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?

Arent you just moaning about not being wealthy though?

Hes getting top grades. So your beef is that you cant paid for a brand name school?

Or that you cant afford to send him on unpaid internships?

That's life. There's a reason the elite is a tight loop. Of course commoners csnt compete with people with millions in the bank. That's the whole point.

I think there's lots of things here - you are conflating money and private schools as others have said. You also seem very angry about it all but there are always unfair things. It is always easier to get into a job held by one of your parents. Doctors sons become doctors, lawyers kids become lawyers, etc.

Taking two wealthy groups - it is probably hard as premiership footballer's kid to become a barrister; it is proabably hard as a barrister's kid to become a professional footballer. Like most things in life it is who you know not what you know that gets you the break. If your child is talented, bright and works hard there are lots of very well paying jobs that he can go into that don't need the kind of leg up you're comlaining about. Focus on that. Maybe become a solicitor if law really is where his interest is as you can move across later when he has some income under his belt

https://www.thelawyerportal.com/blog/can-a-solicitor-become-a-barrister

The inequality is annoying but not life blighting and it does not stop him becoming a barrister a bit later if he wants. He may prefer being a solicitor; he may eventually want to do something else entirely. Try and let it go because you do seem very angry and this will come across in your discussions with him (the pessimism) in ways you'd perhaps prefer it did not.

OK I haven't read the whole thread OP, but as a teacher ... how are you so naïve about the way the world works?

Your DS 'reeling off' statistics aside...which as PP pointed out are probably outdated...

'Fee paying schools' are an indicator of privilege. Yes - the Eton type. But also for other 'private' schools indicative of parents who care about education. I bet if you did a similar study comparing the achievement of students from high-achieving, leafy comp private schools with expensive houses in the catchment area you'll find similar stats.

Similarly there are a fair number of fee paying schools catering to SEN children, working parents who find it has a better deal with wraparound care etc. How are they more advantaged compared to you?

The world is open. There are plenty of ways for your DS to make it in a supposed 'difficult' field if he wants to. No need to make excuses.

What you SHOULD be concerned about, IMO instead of contextual offers is 'middle earners' getting caught in the maintenance loan top up trap.

@Ladybowes it’s well reported that white boys from lower socio economic backgrounds have the worst outcome in the education system.

Oh god. I can't stand the middle class sometimes! Especially when they have the actual audacity to say they are worse off than people from a "deprived background". Get a fucking grip. If your son can't do well for himself with all the privilege he has, then frankly, he doesn't deserve it.

I can understand your, perspectives, it's an ideal one,

My daughter went to a comprehensive school it was a good one. She applied to go to Oxford but did not get a place. She went to another RG university and is now a fully qualified GP

True however, debate exists as to exactly why this is the case. Is it for example attitudes in the home? Is it Lad culture? Is it stereotyping and labelling by teachers. As I said in a previous post it’s fairly complex stuff not easy to solve but we need to try and we need not to blame people - as that’s usually unhelpful

The study referred to earlier is only among FSM people. So, all equally poor/rich.
I don't think people are 'blaming' but if culture is an issue - what can we do to change it? More talks in disadvantaged schools (something that I'm heavily involved in?) Direct recruitment?

I'm not a sociologist by any means but having mixed with lots of people there's a markedly different attitude to grades, and it's not just 'valuing education'. It's about opportunities. Again, 100% my own observation, not claiming this is scientific.
Non-white British people (albeit that study singled out 'Irish) know the odds are stacked against us. 'Education', and by extension a job that relies on measurable things like qualification is one of the few routes out of poverty. Hence it's emphasized. Of course once you get in there's discrimination at higher levels, but leave it for the moment.
However white British people can still find their way although they don't get the grades.
My white husband is from a farming background. A lot the kids in surrounding areas didn't give much of a toss r.e schools and exams. They're now all gainfully employed in the agricultural industry or trades.
But all the jobs around there are who knows who. I don't think any POC would have had a look in. My husband told me in his school there were Indian kids but they were mocked, bullied and excluded. Certainly we stood out as a mixed race couple...
A lot of these 'diversity' stats focus on all the sexy jobs people aren't getting, but it's not just that. It's for the 'average' person. What opportunities do they have.

I wonder if it’s 70% of people who are currently barristers, or whether it’s 70% of newly qualified barristers. Most professions are trying desperately to increase diversity in every way.

anyway, having done jury service and watched the defence barrister, I would say he was the lowest form of scum I’ve ever seen. In a trial for sex crimes, the misogynistic victim blaming and ripping apart every aspect of the victim’s life to try and make her look “a mental liar” made me want to vomit. I’d steer well clear of being a barrister. The law doesn’t lead to justice in a lot of cases.

