Anyone watching 'How to crack the class ceiling'?

[Aslockton]

On BBC2 now about how working class university student break through barriers to land elite jobs.

I wonder with institution blind interviewing whether the interviewing is truly blind? If an interview is wide ranging it is readily easy to slip in hints about university. A question could be about sport and the candidate could answer with a reference to rowing at college so info on uni attended is subtly passed on.

One thought I have on university/gender/ethnicity/racial blindness during interview is that if the same candidates are still getting through e.g. White Oxbridge make them do you look further at the interviewing structure and marking criteria in order to allow rebalancing of intake? I personally feel that although there is material given to interviewers about unconscious bias we are human and a lot of our 'feelings' about the fit of a candidate are based on hunched and a glimpse into what a future working relationship would work like. The 'people.like us' recruitment culture is probably a manifestation of making safe bets on people who will fit into an organisational cultuture; can you argue that is not an entirely bad thing.I

On accents it was suggested sometime ago presenters of the Radio 4 today program were too middle class all having RP voices so it was necessary to try and recruit presenters with regional accents to appeal to a greater breadth of the country. The idea was shelved because simply by biasing against RP you were denying too talent opportunities for these high profile roles so we have the likes of Mishal Hussein and Nick Robinson quite rightly in their current positions. The BBC has become more diverse in terms of gender and ethnicity but for more 'highbrow' programming education/class/accent is still of importance.

top

I’d like to see the evidence for this - that private school educated people would have got the same top jobs based on merit anyway. I don’t agree at all - but happy to be corrected with hard data borne of proper analysis.
The reason I don’t agree is that it would be a huge, huge coincidence if the most innately clever/able/intellectual/gifted/etc kids also just happened, by sheer coincidence, to be born to parents wealthy and/or resourceful enough to pay for schooling.

Adding for context, that I, like everyone, have a opinion informed by my own bias. I’m an immigrant to the U.K. with an accent that would be associated with an underclass. I secured a graduate position in an industry (quite a few years ago) that typically did hire from elite universities/schools. I’ve seen no evidence anecdotally that my colleagues from more privileged backgrounds with the “right” accents and connections have any special talent, what they had in spades was confidence and a sense of a right to be there. Entitlement if you like although that is too strong a word. Over the years that mattered less and less and the people that have risen to the top and/or shown longevity - and especially resilience - have been from a very broad spectrum of backgrounds (including mine). The problem is that the pipeline at graduate hiring stages is still somewhat biased towards privilege (privilege, not talent) although this has changed for the better over time what with the uni widening access programs as well as schools outreach etc.

@slideintomxas

It's a challenging question. There is a definitely a correlation between parental education level/income/class and children's educational outcome. The problems that need addressing are societal in nature and the fact that currently a lot of top grads are from middle class backgrounds is not necessarily the fault of the children and it is not a company's fault for hiring them. Employers can only hire who they see and interviewing filters (for better or worse) do focus on universities with a disproportionately middle class intake.

Possibly there should be disincentives for the intelligent and wealthy to not privately educate their offspring but that is a political decision. Granted there are children who are extremely intelligent from working class backgrounds but I think that an analysis would show there are larger numbers of intelligent children from middle class backgrounds. A fair recruitment system would show a proportionate intake of middle class and working class candidates for a given level of intelligence /education level hence more mc employees in elite positions.

To address this will need investment in state schooling, general raising of aspiration within working class communities, positive role models for the working class professionally and a more egalitarian culture. I think one of the feature of English society is that we have had class system for many centuries and we still have the vestiges of it at the establishment heart e.g.the Royal Family who have a great deal of public support. I really do think there is part of our national psyche that wishes to continue deference to our 'betters' including a passive stance to employment/roles in society. I was always intrigued that Prince William just happened to choose a wealthy white privately educated woman as his bride ; well not indulged really class matters.

