To think this information is missing from the news about white working class children in schools?

[Machinemasoluem]

That the definition of working class is FSM eligibility..

FSM is not a good definition of working class. At all.
The eligibility is earning less than 7.4k a year so barely anyone and its hardly working and will include children busy caring for disabled parents who don’t have time for homework, children who’s parents have alcohol or even drug problems. Etc

Absolutely no judgement from me my child gets FSM (I was only 16 when I had him and he was eligible when he started school but once you get them it lasts until the end of primary school) but it seems obvious that children from homes with issues that prevent them earning more than 7.4k will more likely struggle at school.

In September every child whose parents receive universal credit will be eligible for FSM so millions more children and from more ordinary working families. Even some middle class families receive universal credit so FSM still won’t be a good definition of working class.

I think the statistics around this will definitely be watered down when this happens. In the meantime why is it acceptable for people to act like white people are terrible parents unless they have the money for a tutor and all non white parents are superior at instilling discipline, respect and the importance of hard work? There are areas in London with obvious issues and it would be considered really racist to blame parenting.

In the nicest way, you need to up your comprehension in general. Most people read beyond headlines, most people do not think plumbers and builders are on FSM and £7.4k is not the threshold for FSM. Most people also do not say that white parents are shit unless they are getting a tutor. You need to expand your social circle a bit. If you read the report you will be able to understand more hopefully. The 'working class' term when referring to poverty has always been problematic, as also addressed in the report. Would you prefer 'underclass'?

I read what you wrote, and I seems to be more about you being unhappy that you think white parents get criticised, which seems to me to be more a racist positon than anything else. You can’t blame me for working with what you’ve written rather than implying some complex history you think I should know (& that you didn’t set out in your OP- I’m not a mind reader) that’s not how threads work.

Plus I didn’t like seeing you throw a reading comprehension insult when your own posts are so badly constructed as to be incomprehensible.

The term that has fallen out of fashion is “poverty line”. It isn’t a moral judgement. It is simply an amount of money defined by statute that a family needs to survive.

What percentage of the grade is just the intelligent you inherkt though.

Often you see drs who have dr kids or at least still good academically.
Issues with memory probably are inherited and most exams rely heavily on that.

If you have a low iq its going to seem easier to ger into s trade or not work. There really isnt then motivation to try.

Maybe helping these kids might involve holding them back a year to improve maths and eng.

My dc have adhd and wider family have some severe dyslexia. So even while i dont nor does dh they afe still affected due to the adhd, and so basically all descendants of 1 person who cant read have a level of learning issue. Even though clever and im putting in huge effort they wont reach near potential.

Dsis kids probably similar intelligence will end up doing much better as dont have these sen.

I wonder at the rates of school absence by ethnicity and fsm etc.

I dont think we are blunt enough with parents as how many realise failing sats (where you see so many saying its for school and waste of time) means likely failing gcse. Or understand that sats average is more like 104 rather than the 100 so 100 is a grade 4 gcse and 104 might be a 5.

I dont feel schools generally want you pushing fro your kid to get exceeding.

Ultimately atate schools closed for 2 days last and couldnt even be bothered to suggest the kids do any work even ttr or other online or reading...

But what you said about your son receiving it and being from a family that works and earns more than the freshhold proves that there could be others like you who are working class and getting FSM.

Therefore it does show the white working class demographic. Your sons data was used when they made these statistics and by your own admission you earn more that what you should do to receive FSM. So the data isn’t just based on family’s that have low incomes and aren’t working.

A Train Driver can absolutely consider themselves from sociocultural point of view if that was their background. You are referring to the socioeconomic view of class.

Both can apply...the complexity is there are differing views of 'class'.

@OrangeCinnamon Millions and millions of our ancestors were working class 150 years ago. Clinging on to the past when you earn well and have purchasing power is just ludicrous. Decades ago no one did this. They wanted to be middle class and leave poverty behind. It’s only recently where well off people pretend they are working class - like Starmer. My fil was a toolmaker and they had a large semi detached home in a very smart suburban road. Never would consider themselves working class. That was the machine operatives whose dc didn’t get to the grammar school and they didn’t buy in the better roads.

By becoming Middle class people did aspire to having a good job and making sure dc had a good education. Working class had opportunities to do this post 1944 education act and it transformed society.

100% this.

Infact, some of these poorest kids on FSM might also be from <gasp> MC backgrounds.

This is about benefit dependents, not the working classes. It is misleading.

What a ridiculous post.

white working class children (the ones on FSM) are performing worse than non-white working class children (also on free school meals) ie it goes beyond money as to the reason for issues.

It is cultural capital. That is the issue. There’s no surprise that those of Asian culture still do well despite being on FSM. I was one of them. Education was the way out and it worked.

