How do we ensure all UK children regardless of back ground/ability receive high quality education?

[happygardening]

Contrary to what some may think I'm not anti state ed and as someone who works with disadvantaged children it really matters to me that they receive a high quality broad education and they fulfil their potential. But sadly in many cases they are not (there are I know exceptions) frequently their parents cannot assist them for a variety of reasons.
Is there an answer to this problem or are they condemned by their circumstances which are not of their own making to remain at the bottom of the heap?
No judgey DM comments please.

I find the faith in parental aspiration touching - and proof that those posters have never spent time in a shitty area. Fourth generation unempkoyed (generations being 16 years by the way) - totally based on benefits but spensing money on fags booze phones and tv. The parents have NO concept of planning for tomorrow - let alone a career for their child.

Talkinpeace well the thing is I am from a shitty area, with parents on the breadline reliant on alcohol. I didn't go very much to secondary school, because I unfortunately passed the 11+ and went to a grammar school which made it very clear that I was not the sort of person who should be attending. So I often didn't bother. My parents knew how unhappy the school was making me, but couldn't fix it so they turned a blind eye.

When I went to an RG university it was as an adult single-parent whose kids had multiple-fathers none of which ever wanted, nor did I expect, a long term relationships with. This did not stop me, or them, having good lives at any point. Nor did it stop me getting the job I have now. Just because some people think the order should be education, career then family does not mean this order is universally right.

I now spent lots of my time working for various bodies (DoH, FoE, Councils etc) as a middle-class professional talking to families where there are drug and alcohol problems, in and out of prison and mental health issues etc. Some of these have lost their kids permanently, and many others are fearful of that happening. At that stage all professionals are a threat, and not engaging is often seen as less of a risk.

One of the major barriers I face is first to try to make research commissioners understand that white, middle-class values are just that. The values of a particular group of people, at a particular time and place. If they are promoted as a universal standard that everyone should sign it up to is just class prejudice (so similar to sexism, racism etc).

It is surprising that so many of the marginalised prefer not to engage with professionals or people that refuse to recognise any value in their lives? After all, they would only have to spend 5 mins on MN to work out that many people are so desperate to keep their kids away from them that they lying and cheating is commonplace and often condoned (for example feigning religion for school applications).

One of my friends came from a family where father abused the mother and kids so the mother stopped caring. House a mess, kids left to their own on the streets. No interest in their schooling and living off benefits. My friend now in late 20s got herself through school with not many qualifications, had a few drug issues but a good head on her shoulders. After leaving home at 16 and going to college she got herself sorted and later from the age of 18 fostered her three younger sisters. One of whom went to uni, the other good career, one drop out. Now my friend has a team of about 40 working for her and has just done her Maths Gcse. There is a way of breaking out and she enjoyed her inner city school so there will have been an influence there but what worked for her may not work for others. So proud of her now - it was in her first job that she meant the real mentors though and for me bringing back a lot of good apprenticeships from age 14 on would do a lot to level the playing fields and stop the fear that if children do not end up with good qualifications at 16 they will be on the scrap heap.

I think we might have to accept that education cannot provide any sort of social levelling.

All children who are well educated require a huge input from their parents. My DC attend fabulous schools, but the amount I have had to expend in terms of time, money and energy has been incredible.

Many parents simply won't do it.

"All children who are well educated require a huge input from their parents. My DC attend fabulous schools, but the amount I have had to expend in terms of time, money and energy has been incredible."

Yup. Being (U)MC ain't a walk in the park!

