12 years of New Labour and Social Mobility

[Swedington]

is at its lowest levels since the 1950s.

I'm state educated and thanks to my schooling, all the professions were open to me. Doesn't anyone else find it disturbing that if I was to apply to medical school today, my chances of getting a place are lower than had I applied under Thatcher's government? This would be true for all of the years under Thatcher.

What on earth is going on?

I don't think it is about subject snobbery so much as it is a discussion on how to get into 'top' universities. Top universities tend to have undergraduate degree courses in things like Maths, Physics and French. Having an A level in media studies is not going to help you get into a Maths department.

I think Forensic Science is the new Media Studies anyway.

Crowd pleaser with very limited job prospects.

trickerg - Yes, media studies might be useful for all sorts of things. But it's unlikely to be a useful indicator that someone is a suitable candidate for a degree in natural sciences - biological, medicine or maths.

It's not snobbery. My sons' school made all the fifth formers sit an A level in general studies for a laff. They had never seen the papers before nor had they been taught any GS lessons. The average mark was 98%. They were all graded A.

There is nothing wrong with doing media studies or graphics.I completely agree that they take up an awful lot of time and work.

What is wrong is suggesting that they are equal in an academic sense for the entry criteria to 'top' universities.Art seems to be acceptable for some reason, media studies possibly not.

It isn't snobbery, it is the harsh reality of the double standards that exist.

at Forensic Science being the new Media Studies...

Seriously though, this is the problem, students being encouraged to take subjects and being told they will get into 'top' universities and it won't make a difference etc, etc, when it DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE which subjects they take.

People should be TOLD!!!!!

I hadn't realised how important Art was until DS started secondary school. The ability to present work well - posters, diagrams, typography, illustrations, documents and so on are extremely useful throughout life and in the production of academic work. Studying art as a specific subject really helps with those areas.

A research scientist still has to be able to create diagrams, posters and conference presentations.

Art probably won't get you on to a Maths degree, but it is still really useful in many areas of life, as well as being important in its own right.

I wouldn't claim to know what skills are specific to Media Studies that are not already taught in subjects like English, but hopefully someone else who is familar with the subject can explain?

Art GCSE is really hard.

What use is a Maths or Physics degree then?

Maths careers: statistics, finance, computing & software design, scientific research and development, teaching, pollution control and other environmental management particularly those requiring modelling, meteorology, telecommunications, engineering, operations research, medical methodological design, energy systems, some elements of pharmeceuticals, security systems, secret services, aeronautical design, NASA, various aspects of mechanical engineering and of course... mathematician.

My dh has worked for Nasa and he does not have a physics or a maths degree.

I would imagine most people who do art don't take it with a view to getting a Maths degree anyway and yes, it is hard and the amount of time it takes up is immense.

I don't know what you are talking about with respect to 'top' universities anyway. Most 'top' universities offer art based degrees through their college associate programs and your degree still gets awarded by that 'top' university. Unless I have completely misunderstood and you are just talking about media studies.....on a site that has been set up by journalists

By 'top'universities I mean Oxbridge plus those in the Russell Group.

The point I am trying to make is that, when students look at the small print in the prospecti for these universities and want to apply for Medicine, Law, English, History and probably other degrees, they will see that they not only require at least three As at A level but they will also look at their GCSES, more often than not, esp Medicine and definitely Oxbridge (unless there are special circumstances). They will want A/A*s in a broad range of proper academic subjects, (Art included by the way!).

This thread is about social mobility and how the top professions are still, in the main, full of privately educated or grammar school people. One of the problems, IMO, is that many students are falling at the first hurdle of applying for the courses needed to get into those professions, because they have chosen or been encouraged to take GCSEs which are deemed unsuitable by certain universities.

That isn't to say no children should take those GCSEs, but to say they should be told that it will limit their chances should they wish to become a doctor or lawyer etc. Not everyone wants to become a doctor or lawyer certainly (my DCs for instance) but they do need to know, so they have a proper choice.

Postgrad maths and languages are key requirements in investment banking. Unfortunately, a significant number in the UK banking industry are a) not British and b) not feeling welcome here at the moment!!!

All pupils should be told in no uncertain terms what they will need to get into the various institutions and later in the world of employment.

You can argue til you're blue in the face about the unfairness of subject choices/ choices of institution but the bald reality remains. If a pupil wants to study law at Oxbridge, quals in Media studies et al will not be sufficient.