Op, it sounds to me as though you are taking this headline a little too literally feeling a little judged by it. No one is saying white working class parents are bad parents, and if they are then they clearly don't understand the issues.

Read this from the a
sutton trust, they do a lot of work kn raising educational outcomes for different groups .

https://www.suttontrust.com/news-opinion/all-news-opinion/sutton-trust-response-to-white-working-class-inquiry-report/

There is a significant issue with underperformance in predominantly white working class areas which were significantly affected by deindustrialisation but also other non central pockets of deprivation, away from London and larger cities. Many of the initiatives so far e.g. new school buildings, funding, investment in job creation, focus on raising attainment and aspirations for girls has not benefited these communities as much.

I worked in am area of rural deprivation, we couldn't engage with many of the exciting free programmes designed to help children from deprived backgrounds purely based on the additional cost of transport to London. We struggled to provide cultural capital (trips to museums, theatres etc) for our pupils because even with pupil premium funding it was inaccessible due to transport costs.

When you have large scale deprivation in an area it does come with many social problems, sadly many children do live in homes where parents are struggling with long term mental health issues, addiction, poor health. It's an actual fact that there is a north south divide in the country in terms of life expectancy, health, wealth and educational outcomes, driven by deprivation in our old industrial heartland.

I don't think it's a bad thing the government is recognising this. Although I take huge issue with them framing it as a school failure when very little is being done to offer opportunity and hope to these communities. What good is a stack of gcse's if you live in somewhere like Blackpool and there are no jobs at the end of it.

Wasn't there a recent report focusing on just this that was widely reported?

You failed to read the post on the last thread where it was explained that from September, FSM will be divided into Targeted (the same measure as now, carries pupil premium funding) and expanded (the new additional entitlements, no pupil premium).

So it's not going to mess up the data at all, as it will still be identifying the same group for comparison by Ever6.

I agree to term this as the working class
is misreading, really the statistic is white boys who’s parents are on high benefits are preforming lower.
From what I have seen there is a much bigger issue with generational state reliance in white families than families of colour, who perhaps are on benefits but who attempt to lift their children out of poverty and in a generation they are earning well. A much smaller percentage of white families rely on state benefits and then raise doctors or lawyers. It’s a cultural issue.

@Westerled Intelligence is not solely inherited, it’s dynamic and heavily influenced by environment.

Even with additional needs at play, it is a fact that a child from a deprived back ground with severe dyslexia is statistically likely to do worse academically than a child from a background with educated parents.

We know from study after study, that good nutrition, a stable home environment, providing learning opportunities and even participation in extra curricular activities all influence how well a child does at school.

But you have to take into account that ethnic minority pupils on fsm are much more likely to live in London, and as a result have access to better schools with more funding and all sorts of other opportunities that aren't available to the kids in somewhere like Blackpool or Middlesbrough. Only about 5 percent of white pupils on fsm live in London, whereas around 50 percent of ethnic minority pupils on fsm live in London. Many white British low income kids live in the most underfunded and neglected parts of the countries. often with the worst schools and the fewest opportunities. It's not comparing like with like.

Is that who you blame? White parents? I blame things like capitalism and inequality.

I find this really interesting. How are their attitudes different with regard to food, money management and daily living?

Yes this has been proven in plenty of studies and it’s boys in particular.

I agree with you but it’s the same with polar regions. A person might live in a polar 4 region and be middle class, their parents just wanted a lower cost home or were handed it by a relative who knows. The metrics used are heavily flawed and you’re right in saying FSM will no longer be useful. I don’t agree with FSM for all on UC at all but that’s another thread.

Nobody says all white parents are bad parents.

But we have a problem in this country. We have a subset of people who think that the rules don’t apply to them, that their children don’t need to try or work hard, and that they just deserve to be propped up by the state. They don’t encourage any form of schoolwork or extracurricular activities, they just send their kids to school to doss about.

Why do you blame capitalism? Capitalism allows you to make your own success.

School meals should be free for everyone. But it should be one square meal. None of the rubbish you get in schools now. Two veg, a portion of meat and a carb.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/16/schools-funding-formula-education-england-barnsley-hackney

This is an old article but I always remember it:

"But in terms of the basic funding entitlement which represents the bulk of the formula, pupils and parents at Penistone were shocked to discover that in Barnsley schools receive on average £3,661 per pupil per year, while 175 miles down the M1, schools in Hackney receive £7,291 per pupil – almost double – according to 2015/16 figures."

Because it only works if you have an underclass.

Disagree, parents who can afford to should be feeding their children, it isn’t the state’s responsibility. Some on UC get a tenner a week.