Is there a worrying class divide with parenting?

[teaandcupcake]

I saw a tweet (and subsequent TikTok) about this and found it interesting.

The author of the tweet and the girl on TikTok were basically saying they notice the way their middle-class friends parent their small kids is screen-free, lots and lots of books, lots of time and attention. Their toddlers can read and write. In contrast, teacher friends at deprived primaries have shared stories of reception starters in nappies, children who have no idea how to turn the page of a book or use a knife and fork.

The concern being that the divide between middle-class and working-class children is going to be so vast in the future we ‘can’t even fathom it right now’

I found it interesting as the topic of reception children starting school without reaching basic milestones has been discussed on here many times before but not whether it’s class issue and what’s causing this.

It isn’t but it certainly helps with resource planning to put very academic children together and educate them together.

if you have a comprehensive school with 300 a year, you in effect create a grammar within a comprehensive there are so many children that can be setted and the academic children are all put together. My friend teaches in one of these schools and there is a vast different between her top sets (who many go on to oxbridge) and the bottom sets (who barely scrape 4’s in GCSEs).

but many comprehensives aren’t 300 a year but small and so the ability to separate the academic and the non academic children is difficult. They are the ones who often miss out on reaching their full potential and would have benefitted massively from the chance of entering a small grammer school.

I think the divide is more between children who have a parent at home who focuses on them and those who don't. This can happen in any class. A household where both parents are working FT+ hours and then coming home and parenting is going to be more stressed than one where one is at home or both have flexible working to be able to parent in the way that most people would like to given the choice.

THIS IS NOT A DIG AT ANY PARENTS WHO HAVE TO WORK OR CHOOSE TO WORK. I have been a SAHM, worked 60+hours a week, been self employed, been a single parent and looking back I can see that at times I have been able to be more present and engaged with DC than others.

I think the divide is the luxury of being able to choose how to 'cut your cloth', there are numerous points on the socioeconomic scale that are sort of sweet spots for this depending on the house, lifestyle etc that people want so not class based.

I've literally never heard of a Comp which doesnt set children regardless of how small!

Again I'm sorry but this is nonsense. and the constant focus on Oxbridge as the only measure of success is ridiculous.

for those who don't know, all comps have sets where "very academic" children are taught according to their ability. Ie Set One is the top set, the next set down is Set Two etc. In my school it went down to Set Six where you found the children with significant additional needs. Sets were subject specific as well so a child who does well in English but less well in Maths would be in Set One for English and Set Two for Maths (as was I). You would move up or down Sets depending on your progress throughout the year as well.

I was in Set One for most subjects other than maths which has always been a closed book to me.

My DS (18) (who has just started University) was a "bright" child, in Set One for everything.

DD (15) also bright - but perhaps not as outstanding as her brother - is in Set Two for most subjects (she still does very well and is an average-bright young lady who loves reading, history and music. She's chosen art, history and music for her GCSEs and is enjoying all). She's mostly obsessed with horses anyway, has just passed BHS Stage One at her riding school and is considering going to a college at 16 to pursue a career in the equine world.

Each Set learns at a rate and pace appropriate to their ability level and each has a different teacher. Set One study harder material at a faster pace. My DS and the rest of Set One took their Maths GCSE a whole year earlier than other sets (at the end of year 10) and spent year 11 studying Further Maths/AS Level material.

A much lower set would have taken the Foundation level Maths GCSE at the end of year 11.

So the argument that in a comp system the Superstar Exceptional Mastermind Children are suffering by being dragged along with the thickies is nonsense. It does not happen.

DS's friends have started at Universities ranging from Oxbridge and Edinburgh (where his best friend has just gone) to ex polys this September, depending on a variety of factors (not all ability level. Some wanted to stay close to home, some just wanted to go to newer universities or liked the courses there better/wanted to study less traditional subjects).

DS totally fell out of love with Maths at A Level and dropped it (unexpected as he'd been a Maths wizard since year 3 regularly winning competitions and being part of the "Seren Network" with which he did an Oxford summer school in year 10). He instead threw himself into Computer Game Design which he developed a passion for and which he is studying at a non-Russell Group Uni. He's loving it and I'm totally supportive of what he's doing as its his choice and forcing him to go to Oxford to study a subject he no longer loves is pointless. It's not just about going to prestigious universities. There are many many more options today than the traditional professional routes.

The point is that what worked in the 1960s worked (for a minority. It didn't help either of my parents) but it's 2025 and the world has changed. Many have pointed out that today's Grammars are mostly packed with Middle Class kids who've been tutored to the eyeballs and they really aren't making much difference to social mobility, meanwhile comprehensive school kids are doing well in a variety of fields. We have to move with the times.