Intrigued

@mids2019
I agree with you wholeheartedly that there is strong correlation between parental resources and outcomes for children. And it’s not just a private school issue. I see it already with my children who are attending state schools. The school intakes are massively diverse (across all spectrums..class, race, socioeconomic, etc) but I see a chasm developing already between kids like mine who are very fortunate to have numerous opportunities for extracurricular activities, holidays leading to social capital (e.g. skiing), but more importantly they have access to all the school resources they need and they have clean and well fitting uniforms and shoes and they are always well fed. And they have engaged parents (or parents who don’t have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet - although we do work long hours) who ensure schoolwork and attendance is prioritised above all else. In short there are no obstacles to them learning. Many of their co-pupils are less fortunate and so already, at both primary and secondary stages, I can see the life opportunities shrink for some and grow for others. I’ve worked my ass off to get here and nothing has come for free, but my children now do benefit from privileges that not every child has. And my kids aren’t even that privileged, relative to the serous wealth and privilege that permeates British society. You might not see it if you were not born and bred here, but I am frequently taken aback at the sheer levels of wealth in this country, and the haves and have nots. The divide is absolutely colossal. I don’t think any of the current measures do anything more than tinker round the edges.

@mids2019
I think a proper definition of “working class” would be helpful. Lots of rich people call themselves working class. They might have working class roots,(I do) but money elevates you. The number of times people describe themselves as “working class” but are no such thing. It only takes one generation to be successful, then you leave working class behind. You become middle class. Some graduates from elite universities say they are working class when they have fantastic earnings. So what do we mean by working class? Historical or current criteria?

The top universities do try and recruit disadvantaged Dc. However they are not always working class. Plenty of well educated parents say still define themselves as working class. I do think the Sutton Trust has a better definition of young people who need extra help. It shouldn’t be a self defined category. Even being in receipt of FSM doesn’t mean parents are not well educated! A programme contributor suggested parent job(s) at age 14 was a good indicator. I can see the merit in this.

So many excellent points on this thread. I agree that uni-blind job applications are a start, but can be subverted. I find the whole subject deeply depressing but am glad so many Mumsnetters are being thoughtful about it.

Agree. Money buys opportunities.

My students who are wanting to go into medicine or dentistry can not afford to pay for the coaching that is available to pass the interview process. They don’t have family connections to access meaningful work experience.
They can and do volunteer in care homes or as HCA. But I wonder that someone with connections gets a better insight.

My ex (I have 3DDs with him), has around 6 GCSEs, none above a C, and walked into a supervisors job at 17 as his Uncle owned the business. By 20 he was a manager and on 25K. He still works there now, not a clue what he earns. He owns his house, (deposit given by parents, who aren’t educated but are Boomers) nice car, holidays etc.

He doesn’t understand A Levels/Uni, doesn’t understand that what he did was a rare thing back in the early 2000s and impossible now, and that without his Uncle, he’d be on NMW living with his parents or in a house share.

DD1 (Y10) has her eye on Oxbridge. We recently moved areas (from inner city deprived to rural affluent) and her state schools sixth form regularly gets around 7% of their pupils in (right back to the mid 90s) and it’s in an area where it’s either 40K private schools, or one of three state schools - and the one that’s our catchment is the most sought after. The vast majority go to RG.

Prior to moving here, she was “just” aiming for RG. She will have zero issues getting the grades for the either choice, she’s so smart that she genuinely terrifies me at times I’ve warned her I know naff all about Oxbridge applications and will look it over soon but what I do know is that extra curriculars are expected, related to/regardless of subject chosen, they have to be done.

We have plenty of EC opportunities via school and the local area, but she has such a heavy workload (2-3 hours of HW every evening) that I’m not quite sure where she’s meant to fit it in (leaves home at 7:50am and doesn’t get in till 4pm as it is), is often in tears by a Thursday as she’s so exhausted.

We had a long chat last week and she summed it up really well -

“So you need a combination of - smart parents, rich parents, supportive parents in order to succeed? What about the ones that have smart, supportive but broke parents?”

(Which is basically what I am, middle DD gets HR DLA which limits my earning potential).

I told her that it was still a significantly superior combination to the one I had, and that whatever she needs in order to get where she wants, I’ll make it work and that’s not for her to worry about. Just tell me and I’ll sort it.

And - oddly - my friends are all at least Masters level educated and working in industries where it helps to know people so your teens can get work experience. However, I still have zero connections in comparison to others - nothing in medicine or law.

I worry.

I will check that out now, I’m at the tail end of a horrid chest infection and still laid up on the sofa with nothing better to do!