Maybe if we stopped thinking of kids as kids from a younger age and asked them to make the decisions instead of relying on parental support this would cut the parental link. When children take their options stop involving parents and let the school and professional help make the decisions. One of the issues with some MC parents is they do far too much for their kids to the extent I have witnessed the parents of 20 something's writing applications for law schools or actually helping them with paid work projects. This helps the child whose parents left them to take responsibility for themselves at an early age come into their own. Parents should not be invited to parents evenings from age 14/12 even to cut the influence and make the child look at their future as their own. If they mess it up they need to learn from it. If they do well it is because if themselves. At some schools they struggle to get parents in at all so let the child and school make the decisions. The baby boomers generation were on their own from 14 and they appeared to have done a good job. It is the parent ally involved 60s generation who seem to be making the biggest mess and I fall into this category. By losing the parents and making all children make their own decisions, they will become stronger as a result. If they want to get a job instead of staying on at school at 14 let them. No point trying to keep kids in school just to get a handful of GCSEs when they could be professing in a career or go back to school at a later age when they are ready. We need to get away from everything and a child's future being measured at 16, 18 or 21. How many children have done want their parents wanted, worked hard at school, got their degrees and then bummed around because they managed to tick all the correct boxes so job done or becoming demotivated because those high paid jobs their parents promised them are not out there. I would like my dcs to do all of the above but need to accept that it may not be the right route for each of my children and but out even though it is hot wired in to me to interfere.

I know of parents who send their children to expensive prep schools but don't support their children's learning. These children are not thriving.

I think parental input is critical.

Children do well because of parents but the point of the thread is to get good schooling for all and simply relying on parental in put is not working for all and sometimes there can be too much parental involvement. How many MC parents would push, push, push to get a child to follow the socially accepted at the expense to the child's future independence and happiness?

losing sorry, but I don't want to hand over my DC's future to the state.

Their education is my responsibility. Both in law and morally.

It has bot nothing to do with me pushing them to do my bidding and everyhting to do with my understanding of my duty to them!

grey that is true!

But the majority of the DC I've seen in the private school system are very well supported by their parents. TBH parental support is one of the pillars of a great school, particularly in the early years.

happygarden, you mentioned that the drug-addicts, etc, do love their children. Perhaps by "aspirational" I just mean hopeful and tentatively excited when things go well, but lacking expectations that they will. I appreciate that addictions and mental health problems preoccupy the parent though....

You make a good point about the handful of disadvantaged children in outstanding schools still not doing well. We think a lot about this in our school. I like to think I have been a small part of the solution. It has to do with who you stand next to on the playground, with remembering what it felt like to come from a family that was different......good points were made above about do-gooding not being the answer.

Music is a small but not completely insignificant part of the answer. Because it fundamentally doesn't matter, you can fool around with it, change the curriculum, make up your own syllabus and put unqualified people like me in positions of responsibility - you can take risks with it. You can build up a provision that maps itself entirely around a family's tastes, desires, happy memories and aspirations. So in a funny way it can end up mattering after all :). But I don't think we can import El Sistema into England wholesale. I think that's a bit too top down.

Word

I agree with you. But I do think there are swathes of MC, upper MC etc. parents who are very busy with their own concerns (careers, sport, hobbies) who think that by paying £10 - 20K in school fees, there children will be educated. I can think of several families in this situation and their children are not doing well academically or in other terms (their manners are appalling!).

You may be right grey.

But the parents at my DC's prep were not like that! They made me feel like an amateur!

TBF as the DC have got older, parental input has lessened. Not disappeared but eased off... thank goodness.

Word. You do not need to worry about the State taking over your child's education as yours are private. The thread is about a good education for all not just for your kids. What do you suggest for the not so lucky children?

Funnily enough Grey the manners at our local top performing state school are really bad. The kids have a real sense of entitlement. That is from their teachers.

losing I feel very sorry indeed for DC without advantage, particularly as that was me in childhood!

However, I feel it is utterly wrong to try to leaven advantage by placing the state at the heart of what is a family matter.

You cannot and should not attempt to enrich the lives of the disadvanateg by impoverishing the lives of the advantaged.

My former boss who is an incredible high flyer (think CEO of worldwide blue chip) simply does not have time for her children. She has four and they are all quite wild, horrible manners, struggling at their very expensive expatty schools. She is just banking on them going to boarding school to knock them into shape.

We have to sign our children's diaries every week even now in Year 8. My ds needs to do his homework not me. I sign the book to stop him getting detention and look at his books every now again to see how he is getting on but he is now old enough to take responsibility himself. This over reliance on parental contracts serves no purpose other than to get kids in to detention if book not signed. What if parents big interested. Kid gets detention for parent not being interest enough soon. Great idea making those children at an instant disadvantage.

