White disadvantaged pupils failed for decades - a national scandal

[noblegiraffe]

A group of MPs have produced a report detailing how white pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds have been neglected for decades leading to poorer educational outcomes than almost any other ethnic group.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-57558746

Given that the Tories have been in power for a decade, have they accepted their part in this? Well they seem to have gone with deciding that the phrase ‘White privilege’ is the real issue here.

Yes, white working class pupils have been neglected, but the implication is that is because other groups have been prioritised.

This is a government who:

1. have systematically underfunded education since they got in
2. have cut Pupil premium funding
3. are the sort to express horror at state school kids getting prioritised for Oxbridge places
4. have done fuck all for any other underachieving groups

And they’re only now concerned about white working class kids because

1. they think it might play well to the red wall
2. they can use it to score points in a tedious fucking culture war

Will we see any more money for schools (particularly early years) as a result? I doubt it.

He keeps also saying working class when talking about kids on FSM.

@noblegiraffe

The government has us fighting over scraps and glaring at anyone whose scrap is slightly bigger, rather than fighting the government to ensure that provision is good for all.

In a nutshell.

@Tuberoses

Professor Sir Bryan Thwaites offered £1m scholarships to two private schools because he wanted to help disadvantaged white boys like himself. He had benefited from a scholarship in his youth and wanted to pay it forward. Both schools refused because they said it was racist. Nobody could explain why it was ok to have scholarships solely for black boys but not for white boys.

Yes, why is that?

Just to rebalance the misplaced frothing on that story :

www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/state-schools-white-boys-donation-bryan-thwaites-winchester-dulwich-college-a9265596.html

Although, must say, I still can't get my head round why he couldn't just have extended this to any child.

I went to school in the 50s/60s, my DCs in the 70s/80s, and it would appear some things haven't changed. Children from families who speak using a strong dialect, poor grammar, and limited vocabulary are still at an obvious disadvantage in the early years. The language of teachers and in story books won't be what they're used to. Even harder if they haven't been introduced to books as toddlers.

How did deciding it was all the fault of them foreigners and pulling him out of state education come to be the route you took? It's a very unusual strategy. Do you think it's possible you might be scapegoating foreigners to avoid dealing with other feelings that might arise if you didn't have them to blame

I wasn’t trying to blame the English as a foreign language pupils I was trying to get the teachers to realise that Ds would have benefited more from doing the type of spelling tests and work that they got rather than the type of spelling test and homework that he got.
English might as well have been a foreign language to him.
All I wanted was some sort of acknowledgment that Ds wasn’t coping with the work not punishments.
And trying to get him assessed was like beating your head against a brick wall.

The only feeling of regret and bitterness I have is that I left him to suffer in a toxic environment for a year and should have pulled him out of school sooner.

Piggywaspushed

EdPsych are vanishingly rare in my neck of the woods. And then they come along and say 'nothing to see here' ime

I was meaning that EdPsychs do the actual assessment. Schools (and GPs : your nurse wasn't right there) refer to Ed Psychs but the PP seemed to say that her EdPsych said schools do the actual assessment

It is the school who have to refer to the Ed Psych to do the assessment. We would have gladly paid just to help him but we couldn’t get the referral. I think the school didn’t want us there and we obliged by leaving.
We were referred to Cahms by the GP because Ds I was sure has ADHD. Now going through the assessment as an adult

The appointment was a disaster. We got the lift up to the person we were to meet for the assessment and the lift doors hadn’t even opened fully when this woman who was waiting to meet us said “Well he hasn’t got ADHD”

Spent an awkward 30 minutes taking our details and asking a few questions whilst Ds jiggled in his seat then we left. Not really sure why we didn’t just push the button to go down without bothering to get out of the lift as she then couldn’t go back on her initial assessment. I was completely gobsmacked that they didn’t want to even go through the motions of an assessment before making a diagnosis.

I was able to not work and home Ed Ds. He did go back into another school for year 6 which he loved but then couldn’t cope with senior school. Whilst at this point he was able to read he was 12 years old before it finally really clicked.

Comefromaway

If this is how they treat just a small percentage of children then no wonder we are finding that there is a huge problem with school leavers leaving without a single GCSE and finding it difficult to make their way in life

It shouldn’t have to be this difficult.

It's a pity he didn't think of donating the money to some local schools as a first step.

That was his second step. Not sure what came of it, or indeed why it didn't occur to him.

A lack of imagination perhaps. This is the country's problem though - we have a long tail of underachievement, so just taking one or two out to give them a first class education doesn't do anything much to address the issue.

London schools used not to be good - money was put in and the problems tackled.

It's because he went to Dulwich on a scholarship and presumably was hoping to give someone exactly like him the same opportunity.

I don't think he would consider that a state school would be able to give a child the same opportunities as Dulwich, and to be fair, he's probably right.

Didn't Nigel Farage go to Dulwich? I am not sure that I would want people to have those opportunities if they turn out like him.

Indeed, but Professor Sir Bryan Thwaites obviously thought things worked out ok for him going there, particularly as he had £1.2 million going spare that he wanted to give them.

