White working class children

[NotAnotherScarf]

The bbc has a report about a review of the academic system failing white working class children. The bulk of the population.

It's brilliant that this has been looked at but the recommendations are appalling.

Basically its saying that wcc's are only fit for manual jobs. That schools should push towards offering for vocational courses.

That's where my education went 40 years ago. One child from my year group of 242 went to university at 18. We had at most 6 kids from non white backgrounds. Many went subsequently. I have always maintained the school saw us as shop assistants, factory hands and dockers.

The other recommendations will help children of all races...free travel under 22. Promoting reading etc.

One of the reasons why kids from other backgrounds are doing better has been the push to get them into university...ie black boys being actively recruited and bursarys being given solely to them. Places sponsored etc etc.

Whilst I welcome the move to vocational training. And for many people thats a brilliant move, ts disappointing that the report thinks that that's the main option for wcc's. Basically its says "we don't think your good enough for anything else " .

BBC News - White working-class children 'failed by schools system' - BBC News
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq51j10q601o

As you very well know, it was your assumption that you can somehow see through a screen, that when somebody deliberately says little about their background you have the incredible insight to know exactly who and what they are that I found amusing.

That is what statistical over representation means.

white men make up 88% of the sex offenders yet white people are 83% of the population, worse in child sex offences I believe.

I’d like to convince myself that poster is just trolling but as we know there are unfortunately people that think that way and unfortunately sometimes they are doing important jobs and making decisions that affect other people

Ok but in this case the poster explicitly said

“and found by 8 mist children had formed a view (which was the same outcome for them at 18) of wether they thought they could go to uni or not. This is ingrained in primary.”

And I just don’t personally think many 8 year olds even know what university is, especially 8 year olds living in poor neighbourhoods with disengaged parents (like what was being described earlier).

This is why it’s so important that these children are included and encouraged. I was very aware as a child that I was the dirty poor kid whose mum was neglecting her. I lived in council housing but in a very privileged area of London. I am so grateful that the parents of my classmates weren’t the sort of people who told there children not to play with me, some of them looking back clearly took pity on me and included me when they went on days to the beach, one family even took me to there holiday home to keep there daughter company every summer. It showed me a different way of life and meant the world to me.
I can not stand it on here when I see people actively teaching their children not to play with “children from the rough family” like it’s catching.
I didn’t finish school because the older I got the worse it got a home.
I have a completely different life now due to marriage but I’ve always worked minimum wage jobs.

There are so many assumptions here!

“These WWC boys won’t get the minimum exam results required for them”
why on earth would you assume all WWC boys can’t achieve minimum school leavers qualifications? Indeed, why do you assume none of them do currently?!?

your cousin is clearly not the only person to recognise lack of parental involvement. Its widely acknowledged and has been … well forever.

but-
a) these initiatives are often by their nature long term. They’re not there is produce results in a year but over generations. nudge theory.

b) there isn’t anything directly society can do to make parents engaged. They can work with the younger generations to help them become involved parents, but there isn’t much you can do about the current ones. So the money has to go there, because the easy answer your cousin identified isn’t controllable. Society only has some levers they can pull, they can’t do everything.

I am interested as to where you got that statistic from given that the UK Government deliberately does not produce or publish data on the breakdown of sex offenders by ethnicity.

So either it's something you just made up or you have your own source?

They don't have to know what university is. They just have to have a conversation along the lines of 'I want to be a vet when I grow up', 'Don't be stupid, you'd have to stay at school until you're 25/old and it would cost thousands of pounds. You hate school anyway'.

Source: My mother when I was 6 years old.

Once the idea of university was introduced by a teacher when I was 13 'Don't be so stupid, you can't afford that, you're going to get a job at 16 at the Gas Board, university's for rich people, not you'

'What are you listening to that noise for? Ugh, turn that screeching rubbish off' (Opera).

There's nothing wrong with being white

csa centre publishes data

Rather verbose and cryptic response, that I have no idea on what you mean.

To put it simpler terms I see Critical Race Theory and it's emphasis on "systemic racism " as a vile and damaging belief that destroys hope and ambition amongst ethnic minorities especially black boys.

Namely
"don't even bother trying or having ambitions, the system is stacked against young black boys".