And why shouldn't a kid from a council estate want to do that? I did. So did DH.

I would have been furious if I'd discovered that my A levels were in the 'wrong' subjects. Particlarly, if all my independently schooled and grammar schooled friends had been made aware from the start.
My paents would not have had a Danny la Rue so I put my faith squarely in the school.

may I just obnoxiously point out to SelectiveMemory that prospectus is a 4th declension noun in Latin so the Latin plural would be prospectus not prospecti?

Apparently there's a new arcade game called thwack a banker or something like that and it involves proper beatings. Clearly this is what the British public would like to see; never mind taxing their bonuses (boni for Kathy!).

bonuses bonusses

Labour are not, and never have been the party of social mobility, they are about keeping people down and on benefits....

basic political knowledge.

Why do they do that daftpunk, just to get votes?

absoutely...

apologies for the DM link, but all the info is there..1 in 7 families state dependant.....

you don't bite the hand that feeds you...right..?

Labour will win the next election i tell ya..

god help us...

here

That 1 in 7 figure covers LOADS of benefits daftpunk including disability living allowance, carers allowance, incapacity benefit etc. Are you really suggesting that these 1 in 7 families should not receive this help? Are you suggesting people with long term illness and disability should not be supported by the government to keep their jobs through top up benefits?

Kathy, it's a veeeeeeery long time since I did my Latin 'O' level.

Angryfrommanchester, I am not being negative about Art! DH has a degree in Art; I certainly could not get a degree in Art as I am terrible at it.

The point is simply that some qualifications are considered to be more valuable than others, and young people need to be given good advice by schools on the likelihood of getting a particular job or going to a particular university if they take a certain range of GCSEs.

There are, in the eyes of employers, science qualifications that are less worthwhile and arts qualifications that are less worthwhile. It is not a case of arts vs. sciences.

But many of the fields where people are worrying about lack of social mobility are areas where state schools are not providing children with the opportunity to gain appropriate qualifications. Examples would be foreign languages, further maths and science subjects taught by qualified people.

There are many professions where it will be essential to have a qualification in, for example, Maths, Biology, a foreign language, or Art.

There are many jobs where you can get a job regardless of your degree subject - a Cultural studies or Maths student can end up as a graduate trainee at the BBC.

But it is extremely rare for someone to need a specific qualification in, for example, media studies or forensic science. In many cases, employers in forensic science would rather take a Biology graduate than a Forensic Science one for the tiny number of positions available anyway.

Schools, and for that matter universities, are not always very honest about these issues. If people want to do a course because it interests them - that is fantastic! I lecture in a subject area that rarely leads to a specific job. There are many degrees that make people generally attractive to employers without preparing them for a specific job - English for example.

I think that the problem comes when people believe that a degree in Media Studies or Forensic Science is vocational in the way that a Pharmacy or Dental degree is, when in fact MS and FS should be looked at as being more generally educational, and similar in purpose to an Anthropology degree.

In short, students should be aware of where qualifications are likely to lead them.

Trickerg, a little secret (but a phenomenon that has been researched and written about) - at university we find that students who have studied Maths at A'Level have been cherry picked by their teachers and represent the brightest their schools have to offer. So they get a kind of UCAS halo. The fact that they also prove adept at tackling university work generally adds to this aura of apparent brilliance. That's why Maths A Level appears to count for more, in relation to some courses.

My dream candidate for my Social Science degree course would have GCSEs in Maths, English Language, English Literature, a language or two, double Science, History, Geography, Art or Music. Then he/she would have 3 excellent A Levels in something like English, Psychology and History. These students do really, really well on our course.

I suspect the root issue here may be more about the push to open up university education than about the state school response to that push. Universities are now offering more in the lines of vocational training than proper traditional university educations, which were about thoughtful and philosophical pursuits of higher understanding, the sort of things that raise the level of culture in general. Obviously, not for everyone. Two-year university degrees? Please!

I would also like to see universities themselves be much more clear about their entry criteria. I'm comfortable with some 'universities' embracing their vocational training status and others preserving the traditional focus. But if the entry criteria aren't clearly stated, it's a matter of 6th forms having to guess at the real criteria. SnowyBoff, I found your comments enlightening, and wonder if the criteria you described in selecting students is officially articulated anywhere.