Harsh opinion - is it fair to give work experience to students who in reality haven't the academic ability to enter the profession e.g. medcine?

[mids2019]

I work in a large NHSq trust and we are continually being asked by our widening participation team to take on work experience students for a range of medical careers including clinical science and medicine.
A lot of the children unfortunately are forecast 3/4/5s at GCSE yet schools and the widening participation team keep saying we should be giving work experience to these children who in reality won't be qualified for some professiions out of what I see is a misguided sense of fairness.

The medics push back at this saying they simply have no time and time would be wasted enthusing a child about a profession they would be unlikely to be able to do.

The medics are quite happy to take students from a locally high performing grammar school as a matter of course unofficially (and often due to parental connections)

no because predicted grades change I got a Dd and a U in mocks and AAA* in my actual exams.

sometimes being around what they’re interested in work or being inspired or finding a role model. But writing children off at 15 from certain careers is shit.

all that children without connections don’t get a look in.

Actually it is not.

Yes people need to have capability and required skills for their chosen profession.

However, as a university Equity Director I worked with put it - if you can't see it you can't be it. Children in low socio economic environments think university is for someone else, not people like them. They've never had people in their family go to uni and think it just isn't an option for them.

WRT the OP if these are high school students, realistically what would they be doing? Not patient consults. More likely admin. Anyone can do admin regardless of predicted grades and it might inspire some children to aim high.

I disagree @mids2019

You are right that a lot of people who are predicted 4s and 5s have no capacity to become rising stars in the most prestigious and competitive medical careers. However:

• low aspirations and low achievement are a vicious cycle often baked-in generation-to-generation that needs breaking and breaking it is a long-term project far wider than a single week of work experience. I think you aren't seeing the big picture
• maybe the week of work experience won't propel this particular widening-participation kid into a career as a neurosurgeon, but maybe it will inspire them to pursue a medical-adjacent career in a related but less academically demanding role, and get the ball rolling on increasing aspirations within that family that the next generation will reach higher. If the kid getting 4s and 5s was growing up.in a household where academic achievement isn't valued then they have a massive disadvantage which they may not completely overcome, but at least they can bring up their own children differently and get them striving for the top grades right from the start.
• some of the kids who are getting 4s and 5s are actually very bright and capable but have been massively let down by a broken education system. Some of them, with the right inspiration and opportunities, could be doing massively better, but are struggling in a school where a lot of classes in key subjects are being taught by non-specialist teachers who don't fully understand it themselves, or have teachers off long term sick with stress and depression and spend most of their GCSE years with cover lessons rather than active teaching. These kids may get crappy GCSEs at age 16 but have the capacity to try again at college and get 8s and 9s, and go on to get top A levels given the right inspiration which the work experience opportunities are part of providing.

Limiting work experience opportunities to privileged children who already have plenty of inspiration, and via parental connections is fundamentally wrong - fine to do it for those happy and privileged few but only in combination with also doing it for those who are less fortunate.

They have also by default become more likely to gain a place on a medical course - perhaps one with slightly lower requirements such as physio, nursing, speech therapy, paramedic because they have been gifted the work experience others can't get and for all of those courses some relevant work experience is a requirement. So, the advantage of background has embedded itself.

What is more valuable? Offering work experience to a child who probably has many opportunities already and is on track for a great academic outcome. Or showing a child who has few helpful social networks or role models what might be if they worked hard? It’s not about ‘wasting’ medic time or not but raising aspirations generally.

Maybe that ‘wider participation’ student will leave the experience thinking about working in the NHS in a role they had never before contemplated. Surely that is more important than a privileged grammar kid getting another tick on their cv.

Most kids have no idea what they want to do. Sutely the idea is not that they might all want to be doctors but care workers, nurses, physios, auxillaries, porters, paramedics or ambulance drivers? Something health related which you don't necessarily need the top grades or there are less linear ways through to getting into those professions? And some may raise their grades or ambitions once they see a pathway through. It defunitely shouldn't be just for the academically gifted if widening participation in healthcare is the aim, but perhaps there could be a separate gifted pathway.

This.

predicated grades are just that predicted. I’d even argue it has more value to a child who is capable of doing better which lots of teachers might know so have encouraged them to go to work experience so they get hopefully get sparked into interest.

it is very hard for a child with no academic roles models to even grasp the options and opportunities to apply themselves.

if your parents are care leavers or have no GCSEs you need outside influence to encourage academic participation sometimes.

I entered medicine via a widening access pathway, with slightly below the minimum grade recommendations. I went to a poorly performing secondary school with very few students being channelled into higher education. School was chaotic, home life similar, classes were disruptive, I didn't reach my full potential

I graduated with a distinction in my medical degree, 2nd in the year group, and entered my speciality of choice ranking in the top five in national recruitment (of several hundred applying for speciality recruitment). I sailed through post-graduate exams (I got full marks in my speciality exit exam), earned a post-grad degree when training and got a Consultant job in a tertiary academic centre.

Sometimes you really do need a leg up. You have to give talented kids a chance to succeed when the playing field is levelled.

My background before medicine also means I can interact, engage, empathise and communicate really easily with folk from all walks of life. I use that skillset every day at work and it's the thing I most value.

Who knows, sometimes it's not lack of ability but lack of application. Maybe work experience would light a passion in one of these types. Sad if students were written off at an early age like this and agree w/e should definitely not be limited to the local grammar.

I agree with you.

The trouble is, there’s so few places that offer work experience, so if a school hears that xyz hospital offer it, then they will push their pupils towards there.