@IAmTheFire it is great that your DD is thinking of Oxbridge. FWIW, my impression from Oxbridge admissions tutors and applicants is that Oxbridge is less interested in extracurriculars than supracurriculars - that is, independent reading and study in your chosen field. Given that her school has a good success rate with Oxbridge they should be able to give her guidance about this. It isn’t too soon! Good luck to her

I really hope that’s the case because she spends her free time pissing around on GitHub (I reckon she’ll have most of the house automated by next year!) and in The Sims 4 Studio designing hair/clothes/furniture (although that’s Game Design and more for fun than anything else - having said that, a friend of mine works in GD and earns 120K + wild bonuses!)

She’s started peering over my shoulder now I’m doing the prep work for Masters (Bioinformatics) so no doubt she will be chatting my ear off about that once it starts next month.

@IAmTheFire
I think the school will know the time of day regarding Oxbridge. I don’t actually agree it costs money. What she needs to do is work out what super-curricular activities really pack a punch. Don’t waste time on others and read what universities actually want. Not what she thinks they want.

They don’t have to cost much at all. I also think the naturally intelligent don’t need loads of coaching. Plenty get next to nothing. What they can do is much wider study of their subject and be a self starter. DDs friend did St Johns Ambulance for example - at the weekend. Dad was in prison.

I would also be concerned about her being so tired and crying by Thursday. Don’t tell her you can fix everything. That’s unlikely. An elite university is really hard work and relentless. Make absolutely sure this route is the right one for her.

Agree with @TizerorFizz Absolutely no pupil should set their heart on Oxbridge or any other uni. A school that sends a good number of students there should be well placed to give guidance. I am also concerned by the signs of stress.

But, OP, your DD is in the years where she should be dreaming of the possibilities! Given she is interested in Oxbridge she should def look into it.

I’ve just watched this, it struck me that for lots of reasons it wasn’t comparing like with like. I’d have been more interested in seeing how young people from working class backgrounds at Oxford/Cambridge/Durham/UCL/Edinburgh etc fared.

@TizerorFizz

A definition of working class is quite complex now hence I think programs like this address class inequality somewhat superficially.

I saw a debate on a political program on BBC where MPs and journalists were asked exactly this question and basically there wasn't time to discuss the issue fully and all were coy about discussing their background.

One Telegraph journalist ( the daughter of GPs and privately educated) said she could describe herself as working class as her grandparents were miners. I think it was a fair point and begs the question how back into your family history can you dig to prove your working class credentials.

I think there is a tendency to promote your working class roots if possible as the rags to riches narrative of achieving a good education and job despite social challenges is more appealing narrative than my parents are middle class and so am I.

I think it is a bit over-egging things to hark back to grandparents. My grandfather was a miner and he had to stay off school sometimes as parents couldn't afford school shoes etc. I grew up in a very different environment
-ponies, tertiary education etc. I went on to have a very good career and also "married well". Our DC are a million miles from my grandfather's experience. I think it can only really take one generation to change everything.

Grandparents are interesting because they show how people move class in about 2 or 3 generations as some people have done in my family. I agree with the PWC definition of what were your parents' jobs when you were 14 as a pretty good indicator. (My father was an NHS consultant (doctor) (psychiatrist) and I went to a fee paying day school and I am middle class). My parents were probably by profession middle class (state grammar schools, doctor and teacher) but I would probably say my mother grew up working class and my father middle class although they were certainly not rich but his father rose to become a JP, councillor and was a surveyor and auctioneer so he was a bit of a big fish in a small NE pond.

What employers probably need most is a means when sifting literally thousands and thousands of applications from very very good clever graduates is a tool that helps asses them fairly eg plenty of law firms use minimum A level grades AAB as a filter, a 2/1 degree and a high score on a Watson G test. If you get through all that whatever your class then you get to assessment stage where probably there is at least a day sometimes a whole week when they observe you in groups and one to one. Whateve ryour class they will want someone who can thinkin quijckly, grasp ideas very qujickly, have very good written and spoken English (accent is not the issue as plenty are recruited from a group of top graduates from abroad, the international competition UK candidates face, but ability to be understood by clients will be important).

I think defining your class by grandparents is taking it too far. I’m working class on DMs side! But, Grandfather (DM) owned a house, despite leaving education at 9, and made money from property dealing. He was very poor as a child. My great-grandfather never learned to write.