It isn’t trolling to claim white people aren’t victims of racism it’s quite a well established school of thought actually.

it doesn’t mean there aren’t some instances that white people are specifically targeted but we aren’t victims of racism, race based prejudice sure but not racism as there are not networks or institutions of power suppressing as a people.

those women were terribly let down by the authorities as victims of rape often are and it was made worse that the authorities were too afraid of being termed racist to actually do their job which again shows how important these discussions are

The problem with being poor (and I think being poor is what the report is actually about) is that it goes along in general with having a low IQ. Please don't tell me that not all poor people are thick, I KNOW that, but it is also absolutely true that statistically the poorest of us are the least intelligent. IQ is the biggest predictor of earnings. There is more learning disability, more low ranges of IQ in the poor and as a childs intelligence is inherited from the parents (80% inherited vs 20% nurture) they in general are going to do worse at school.
This doesn't hold true for new immigrants, because those parents are often poor because of language difficulties etc, but normally intelligent. This can be remedied in one generation as offspring inherit the parents intelligence and are native English speakers.
So it is entirely predictable that poor white children are lowest achieving and their not very bright parents do not have the skills to help them. In general.

IQ isn’t even used statistically the way you’ve presented it, it’s not routinely measured in the uk

and as you know, it’s controversial and widely criticised for being so white centric that black people perform worse in it just because of the colour of their skin

Trades are definitely looked down on, yet my friends who went into a trade out earn my friends who went to Oxbridge. My friend who went to uni and got a degree then trained as a plumber and has always had more work available than he has time to do, as he’s good at his job, reliable, polite etc.
I don’t think pushing all children towards university and treating those who don’t want to go (or who drop out) as somehow lesser, is helpful for anyone. Vocational training can be a really good thing.

@Bunnyofhope

Is it really inherited? I find that fascinating. I am from a long, line of poverty. Grandparents moved over from Ireland during the famine. My mum was in and out of care homes. The odd photo of her as a kid, she’s filthy. A lot of addiction and complex needs around her, but there has also been a long line of intelligence.

My nan was bright, my mum went to uni and got a first (which was some feat after her background). I’ve always lived on the breadline myself. Achieved a first class OU degree despite no secondary schooling. My own 16 year old who’s on FSM got mainly 8s in his mock exams, so highly likely to do well.

Sometimes I look at peers who I grew up with, many are in prison, some are dead, that sort of thing. And I always think, why did we turn out okay? I mean, still socioeconomically not well off. It’s just this deep question I always struggle with. It’s not arrogance, but maybe inherited intelligence saved us.

Both SATS and CATS are similar to IQ tests and have a normal distribution curve. I think most people do think that most human characteristics are normally distributed.

Around the inheritance of intelligemce
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p072bsz7?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

I don’t think that’s a common experience. When most 6 year olds tell their mothers they want to be a vet or a superhero or whatever the response is usually “that’s nice”.
I can’t remember thinking beyond the end of the day as an 8 year old let alone ten years down the line.
I have an 8 year old he only knows what university is because his uncle recently moved away for uni. I do not think any of his friends would know what university is.

I honestly just don’t think your average 8 year old knows what university is

No. Thats not really true. It's the first marker of LD even now with functionality taking a useful second place. Also statistics don't have to be taken from the UK to be valid. It used to be said to be white centric but now it's more thought to be variously class or experience centric, which as we know does not make non white people more likely to do badly and they don't do badly. White poor people in general do worse.

Ok in my middle class home either tbe one I was born into or where my children grew up :

Child (aged 6) :" I want to be a vet when I grow up"
Parent: " That sounds like a good idea, why do you think you would be good at that?"

Aged 8; " What do you think vets need to be interested in?
Age 10: "We need to apply for a secondary school who have a reputation for getting 18yos in to vetinary courses"
Aged 12: " If you are still thinking about vetinary science, you need to do well in 3 sciences at GCSE, how can we help you acheive that?"
Aged 14 : " Is vet med still the plan ?, lets start thinking about who we can ask to support with work experience after your GCSEs"

and so on.....

Absolutely it is inherited. Hugely. Look it up. Nature vs nurture. But nature is by far the biggest predictor. Nurture can help maximise skills, but nothing like to the extent of making up for inherited characteristics.

I don’t think that’s a complete story though. score gaps in other tests by income exist (all over the world), but they’re mainly explained by environmental and structural factors rather than being evidence of genetic or inate differences of poor people vs everyone else.

SATs (and GCSEs and degree award) are attainment tests tied to a specific curriculum, not psychometric measures of cognitive ability.
CATs are more similar

Tradies out earning graduates are always ancedotes.

Bottom line: in the UK, the average skilled university graduate wins over the long run. But a fully qualified, in-demand trade can beat a weak/low-paying degree, especially early on.

It’s very nice that your parents were encouraging so were mine but it was always focused on the current or next step not one ten years down the line. Even in your own examples that is the case.