Are the majority of classes in state schools as disruptive as the class on Jamie Oliver's Dream School?

[mummynoo]

After watching Jamie Oliver's dream school, I am wondering if all state school classes are as rude and disruptive as the class featured in this programme. Since my daughter is due to start infants school this September?

Can any teachers who might be reading this give me their opinion. Is it impossible to teach because the pupils are constantly talking over you?

Don 't discount too quickly my class point. It's a fascinating area to examine. I'ts also topic de jour for the various political parties. It's why they want social engineering at university entrance stage, why they might ask did your parents go to university and did your parents go to state school. It's why some City firms are starting to ask what sort of school did you go to because their cilents might be asking how many of your staff are from very poor homes and they need statistics to spout back. So I suppose if you can recruit the child from a very very poor home who got a scholarship to a school which edcated them properly and gave them the accent your customers want then you hit gold in the Brave New World of social engineering.

Class not sex or race is one of the biggest determinants... I accept what is said about the BBC (and indeed hte suggestions to dumb down and lower the class of radio 4 which is getting people so excited at prsent) and there wa a time when you'd only get on in broadcasting if you had a strong regional accent and I assume in some socialist republics of local authority type regimes if you aren't black disabled and working class and female you probably find it harder to advance although even there I bet most of the chief executives or those over £100k at local authorities in the UK are white males.

State grammar schools used toi allow children tyo change class -0 that was that thing. Comprehenseives don't. How that may not matter or it may be better now as if you take a child and change it so it doesn't fit in with its family any more may be the damage is worse than the benefit of its moving classes and away form its family but it's certainly an issue to consider. Plenty of adults deliberately adopt the clothes of a different class either up or down and the way of speaking and like,. Others do really well and end up rather common nouve riche millionaires. It's interesting how some move class and others don't. But don't assume this issue does not exist. It does.

Xenia, could you provide pointers to this research that 'proves time and times again' that class is a more important differential than race, ethnicity or gender in social advantage/disadvantage.

And explain how you extrapolate class from race, ethnicity and gender to 'prove' this point.

Unless you're too busy, of course .

Xenia- "Others do really well and end up rather common nouve riche millionaires"

"the suggestions to dumb down and lower the class of radio 4"

You are absolutely unbelievable and not in a nice way. Quite despicable.

Read this, Xenia?

Be afraid.

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/11/oxford-record-state-school-intake

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/11/oxford-record-state-school-intake

It's been all over - the plans to make Radio 4 more appealing to a different sort of person. I'm not initiating the debate over it. It's a huge thing and lots of people don't want it to change. If it doesn't appeal to some people they can go and listen to a different radio station.

I was out with some of the children but this is just one www.lawandlegal.co.uk/careers/working-class-accents-overlooked-top-law-firms/

"Dr Louise Ashley from the Cass Business School conducted interviews with 130 staff from high-profile City law firms. She found that although the firms were committed publicly to diversity programmes, almost all the solicitors employed were from non working class backgrounds.

Of those surveyed, 90% of the lawyers had fathers who had been senior managers or officials. At two of the law firms 70% of the lawyers had had a private education.

Senior-level employees at the law firms interviewed told Dr Ashley they did not believe applicants from less prestigious universities were likely to be less academically gifted. However, there was a concern that people who looked or sounded working class may damage a law firm?s image and brand."

You could extrapolate that to many different careers. The BBC programme about how people get jobs looked at medical students and found much the same.

I am not saying if you have a working class accent you cannot get on (look at all the Essex boy traders and a few Essex girls in the City) but it's harder.

Xenia-I wasn't interested in whether or not you wanted to "initiate a debate" I wanted you to realise what a pompous twit you sound when you say things like "others do really well and end up as common nouve riche millionare"

Don't you understand how rude and obnoxious you sound?

But surely the debate is worth having Quicklook busy? Expressing irritation at a perceived lack of sensitivity in the language used to describe people is admirable but distracts us from Xenia's important point, which is well worth examining, about the difficulties the working classes face and how they might (and many do) learn to "play the game".

I absolutely agree that class matters where social mobility is concerned. Individual success stories are great, but are just that - individual.

"Expressing irritation at a perceived lack of sensitivity in the language used to describe people is admirable but detracts us from Xenia's important post"

Oh thank you for thinking my post is admirable but distracting. I didn't realise we weren't allowed to distract from Xenia's posts.

The point remains that Xenia and presumibly you also think it is ok to refer to someone who has made good as "ending up as common nouveau riche millionaires"

I am afraid any right thinking person would feel the need to bring that comment to her attention and ask her if she realises how obnoxious it is.

slipshod you are absolutely right. The debate is worth having.

However unpalatble Xenia's posts are, there remains a degre of truth in them.

Privately schooled DC do fair better statistically.
Our country is bloody well run by the privately educated.