Not necessarily as not all children are top set for everything. There are children with particular strengths in one subject who may be weaker in another for example very good at English but less good at maths. Setting children means that child can be in the top set for English and a lower set for Maths where they can maximise their potential in both subjects. I was like this.

My mother was like this too. A voracious reader from an early age who wrote the most beautiful prose and poetry for which she won prizes.but less good at Maths (I often think we might have had a form of dyscalculia) She failed her 11+ (by a few marks apparently) which sent her to the local Secondary Modern where she was one of the brightest but was not able to reach her full potential in English, was not allowed to take O Levels and had to leave at 15 to get a job in a bakery.

The Comp system meant that I was able to study to my ability in English, got good grades in my GCSEs and A Levels and ended up graduating with a 2:1 in History from a Russell Group.

My mother was so proud but it makes me so very sad that she never had this opportunity, despite being totally capable. Of course my generation (Gen X) also had the benefit of being able to access loans and grants to fund our studies, which previous generations had been denied.

Can you not see how literally discarding a child as "less academic across the board" at the age of 11, when they have so much potential to grow and change, is harmful? Because it seems blatantly obvious to me. And given that all Comps set children anyway, there are literally no advantages to Grammar Schools other than allowing middle class parents to save money on private school fees.

I'm a single full time working mum with no real extended family and an ex who isnt terribly involved and neither of mine struggled. I think we are looking for reasons where sometimes no reasons exist.

Children are different. They develop at different rates have different strengths. Perhaps if we celebrated that instead of trying to cram everyone into the same box and analyse why they don't fit (instead of accepting that perhaps they need a different shaped box) we'd all, including our kids, be a lot happier.

Was going to say that! My DD is obsessed with art and horse riding but is one of the loveliest young women you could wish to meet amd definitely not spoiled in any way.

I'm an ex council estate scumbag who somehow got a good degree despite the lack of Grammar Schools in Wales and am also divorced, 50s.. oh dear. Not doing well am I....

My own DD enjoys art too, still living in a wc area, my point was to the posters who assumed mc status makes you a more cultured person, assuming wc parents are not interested in education, unless on an ipas, there is mc parents who offer all the trimmings without the boundaries, therefore mc children are not automatically making better choices than wc teenagers.
It's not all painted with the one brush

Very much so, especially if the sex results in pregnancy.
Young single mothers are judged harshly, sex shaming is very much alive in certain areas, its bad to be labelled wc and easy, not so much for the posh kids.

Are the boys shamed as well? Takes 2 to create a pregnancy, after all...

Very much so. My mother loved reading, wrote beautiful prose and poetry. My brother is very musical. My DD loves music too, art and horses. Not sure which class I fit into as I grew up poor, have a degree and a good job but am a single (divorced) mum who earns roughly £36k and is mostly broke but it hasn't made any impact of my (and my children's) love of art.

The poster who mentioned the word "tenor" in a verbal reasoning problem made me smile. My DD would have got that, not that she's super cultured (does play guitar and a bit of violin) but she loves music especially My Chemical Romance and was telling me how Gerard Way is a tenor but she thinks Frank Iero is more a baritone. I have no idea actually other than I love a bit of MCR and can't wait for us to go and see them at Wembley next July. Long Live the Black Parade.

Sometimes its just about their own interests and how much they read and learn than how much they're taught.

I agree it’s to do with time spent. Lots of middle class families have two high earning parents out of the home most of the time whereas working class families tend to be less focused on material things and keeping up appearances so more time to devote to the dc and their education.

No, of course not.
Society has never held the boys responsible.
I didn't create the situation, it is what it is.

I wasn't suggesting that all children will struggle, more that if a child is going to struggle then they are likely to struggle less if they have a parent or parents who are able to devote a lot of time to focusing on them.

As I said, this isn't about working parents / not, I think the same can be said for adult wellbeing too. An adult who is able to devote time to their own self care is more likely to thrive.

The point I am making is that the issue isn't class related, it's more to do with how much is demanded of us and what that leaves us with at the end of the day. Some people will manage the demands on them better than others, that doesn't mean a more balanced society / economic structure wouldn't also benefit them.

Naturally that will vary with financial stability and the ability to work less or have a parent at home whilst the other parent works, but levelling that out would require more investment into social infrastructure - ie higher rates of Universal Credit for single parents, or social housing providing secure accommodation and lower rents - and I'm not sure anyone's willing to have those conversations.

This certainly isn't the case I t he area we live. It was my own comp experience, as there was absolutely a 'grammar level' set. I was surprised when we looked round local schools that none used setting at all in year 7, and only maths (& science in one) ever used sets. Similarly, my child did year 7 at a non-selective independent school. He was in a set for Maths and science, but everything else was taught in mixed ability classes.