This is exactly the kind of shit my sister had to wade through on her journey to becoming a Dr. We went to a shitty local comprehensive secondary school. My sister is, and has always been a fucking genius with an incredible work ethics, regardless of our social background. Her sixth form tutor wouldn't write her a recommendation for me school because she hadn't gone to the "right school". Anyway, she's now a consultant.

I agree that children should be academically able for the work experience, but the focus on only accepting children from a "grammar school" is discrimination.

This is why there should be a national work experience programme (not just for NHS, for everything), or at least organised regionally. Most schools just ask parents to sort it out now and it just widens inequality. Our school/local authority ran a programme 35 years ago and did it all for us, you picked several options and were allocated one. I couldn't believe parents had to sort it out with my own kids, it had gone backwards! Most kids just went to their parents' work for a week, so you can see how that plays out.

That... the big hospital near us has a very formal set of structured procedures in place, to apply for their WE. They are hugely oversubscribed so can impose a lot of hoops for kids to jump thru.

my friend went to a rough comp, is from a traveller family. She did a work placement in a hospital. She did well at GCSEs (C/B/As) and Alevels C/B/B and secured an apprenticeship at the same hospital ( I want to say she was a technician. ) She worked her was up and ended up department manager. She left for private sector and now manages teams across Europe and Asia. She obviously earns a lot , is well traveled and leads an affluent lifestyle. Sent her children to private school. She did a MBA in her forties.

If she hadn’t have been given the placement that led to the apprenticeship her life might have been very different. It showed her more beyond what she knew.

@Middlechild3 but it is unrealistic to expect a child who is predicted a 3 at GCSE to get an A grade at A level maths even if they are inspired to try hard from there. A 6, sure, you’d say there could be room for improvement. But a 3 is seriously low - it’s showing very little grasp of some quite basic concepts. It might even help motivate students if they were told that they needed a predicted 6 (or a 5, I am no expert) to get the work experience rather than pretending that academics are not relevant to the opportunities you have later. I think there should be some minimum standards to filter people (and offer others realistic options) as otherwise it’s hard for those students who are high achieving without connections to get anything.

Yes exactly same a when I was a school. I found it stressful that we had to organise it. My eldest ended up in the local library which she loved (wanted to be a publisher) and youngest did go to her dad’s work. (Engineering which she was considering career wise)
But I’m not sure how much effort some parents would put in.

OP if you are in any way able to voice to the people in charge that sticking with nepotism is a bad idea, I would definitely do so. It only takes one person to tip off the daily mail and they'll be running a "sad face" story and your colleagues will be in the shit.

As an aside I dont know any doctors who want their own kids to also become doctors. Without exception the ones I know are steering their kids towards literally anything else!

No, it not fair at all. What would you do in my area where there are no grammar schools and only 1 private school in the county? Do you think that means there are no children bright enough to succeed in medicine?

Having a brief report from the school about the pupil’s achievement so far, and aptitude would be reasonable Ime.

As for work experience- that certainly doesn’t have to be with a Dr in a hospital. Successful applicants to medical school that I know (from our local state schools) have spent time volunteering in local residential and nursing homes, or our local hospice. They have been able to provide activities, refreshments etc all while seeing more about what it means to care for people. The onus shouldn’t just be on Drs, and especially hospital Drs to provide work experience opportunities.

I feel work experience generally is a huge problem. When I was at school you had to use your contacts etc or the school would find something (retail based) for you. As far as I can see it’s mainly the same now. Lots of local teenagers struggle to get anything useful. And I’ve heard people complain about spending time with disinterested teenagers in work locations.

As per a PP it seems to be a pre-requisite for those wanting to study medicine and that’s fair enough, but there should be a formal route for it, and that does need to mean limiting it to those with the academic potential to get to med school.

I’m not saying we should abandon work experience, we just need to do better for all students, not just in this context.

Well this needs tightening. People can’t go around bypassing systems and getting their friend’s dc in. That’s exactly what widening participation is supposed to be balancing.

there can be grade requirements set but it needs to be a properly structured system. It should include contextual grade requirements just as UCAS does.

so those wanting to shadow doctors need for example minimum 6x GCSE AT GRADE 7 & above but for those with contextual mitigations the grades would be lower like 4x GCSE AT GRADE 6 and above with science at grade 7& above

and a personal statement.

then there could be other w/e offerings like shadowing nursing staff, HCA, pharmacists etc with slightly lower GCSE grade requirements.

i don’t see anyone saying just anyone with any academic profile should be accepted

Well it is class bias only taking children from a grammar school. How do you know the children's predicted grades? That information isn't usually shared with anyone. My DC is in a state school and is predicted 8s.

It sounds as though your medics are in danger of perpetuating the elitist myth that they are superior.

Well you have just admitted that there is class bias.

16year olds, grammar school or not, have no idea when they do their first work experience.

Of course they should be given a taster of something like shop or office experience that doesn’t take up the time of professionals in vital and overstretched service. But this should apply equally to kids from all backgrounds.

If medical professionals are too stretched to give their time to kids from state schools then they are too stretched to give their time to kids from grammars and shouldn’t be giving placements to anyone.

You are being unreasonable to suggest that it is not a matter of discrimination because it clearly is.

I don’t believe the medics are only selecting grammar school kids as many medics went to comprehensives themselves. And there aren’t many grammar schools. (Unless you’re in Kent).

If they are selecting those with grades good enough to enable a HCP career that’s fair enough.

I don't think it's 'wrong' to only offer work experience to those who have a realistic chance of being able to study medicine. But medics saying they are happy to take grammar students as a matter of course is elitist. Surely it just makes more sense to have a minimum requirement for gcse. So those with predicted grade 6's. That way, you are still getting those students who will qualify for widening participation later on, but who wouldn't 'traditionally' be accepted for medicine. Which is surely the point of the scheme.