firm there is a sadly an emerging problem with male graduates thinking the world owes them a living whilst our apprentices straight from school prove themselves to have much better work ethics and potential to progress - don’t let him be like that.

I agree with prior posters, the stats he’s looking at don’t mean anything without age data. Can’t speak for the medical profession but certainly in legal and accountancy circles the face of the workforce has changed hugely over the 15 years I’ve been working. Have him look at the careers and DEI pages of firms he might like to work for - most will have social mobility policies, e.g., KPMG’s target to have 29% of its partners and directors come from lower socio-economic backgrounds by 2030.

If he’s extremely career motivated then perhaps an apprenticeship would suit him better than university? A chance to get onto a career path sooner and put the work in.

My DF was from a very WC background and neither parents went to university or any form of further education. They were however hard workers and supported me throughout my education. I went to prestigous state grammar, well before most were abolished. I left at 16 with a handful of mediocre O levels to go to the local college and did a vocational qualification.

In recent years I have caught up with my old school friends, many of whom went on to Oxbridge. I didn't even really know much about university and so it was well off my radar. However, I can honestly say that my career has far exceeded any of theirs in terms of both prestige and money.

As an employer, I have had to counsel out some extremely well qualified internship/probationary candidates who just completely lacked social skills and commercial acumen. They were good at learning facts, but would never succeed professionally as they didn't have the right skills, attitude or drive. In my opinion, one of the big benefits of wealth is the confidence and social skills it instils in young people. Not everything is about qualifications.

OP it sounds like you are putting your DS at a disadvantage by making him doubt himself due to his schooling. Please stop doing that and teach him that he can do whatever he wants if he has the right attitude. Kids with a 'can do' attitude will go much further than those who have been brought up to doubt their self worth. The best thing you can do is teach him confidence and positivity - essential skills for any job and worth far more than private schooling.

What I will also add is that, while great improvements have been made in progressing women and minorities at the firms I’ve worked for, I’ve never in 15 years seen a white man held back so others can progress. If there are 3 positions available, 4 candidates and no 4 is a white male, there quickly becomes 4 positions available, irrespective of where he went to school.
(my anecdotal experience only, to be clear)

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves what is wrong with taking the well documented extensive research that girls do better in single sex schools at face value? Is that not enough to make a case for them? On the other hand, extensive research about grammar schools supposedly not promoting social mobility is referenced by you as proof that they should be banned. It seems like statistics are only significant to you if they fit your narrative.

You wouldn't squeeze all those private school children into state schools - you would 'nationalise' (can't think of a better word to say what I'm thinking) the private schools and all their buildings etc.

Nationalise private ownership? Are you aware that that's illegal. We thankfully live in a free country!!

Not at all, I have already acknowledged the research on single sex education for girls and agreed that separating the sexes might be beneficial. I am aware that girls tend to do better academically in a single sex environment, and that there may be some mental health benefits as well. What I don't know is how women from single sex schools fare in the longer term in mixed sex workplaces etc. I haven't seen any research on that and don't know if it exists. I am not interested in anecdata. I also don't know whether there is any research to indicate whether or not single sex schools for boys might further fuel toxic masculinity in the longer term.

I am entirely willing to take the research at face value but while I acknowledge the short term benefits of single sex education, I am uncertain about the longer term impact. I would worry about possible unintended consequences for society in the longer term because our society as a whole is not segregated by sex. As it stands at present, I feel that it is important for my dd to learn how to work effectively and assertively alongside her male peers because that is what she will have to do in the future. If research exists that looks at the longer term impact of sex segregation in schooling on people's future life/career experiences, then I would be very interested in reading it. I am entirely open to persuasion on this subject because there is plenty that I just don't know at the moment.

Exactly. You need to drum this into him as I have done to both of mine. I will not have my two thinking they’re hard done to when they have so many advantages because a few have more. Far better to talk about the folks who have worked hard and done well from a range of backgrounds.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves in my direct experience I firmly believe that if you get girls playing at the top of their game education-wise without any male constraints, there is a confidence derived from that that propels them into male-dominated spheres ignoring any perceived barriers. The ones I have known (sorry, anecdata but heigh-ho) are more than capable of holding their own with any men , toxic or not, at both an intellectual and social level in the workplace. I actually find the notion that they wouldn't be quite patronising. I know some formidable women now working across those elite areas that are always mentioned on mums net. Girls who came into their own through a certain type of education in a single sex school. Male toxicity can't be blamed on just single sex schools either. Maybe a certain type of single sex school, but that is a whole other topic.

This can happen if the political will is there. It happened with the Banks - do you remember when the bank were bailed out by the tax payer during the financial crisis? And no it isn't illegal especially when laws are passed in Parliament to allow such things...

Thank you for your thoughts. As I said, I would be interested in seeing some proper peer reviewed research on this, rather than anecdotal evidence.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

Honestly this is nonsense about women not knowing how to operate in a mixed business environment if they went to a single sex school.

What girls learn at a single sex school is to focus on their own achievements. Something that will stand them in good stead in any work environment.

Not under the male gaze, not under the demands of femininity or under the stress of sexual harassment.

For the anecdotal record I went to a single sex school, am now 51 and work in the male dominated tech industry.

For the statistical record female participation in computer science degrees have gone down from 30% in the early 90s to 13% today. Funny enough since the statewide reduction in single sex schools.

You can’t have free university and unselective admissions at the same time. During your time fewer went. And in the supposed free/cheap uni European countries students have to pass very tough exams. Every student has a viva.
Compared to the U.K. where the curriculum varies wildly and is extremely watered down in some institutions.

Also currently you still get the money to go - it just has to be repaid, and even then if you earn a certain amount (although I agree the interest is horrendous and the threshold frozen). And actually the ‘squeezed middle’ are the ones who lose out if their parents can’t top up as much as the gov expects.

There’s also the option of getting ‘a degree’ part-time or via distance learning. More open and easier for people who don’t want to or couldn’t go to a 3 year uni. Foundation years etc as well, many routes.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves sometimes direct experience goes a long way, whether you accept or reject (when it suits you) anecdotal evidence. I know single sex schools very well. They work. Just because you or your much referenced DD don't have experience of them doesn't negate their effectiveness.

are you sure it’s’ that? More like the men moved it as it branched into its own discipline and became an scientific heavyweight.
rathee than being seen as a secretarial jobs delegated to the wimminz.

Theres a much higher rate of women in countries where people have no choice but to earn. Like India. Still less than men, but closer to parity (about 30%).

-writing this while waiting on a pull request 😍

It makes a whole lot more sense for the cream to go to Uni and be funded.

I actually struggle to see why young brainy people would want to become Doctors, 5 years BSc, and about another 3 years Doctorate 8 years of study and debts before they earn a penny.

Why not become a dentist in 5 years and then earn a shed load of money.

Far to many leave Uni with degrees that don't really mean anything that a few years ago the people who did those jobs only had a couple of years at college and a whole lot less debt.
Half of all graduate jobs are non-degree specific - they just want people who have shown a bit of sticking power and can work on their own

I would happily pay more tax now to ensure other people have the same opportunities I was given thanks to the tax payer.

LadyBowes you can pay more tax if you want to. This is from The Guardian:

Susan Reynolds (Letters, 28 September) says: “I want to pay more tax for the public services I enjoy.” She might be relieved to know that she may do so simply by sending a cheque to HMRC. I understand that you can even specify where you would like to see that money spent

Are you going to pay more tax now you know that it’s possible?