Apparently, there has been a huge swing towards mixed ability teaching for most subjects in recent years as it brings the less able children up and creates a higher average. Not great for the most academic, but good for school outcomes.

Of course there is a class divide, on the whole middle classes value education and working classes don't. There will of course be exceptions. It has ever been the case and probably always will be.

Some of that would be leveled out with the changes that you mention but that does nothing for kids whose parents are just about keeping things running in middle class families. You only have to look at threads about nursery providers who aren't supporting potty training (it isn't their job) etc to see that parents struggle to find the time, energy and patience sometimes to get these things done and hit out at nurseries. I doubt those parents really think it's the nursery workers responsibility as much as despair at finding the calm time to devote to things like potty training around work, nursery runs, housework, food shop etc.

Financial stability means different things to different people but the ability to make choices about where you want to spend, what you will cut is a luxury that occurs at different points on the scale from benefits to millionaires.

I live in Wales have experience in education and have never encountered a school (at secondary level) which didn't set, at least for subjects such as English and Maths - even smaller rural ones! I have no idea how it would be even workable given the range of children's needs and abilities. My school set for most subjects including languages etc. There is less need to set for subjects such as Art or Home Economics.

If some schools are not setting then this is an individual issue which they need to sort out, not a call to re-introduce Grammars, which largely don't help and only benefit a minority.

I can completely assure you that there has absolutely not been a "huge" swing, or a swing of any kind towards mixed ability teaching, far from it! If this is happening then it's a minority of schools and should be addressed at a local level.

Really not sure where you're getting this information. I'm assuming that as your child attended an independent school you're not actually familiar with how state schools work and this is possibly hearsay because I can assure you it's not true.

When secondary schools set children properly there is absolutely no need for Grammar Schools which cause a complete segregation at a too young age. Sets allow children to work to their own strengths, move up or down in various subjects as needed, which is arguably better for both their development and their mental health. Grammar Schools are such an anachronism.

I see the snobs are out in full force with this one.

don’t know what class id be considered on here probably the dreaded one below the working one seeing as mother was unemployed pretty much the whole time and on benefits but much of her parenting and things she did is apparently middle class according to this site. Don’t even get me started on myself having my first child at 16 apparently should be a terrible parent but my kids are both top of their classes at school. Don’t let them vegetate in front of the tv either and they don’t even have ipads
Leaves me very confused, born in the 2000s btw I only learned about this class stuff when I started using mumsnet. Don’t think anyone under 30 thinks about it

For Middle Class families who are struggling things like flexible hours and home working can help then balance the need for work and time with their children.

For the struggling single mum working two jobs to keep a roof over her head, social housing and higher rates of UC can help.

There are solutions, it's just whether anyone wants to go there ....

I'm glad people under 30 aren't thinking about it. I'm much older than you and I've always been aware of it, having grown up poor with a single mum on benefits, then going to a "good" university and working with more "educated"/middle class people (but still being skint most of the time as a divorced parent, living in a working class area and sending my DCs to an albeit fairly decent Comp).

There are differences, I won't lie, but so much garbage is spewed about how "only middle class parents value education" and "only middle class parents care about exposing their children to home cooking, books, music, theatre and art. Working class just dump them in front of an iPad with a McDonalds" or "State Schools don't set and the most Gloriously Intellectual Superior Superkinder are being harmed by having to sit in a classroom with all the inferior thickos who should be kicked out of school and taught how to change tyres, clean toilets and lay bricks. We need Grammar Schools like back in the Good Old Days (tm)" etc.

People are individuals and can't be defined by a class.

Most of what Middle Class people think they "know" about the Proletariat is largely nonsense.

I think there are also issues to British middle class parenting. IME British middle class parents can be quite....ineffectual???? They are often clearly uncomfortable with exercising any kind of authority vis-a-vis their children, which is less than ideal in terms of outcomes. I've compared notes on this with other foreign parents living in this country, from a range of different cultures, and we're all struck by it. I also don't think they're necessarily good at preparing their children for adult life. They give them these lovely warm fuzzy childhoods, but don't then prepare them for an adulthood where they won't be the centre of everyone's attention and emotional energy. I have friends in the university sector who've commented on the noticeable decline in resilience and independence over the last ten to twenty years.

My friend grew up in a very middle class area. She said there was a massive drug problem among her peers. They had the money to get the stuff. Mental health was also extremely poor with eating disorders and self harm being rampant. They all got good GCSEs though.

Of course wc parents value education. I taught for many years and I can tell you that for a fact.

I remember my oldest son lying under the dining room table, which I had made into a tent with blankets over the chairs. He was in there for ages, blowing wee bubbles and thinking. Children don’t get that time to themselves now because they are institutionalised from a very young age. I really hate this new culture where children are farmed out to strangers and spend all day away from their parents and people think this is normal. It isn’t.