I was recently involved in an access to justice think tank and was gobsmaacked to learn that 75% of all QCs and the judiciary were from independent schools. I knew they were over represented, but 75%!!

It's so easy to be defensive when Xenia says that the privately educated do better...so so easy to point out ones own triumphs and those of ones children...but the fact remains that despite the fact that privately educated are not better, they do better.

And that tells me a hell of a lot about social mobility and meritocracy in this country.

I must just clear something up.

When I posted "I am not interested in whether or not you want to intiate a debate". I was responding directly to Xenia's posting Mar 11 20.16 "I'm not intiating a debate over it"

I think it is very telling that every time Xenia posts something obnoxious, such as "accent like a bus driver," "ending up as common nouve riche millionaires" etc etc etc, the comments are ignored by Xenia and posters who agree with her.

Posters who disagree with fee paying schools are only trying to say that just because a child attends a state school, it does not mean their life will be unsuccessful/unworthy. That for us the choices we make for our children are just as valid as yours.

The piece that you posted, Xenia, doesn't address issues of race, ethnicity or gender at all.

Talking about the discrimination towards those with others than upper class accents without mentioning race and ethnicity is extremely superficial and, dare I say, parochial.

It's thoughtless, dim-witted, Daily Mail-type twaddle, same as your recent comparison of discrimination against people who don't like sport with racial discrimination.

I think a lot what Xenia has to say is actually depressingly true. Popular careers generally require work experience or unpaid internship experience. How can you get these if you do not have contacts in the industry or the wealth to survive on no salary for several months? My OH works in TV and is the only state educated person in his department - because all have to start on little or no salary and connections help you get in. OH was lucky that his dad built an extension for a TV executive . . .

I don't see this as a reason to send my children to a private school however, I see it as a reason to try to fight to change the status quo. (I'm an inner city state school teacher - trying equip my kids to compete in this world as best I can . . .)

trying to equip

QuickLookBusy I completely agree. Xenia appears incapable of answering challenges as well as incapable of logical argument and seems only able to resort to prejudice of the very worst kind. I also agree that I shouldn't dignify Xenia with a response but so far the inanity of her posts has been such that I haven't had the will to resist.

Sorry wordfactory that you feel chippy.

And wordfactory you shouldn't be 'gobsmacked' that 75% of QC's and the judiciary are from independent schools. Recruitment policies now at the Bar need time to filter through. That surely is a very obvious point. Especially to someone whose husband is Managing Partner of a MC firm.

qumquat the work experience thing can be double edged. Universities recognise the difficulties of those without 'connections' getting work experience in competitive fields and say so in terms on their websites (Oxford/ Faculty of Medicine for example).

Hey Xenia what about the news in the Guardian? Fees well spent?

Thank God for state school.

Xenia is right, unpalatable as the message may sound.

It is not much nepotism as having the brains AND the right fit to get ahead. It is not a true meritocracy. There are still many barriers to entry for someone with just brains and good grades.

The right 'fit' does not require private schooling and elocution lessons however and it's simply absurd to insist that it does.

Where is all this evidence that only those who speak proper are getting good jobs? My eldest is in her final year at university with all her peers looking for jobs. All talented by definition but extremely diverse in terms of background and she assures me there is no discernible difference in outcome which appears to be based on 'class'. If we're talking about current recruitment prejudices, the Class of '11 is a good place to start.

Xenia is wrong.

There are a lot of comments above.

1. The more interesting debate rather than my views or how I express them in brief moments between earning a crust (been at my desk since 7am already) and dealing with children is how to equip the working classes to get where they want to get and information and access to statistics and the like does help. If all they need to do is change how they speak then tell them that. Might save a lot of wasted effort in interviews.

1. It is very hard for anyone to do well in their early 20s. Obviously I know loads of young people that age plenty of whom have great A levels, even great accents whatever that means and social skills and even then a ton of them are unemployed at present even with Oxbridge degrees as has always been the case in severe recessions.

1. I have never regretted paying school fees for a vast raft of reasons. I do not sdee them as directly buying exam results. Good teaching is only a part of what I pay for. My own involvement in and enjoyment of school life is part of it too which I would not get at our nearest comp with its 34|% A- C at GCSE.

1. I very much doubt I said above that you can only have received pronunciation if you go to private schools. I've repeatedly said 50% of entrants to the best universities go to state schools and a good few of them get jobs after.