I know someone who was very poor growing up who got a scholarship to a private school (not Dulwich) who is now doing well and feels quite a lot of responsibility about paying it back. The school also lean quite heavily on ex-pupils for scholarship funding so it's not surprising it was Professor Sir Bryan's first choice.

Nobody could explain why it was ok to have scholarships solely for black boys but not for white boys.....yes why is that?

It's because there are structural barriers to black children so in effect white boys get a disproportionate amount of existing scholarships. Providing scholarships for black boys goes some way to redress this.

Same for scholarships for girls into STEM for example.

Personally I think its very strange when people get up in arms about "white people/men should have this cos equality!" Just shows they haven't recognised that some sectors of society are structurally disadvantaged.

But there are definitely fewer opportunities now for white working class men to advance. Where is the next Denis Skinner for example? Or people who worked their way up via Trade Union activities?

@Peregrina

But there are definitely fewer opportunities now for white working class men to advance. Where is the next Denis Skinner for example? Or people who worked their way up via Trade Union activities?

I don't know, but there isn't anything stopping them, is there?

Seriously. Where are the structural barriers to white working class men working their way up via a trade union or standing for election etc?

But there are definitely fewer opportunities now for white working class men to advance
Is that because women and BAME men are in those jobs? Is it because white middle class men are in those jobs? Or is it because those jobs no longer exist and the world has changed?

The answer to those questions affects societies response. For example, if its 2, then activities to increase mobility for all working class people would work best. If 3 then there needs to be thought about what opportunities there are for men. It's only if 1 that interventions targeted at white men would be appropriate. Personally I see no evidence 1 is the case. There don't seem to be hordes of black union leaders around.

There's plenty stopping all children in poverty achieving.

Indeed, I'd say that social mobility hasn't just slowed down, it's gone into reverse - which is why so many graduates are angry.

I don't think you mean to. Grellbunt, but this is why the 'arguing over scraps' thing is so pernicious - you end up claiming that there is nothing holding anyone back, and if people just try hard enough, they can all succeed.

Which is palpably not the case.

Of course structural racism exists.

Of course poverty and inequality impact on children's life-chances.

Not all children in poverty are white; not all BAME children are disadvantaged.

All these things are true. Blunt approaches to trying to rectify disadvantage are just that: blunt approaches in a nuanced situation.

But the overwhelming fact remains: a massive series of cuts which have made life so, so much harder for all disadvantaged children.

Across many areas: in education, in public services, in communities, benefit caps, a social housing project that hasn't happened ...

That is what we need to focus on, not viciously arguing about who has a minisculey larger scrap.

And to come back to the report.

It clearly isn't the case that an invisible army of woke educators have done down white working class boys because they believe in 'white privilege'.

Or that an 'industry' exists to promote the interests of BAME children above those of white working class boys.

Those two figures of blame are chimearae - they don't exist.

The Conservatives have been in government for bloody years.

The situation that exists is the responsibility of them - and them alone.

They have engineered this situation.

Blaming it on anyone else is a nonsense.

So let's not fall for it.

I mean, look at this - a pinned thread on MN today: Guest post: “Our investigation found that ministers knowingly underfunded childcare - and parents have been paying the price.” http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/guest_posts/4279300-Guest-post-Our-investigation-found-that-ministers-knowingly-underfunded-childcare-and-parents-have-been-paying-the-price

The cuts are everywhere.

The cuts are real-term cuts, benefit caps, funding and investment that didn't happen, invisible cuts.

All of them have an impact - whether it's on the wages of the working poor (which then impacts families), on the provision of early-years education and services ...

This is what impacts on children's life-chances and achievements.

Not some bloody imaginary figures who are - bizarrely - running things from the shadows.

Common sense, people. If this shadowy woke cabal has so much power, how come the Conservatives have been governing so long?

Indeed, if this shadowy woke cabal have so much power, what is the government anyway? why bother having a government when things are actually determined by a shadowy woke cabal?

No. It's nonsense. And, really, we know it's nonsense.

Just a thought...

Do conservatives know they have to increase schools funding and investment but not want to admit it's fucked because of their cuts or put off their traditional voters by increasing public spending and funding it with money from the 'magic money tree' they bash labour governments for? Are they therefore trying to create a situation of perceived injustice for white kids to pre-appease their voters before upping funding?

Even as I was typing that a voice in my head was going, ha! as if they're going to increase school funding. So I guess it's unlikely.

I think they might increase funding in a few token seats e.g. like Hartlepool, just so that they can make a big show of it. But otherwise - no.

The problem here of course is that the BAME community in Hartlepool and surrounding areas is not very big, so it's going to be hard to blame them for the failures of white working class children.

Maybe.

I think it's a combination of lots of factors. As with everything in life.
I agree with you but I still think aspiration has a part to play. I see lots of nice kids, boys especially, affected by toxic masculinity and peer pressure to the effect that reading and doing well at school, or being nice and polite, or doing things like performing solo or giving a speech in front of the class, or doing things that benefit the wider community, isn't"cool", and that's nothing to do with structural factors. So while I accept that it isn't purely a matter of individual attitude I refuse to accept that it doesn't often play it's part.