If you don't do your homework it should be detention not if parents have checked you did your homework. How is this going to help kids in the workplace. Are they going to ask parents to sign then. We are seeing the influence of parents fighting for their kids' rights in the workplace in HR. It is just ridiculous.

The other argument against it is that parental involvement can be negative. Don't bother with that subject this is much better even though child more likely to do better in the first subject. Do you think top public schools expect 14 year olds to get parents to take responsibility for prep. No. Therefore better preparing the kids than the State system.

What about their father grey does he work long hours too?

I am not sure what he does but he is not very involved.

There's a certain abdication of parental duty, to my mind. I think it is shocking that the normal progression you expect, of children doing better than their parents because their parents strive to give them better opportunities eventually stalls when the parents are such high flyers that they don't have time to do the best for their children.

Might be a small subset of parents, but I know of at least two families in this category.

losing you're right about homework etc.

My DS attends a public school and I wouldn't be expected to help with homework in any way or sign anything. And he's never given any project type stuff that requires me to do owt. Though I would be informed about a detention.

But the options process very much involves the parents.

can you explain a bit more word? You sounded a bit "let them eat cake" in your posts until I got to the bit where you said that you do feel very sorry for children without advantage esp. as that was you in childhood...

but I'm not quite clear on what you are for or against....? are you ok with the well-off paying tax to pay for universal schooling, thus impoverishing themselves, for instance?

Word I think the difference between State and Private is quite big in this. Parental contracts run until a child is 16 and is just foot tick box approach. I agree you do not want your child to lose out at the expense of the disadvantaged but I actually feel all children including the Mc kids in the State system are being disadvantaged in later life by this reliance on parental impact being so important and believe I am as bad as the rest.

thesecret just for context, I'm from one of the biggest and worst housing estates in Europe. Growing up I was very poor indeed!

My view is that parental input is one of the most enriching things in a child's life. Nothing to do with being rich or poor by the way.

But there do seem to moves afoot (and I htough this was what losing was supporting) to reduce parental input as much as possible to leaven the advanatge it gives those DC against those whose parents don't give as much input.

In order to hand over your child to state Ed and relinquish responsibility for their education to schools (ie for options etc) then you would have to have faith in the system.

If we are genuinely suggesting that parents in disadvantaged socio-economic areas are right to be disenfranchised with school, how on earth do you propose to convince a group of middle class parents that the school has their best interests at heart?

This would be a complete disaster, with the system able to pigeon hole child on definitive pathways merely by dint of their socio-economic status, and would lead to far less economic mobility.

I can't see it flying at all.

My kids are entirely stated educated. I have a son who is both extremely bright and ADHD. School are happy if he hands in a bit of homework every now and again - they removed him from his grade skip classes because although he aced the work, he wasn't confident enough about removing himself from his peer group and finding the other classroom. The school aren't concerned that he isn't meeting his potential at all.

I also have a dd with a physical disability. She is extremely bright, but has slow recording skills due to her disability. There isn't enough time or money to sort out a system whereby she can meet her potential, so she is grouped with the children with learning disabilities.

I have spent periods working in secondary schools. There are classes where the 'education' is crowd control, and a constant effort to inspire some sort of interest in the student body to no avail. I have worked with some of the most committed teachers, who work for hours to come up with something likely to stimulate interest in young teens. They turn up and chuck ink cartridges around for amusement.

I had to leave the learning support department for my own sanity. So understaffed and underfunded that the 'annual review' of a child's needs consisted of nothing other than a rubber stamp and continuation of the same (whether a child obviously needed more or less support) because there was just no time or money to do the job thoroughly. And where, if a child did not have interested and engaged parents, who were actively petitioning for action, then it was virtually impossible to get any changes in support for a sinking child.

I did the philanthropic thing. I forced the departmental hand on a number of occasions and we made changes towards enabling pupils to succeed with a different support. But it was so virtually impossible that the system made me weep.

Will I be handing decisions about my children's future to the school?

Nope.

And these are nice middle class outstanding comprehensives, where people fight to get their kids in, move into catchment to secure a place etc.