1. I said there are different types of people. Some are quite poor and working class. Others were working class and change class (which is a fascinating thing). The third category get very rich but don't change class. Good for them. I have never criticised anyone. The pursuit of wealth can lead to your death under a bunch of gold like King Midas. I've always said the richest things we have are good physical and mental health and love for those for whom we care BUT it can also be fun to pursue a career, succeed, earn money - it's a pleasure more women should indulge in - can be a route to happiness in a balanced life. This latter category I described as nouveau riche/common. These are just words people use. I am sure there are plenty of words that can be used to describe me. I'm nothing special. However without doubt within seconds of opening your mouth and indeed befoer you do by what you wear people in interviews will form a view (not best HR practice of course but still important - will they wear the clothes needed in that work environment - whether that be the boiler suit or the right kind of City suit etc)

1. There are plenty of people who keep their working classness if that's a phrase and succeed although others again change their accent.

1. When Cherie Booth was asked on the Dream School programme by the children how could she possibly be working class Liverpool she had to explain over time her accent had changed.

The debate about class being the biggest barrier to success is worth having. I agree the survey I produced above related just to one area. I don't think it's the only one. I suspect it very much depends on the job you do and with whom you work.

There are plenty of posher state schools of course and gosh one of the worst bits about having children when they were teenagers was the way they and their friends spoke even in their schools although perhaps not as bad as in many other schools. Thankfully the phase passed. I certainly didn't feel school fees were teaching them to speak properly.

Xenia has an incredibly superficial and tunnel vision view of the world. She repeatedly says that the best thing than women can do for their kids is earn enough for full-time nannies, private schools, elocution lessons and the like.

Those of us who view life as more complex, rounded and actually interesting than earning money to pay someone else to live our life for us start from a fundamentally different perspective.

I do find her comments that equate racial discrimination with eg discrimination agsinst people who don't like sport very offensive, not to mention dim-witted. Of course life isn't a meritocracy; if it was only education and elocution lessons that levelled the playing field, we'd be laughing.

And love them and be happy. There is no doubt that the biggest indicator of child outcomes is family income however wrong that may be so that one of the best thing a mother can do for her children is go out there and earn £100k.

I don't think most men nor most women who work would feel that becase we work we pay someone else to live our life for us. Work and our families and hobbies together are our life.

I don't think I've often written anything about racial discrimination so I'd be surprised if I had said was is suggested. I did say class discrimination matters and indeed is lawfeul as is discrimniation on the grounds of how you look and your height and weight unless it's racial /sexual as well etc. it's an interesting issue. The Afro-Caribbean bright girl from the top public school with the very posh accent can be ilke gold dust in some recruitment environments - you fulfil a customer ethnic target yet get someone who fits in and talks like everyone else does - win win all round.

Yellowstone, your dcs have not worked long enough to know that whilst fit may not matter as much at the recruitment stage (where companies like fodder for their diversity and inclusion campaigns), it matters subtly and often unconsciously at the promotion stage.

It is quite possible to predict from a batch of recruits (assuming they have the minimum intellect and graft to continue), who will be promoted and who will have to work a lot harder and longer or have some special skill (esp languages) to get to the same place.

I have spent more than a decade in the City. I work with the those who have made it. It is a type.

Of course, the City is not the end all and be all. And you don't need a private education to get on. But it would be naive to think it is a true meritocracy. There are those for whom success will come much more easily.

Xenia you do keep retracting bits of what you say. A little while back you made out that elocution lessons were key.

'Common' is not just a word people use. In the context you used it in it's a word only used by the worst kind of snob (and I've got no chip: my dad was nouveau pauvre).

I'm interested to know what qualifies you to speak so knowledgeably on behalf of the current generation because, frankly, you seem to lack knowledge as well as the imagination to see things from a perspective other than your own.

'One of the best things a mother can do for her children is go out there and earn £100k'. No it most certainly is not. In fact it's becoming ever more clear that quite a few of your protestations are merely exercises in self-justification. I particularly love the bit about having to get away from your kids on holiday because that makes you happy and the kids want above all for you to be happy.

I thought three of your five were grown up? An experienced mother of five having to deal with two at the weekend is definitely not a big deal.

Blueshoes I don't extrapolate from my children alone - the eldest is only a finalist, so that would be daft. I was in the City long before you were, as was my brother and plenty of friends. My father spent half a century there too. I'm bright enough and interested enough and with wide enough vision to see how things have changed, especially with the eldest on her way there now too, along with a bunch of her friends. Allow me my perspective, which is quite long.

And love them and be happy. There is no doubt that the biggest indicator of child outcomes is family income however wrong that may be so that one of the best thing a mother can do for her children is go out there and earn £100k.

you say this xenia....and yet, no it isn't!!! Its the level the mother is educated to. This is a greater indication than wealth, free school meals, class, private or public education. There was a report done about 5 years ago reported in the Sunday Times. They surmised that the man carer's repsonse and support of the school made the biggest impact to a child. This was linked to how successful the mother had been in fuull time education herself.

this is why you have such poor debating skills. You make statements stating them as 'fact' that we all 'agree' to...when this clearly is not backed up as 'fact' by all studies ever carried out.

Please don't presume to know what I think