I’m solidly middle class and I know that’s been gained due to education. Both my parents went to grammar school and my father was a farmer. His father was also a farmer, privately educated and Chairman of the Workhouse Board and held all sorts of other honorary posts. So very different backgrounds and position in society. As a result of education, class of former family members is often left behind. We become middle class and should acknowledge that.

I think a good question to ask yourself to help establish your class growing up is - how often were you hungry and there was little or no food in cupboards - or - did you ever have to do without something essential because of a lack of money? Or are my questions more indicative of wealth/poverty than class? And should we septate class from wealth/poverty?

I grew up in a fairly poor household where education was seen as an escape route. My siblings worked hard at school and went on to get middle class jobs. I had a few issues at school but have other skills that have been recognised in the workplace and earn a reasonable salary. I think there are things about me that tell people my social class background. Things around grooming (or lack thereof) and life experiences.

What struck me about the programme is that they all seemed pretty unhappy and relentlessly focused on success in terms of career and I am not sure that will bring them happiness.

In terms of DDs exhaustion/crying - it’s the sheer amount of homework the school set that’s causing it. Home at 4pm, snack, and straight into my study to log onto the PC, often doesn’t come down till around 7pm (I do check on her hourly, make sure she has water, is taking screen breaks etc) and when she’s up since 6am, that’s a fuck of a long day even by adult standards.

None of the pressure comes from me. I’ve encouraged her to sack off any homework that has a longer due date till the weekend, then it’s more spread out, she can relax in the evenings/go out with friends (rural so they all tend to take the family dogs out for long walks as there’s not much else to do!)/learn what she wants to learn and I think she’s finally heard me because that’s what she did last week and she was much happier.

Throw in a recent Dx of AuDHD (like me), her periods being all over the place/horrendous when they do appear, and being an August baby, it’s not a fun combo.

I’ve never told her I can fix everything (or any other similar nonsensical promises) - not my style. The Uni I went to has a highly ranked CompSci course, its on her Top 10 list.

Plus, it’s still GCSEs, not A Levels, she’s planning too far ahead in some senses, but that’s the schools culture and not much I can do about it.

This Financial Times article might be of interest to MN readers - Lucy Kellaway who is about my age was an FT journalist all her life until relatively recently when she started a teaching organisatino and became a teacher in London. She now teaches in a Catholic school where I come from in the NE and this week wrote about her experiences there including for some children their contentment to stay where they are and have ordinary jobs and there is nothing of course wrong with that. on.ft.com/3jr7m26 www.ft.com/content/55f6cd8f-a61b-425e-b3d8-069c6e8f37fb

The IAmFire daughter seems very hardworking. There will always be teenagers like that in all kinds of schools and plenty of them do extremely well, Most of my children are a bit more laid back, eg couldn't be bothered to try Oxbridge as thought would not get in and it was too much work etc. There is nothing wrong with a hard worker as long as she is happy.

The insidious thing, surely, is that getting in is only the beginning of the story - difficult though it is!

I'm in senior management in a field that is very traditionally elitist, and while I'm white my background is very much rural working class.

I "pass" quite well as a member of the educated upper-MC but only in passing. As in: I have the right voice and accent, know the right things. Nobody would ever suspect I hold a 2:1 from a very third tier uni just by seeing me run a meeting. Nor would they suspect me of knowing a lot more about sheep than family silverware.

It also, arguably, "helps" (although in other ways it really doesn't) that I'm a woman in a very male dominated field. A lot of my differences are simply attributed to my gender by my male peers.

Still, though, it's different for us. I've seen a lot of people a little like me get a foot in the door but fail to thrive in this kind of an environment. If I had to pin it down to one thing I'd say it'd have to be that seemingly natural confidence that we lack. It convinces others they should have confidence in you, too, and if you lack it so will everyone else. I genuinely believe that learning to fake this has been what has made it possible for me, personally, to do well in this kind of environment.

Point in case: we recently hired in a new bloke - typical public school type - at a level below mine. He confidently gave his into in our "get to know" meeting and then went on to immediately ask for my support to get him promoted. I was sitting there thinking to myself "mate, it took me three weeks of fretting and half a bottle of wine for courage to utter the sentence "I guess I'd like to be put up for Director" - to my boss, whom I had known for years, and who'd been pushing me to take the plunge forever.

It's insidious because the system is self-preserving in so many ways.