Also, your ds might consider that having a teacher as a mum is a pretty big advantage in life. And that having a deadbeat dad is the reason that he might not be able to afford certain things.

It might not have been any different.

I honestly don't believe my dd's future would be any different if we had sent her to a private school.

Children from state schools out perform children from private schools at university. He’ll do just fine.

@BoojaBooj2 It’s all very tricky. No easy solutions and I certainly don’t have all the answers. I mention people blaming people because some always point to knowing someone who had it hard and made it and I feel this kind of misses the point and frankly is a bit dismissive of the issues many face. The system is stacked against some people and telling them to get a grip and try harder isn’t helpful. Also think that if more jobs were better paid and had more status maybe that would help people feel life was fairer - but that’s a whole other thread 😂

Anecdotally, I went to uni with someone who had attended Milfield. His very expensive education, with amazing sports opportunities, led him to the same average Joe non-Russel group uni as me. Two people I went to state school with went to Oxford and Cambridge respectively. Others when to UCL and Durham.

Indeed Cambridge does give contextual offers. And the winter pool is heavily skewed to state DC given the state school targets.

Agree. I realised this as a kid and just realised it more and more and more as I grew.

I definitely think the tax breaks and ludicrous charitable status of some of these schools should be removed permanently.

For Oxford his GCSE results will be looked at in the context of the school they were achieved in. Therefore if you can achieve straight 9s in an average comp, you rightly, have an advantage in Oxford entry over a student who achieved straight 9s from a top indi.

@coffeerevelsrule You said:

For many of these top flight careers you seem to need to be able to do unpaid/low paid internships etc

Children shouldn't have fewer opportunities because of decisions made by their parents though and companies shouldn't be expecting people to do unpaid internships

It's disgusting that jobs are basically open only to those who can afford them - madness.

For people saying he will get there if he works hard, it's not the case. He could get all the qualifications and then just not be able to afford to do the necessary work experience, and that's not fair.

So what actually is your gripe? Is it with young people who have been to independent schools - which is what your thread title suggests - or is it with young people with rich parents (who have very often not been to independent schools, hence their parents having lots of money to spend on other things, including giving them a financial leg-up once they start work/want to buy a house etc)?

If it's with people being richer than you, then there will always be someone richer than you, so you might as well forget about it and just carry on encouraging your son in whatever avenue he decides to pursue.

And rather than being outraged by the statistics your son has found, you could either find some yourself that demonstrate a different story (because one can always find statistics to back up one's own belief). You could also tell him that he will not be well served in life by developing a chip on his shoulder about where he went to school, which is what he risks doing if he's digging up statistics that make him feel hard done by.

@coffeerevelsrule I was raised by a single parent to 5 children and didn’t go abroad on holiday until I was 21 and able to pay for it myself using my student loan. Grew up in inner city London so called “sink estates”, sleeping 4 to a room, add in ethnic diversity and that’s what I consider to be disadvantaged, not I choose to spend £3k a year.

I went to a standard inner city comp and former polytechnic and, as a City lawyer, now work with lots of oxbridge educated, wealthy types. My privilege, that helped me get to where I am now, is that I felt thoroughly loved by my mother, felt secure despite everything going on around me and had a parent who valued education. We all have a level of privilege and you would do well to spend more time acknowledging your own.

You may not want to hear this but I can tell you now that if you truly wanted to send your DC to a private school and benefit from the advantages that they come with, you could have. You could have lived in a cheaper area in a smaller house/flat, you could have made it your mission to pursue scholarships, you could have foregone the £3k a year spent on holidays. My guess is it didn’t cross your mind at the time, and that’s fine. But I don’t think it’s fair to then say that everyone who sends their kids to a private school is far more privileged than you are, a significant number just made their choices.

For what it’s worth, law is far less exclusive these days and going to a comprehensive school is likely to work in your child’s favour.

I think if you take all private school students and put them in state school those same students would do the same academically and 70% of solicitors would be those students.

I feel it is more to do with aspirational parenting, good role models, genetic intelligence etc... than what school they are in.

OP, during your research, have you found a country yet that is equal?

What is really unfair is making all children squeeze through an educational system (state, grammar, private) that sets a good proportion up to fail because they are not academic.
Be grateful your son will achieve good grades which will give him far more options than children who struggle in school, and will never pass their GCSEs at 4 or above.

Yeah, well Labour destroyed social mobility for bright working class kids when it killed off the State grammar schools. That wasn't its intention but that's sure as fuck what happened.

But state grammar schools are inaccessible to the majority of the children in their areas, and are disablist ( largely excluding SEN etc)
Would far sooner support abolishing those, the small number that are left.