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.

I'd just like to chuck in my 2 pennies worth. When Black boys were doing badly a lot of commentators said it was generally because of laziness, fecklessness and fatherless households. The government just the other day released a report saying that institutional racism doesn't exist.

This is a manufactured culture war. A Black millionaire footballer who grew up in poverty had to shame this very same government to feed these poor white working class boys free school meals.

This is nothing to do with 'white privilege' but a nice shiny new culture war.

It's perhaps different across the UK but I'm not managing to think of an example of that around here... what kind of group are you thinking of? I suppose maybe E Europeans and of course they're white but I suspect that wasn't what was meant by "white" - I suspect the group causing concern is actually those who've lived here many generations. Certainly that is the group I see underachieving.

Not quite sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing...

God, it's depressing. And so short sighted.

You might want to look up stats on Bangladeshi achievement sin education before you generalise too much!
I don’t know anything about it but my colleague said education is a bit irrelevant because you can get hired at a family business with no education. You don’t need to be educated, you just need to own the business and hire educated people to work for you.

@Grellbunt

It's perhaps different across the UK but I'm not managing to think of an example of that around here... what kind of group are you thinking of? I suppose maybe E Europeans and of course they're white but I suspect that wasn't what was meant by "white" - I suspect the group causing concern is actually those who've lived here many generations. Certainly that is the group I see underachieving.

Not quite sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing...

I was disagreeing really : I thought it was a generalisation and hardly speaks to the experience of highly educated Windrush arrivals, for example.

White Eastern Europeans are a large group. You are right , though. It's not who the EDL etc will think this all means.

The will perceive that their poor achievement is because of their white skin, and the presence of white and non white 'others' - and now also the 'woke' educational establishment.

This is nothing to do with 'white privilege' but a nice shiny new culture war
Honestly I think it is about poverty vs wealth and who has the most money. Because money creates opportunities. Two people can have the same business idea but only the rich person can actually set up the business.

There are undoubtedly a lot more rich white people in the UK. But poor people are under-privileged no matter what colour they are. Hard work means nothing when someone less skilled becomes your boss because his dad owns the company. And all of the stuff about having the right manners and style and “face that fits” are largely about being raised in a privileged household where you’re taught the right stuff and have opportunities.

State school education is a better proxy for working class.

No, because plenty of middle class children go to state schools. I wouldn't be at all surprised though that if a school is deemed to be failing it's almost certainly a proxy for one serving an impoverished area.

You can't actually get FSM if you work. You literally have to be solely reliant on benefits to qualify so it's a bit of a misnomer anyway. What they're actually looking at is the non working class so yes I agree fsm is a poor indicator of social class and actually just identifies children of households who are long term fully reliant on social benefits (doubt people jump through the hoops required to get free school meals during a brief spell of unemployment).

That's going to be people who are disabled or have caring responsibilities that don't allow them to work or those who either genuinely cannot get work (eg. lack of qualifications or skills, live in area of high unemployment or language barriers) or those who are just in the cycle of living on benefits for various reasons.

I wonder if the different ethnic groups have different reasons broadly/at the statistical level for being reliant on benefits and therefore accessing fsm?

From my own experience in schools I would say working class British white and caribbean boys have way more in common with each other than for example British caribbean and recentish African immigrants do. @Piggywaspushed do you have stats on what happens if you isolate and compare White and Caribbean boys on fsms' achievement?

So if we're honest and look at the actual facts its: kids who come from households where no one has worked and who are entirely reliant on benefits long term are less likely to go university. Of those kids the white ones seem to do particularly badly according to this study. The next logical line of questioning to me is why are these families long term reliant on benefits and are those causes evenly distributed or are there racial trends and are some of those causes more likely to result in underachieving.

If for example one group is more likely to be on fsm because of reason a and another group because of reason b you then look at what relationship there is between a/b and underachievement.

I agree with whoever said it - fsm is a really blunt tool and without any nuance when the keys are probably in that nuance rather than something as superficial as ethnicity.

@Tuberoses

If I might share an anecdote from a Bangladeshi colleague. He said they have shared family finances and their earnings go into one pot. So my colleague puts his salary into the household pot and he receives pocket money and expenses paid. But he’s putting in way more than he gets back.

I said that seems unfair? He said but it essentially means the family pot is like a private bank that gives us money to buy a house with no mortgage, or start a business with no loans, and we pay zero interest. The “family bank” never turns you down so you’re not restricted in the way you would be if you were unable to get a loan or mortgage from a high street bank. Right now his salary is going in the pot and helping his cousin to start a business with no loans. Then in maybe 5 years time his cousin’s earnings from the business will go in the pot to help him to buy a house with no mortgage.

According to him this is a common arrangement for Bangladeshi families and he said we think it’s mad that white people keep their money to themselves and borrow from banks so they pay massive amounts of interest.

Of course it’s only an anecdote, but if it is as common as he says then it could be a cultural reason for white people being under-privileged.

It might be good in other ways but it has its disadvantages. It can be used to control: its never your personal money so this is who you marry, this is the career to chose. And its can leave others especially women destitute if they married into the family from outside and then they loose their spouse. Typically, that pot is inaccessible to them and their children. Whatever their spouse put in is gone. Happened to a family member of mine

@planderaccordement I came on a coach in 1999 😂😂

Good point Ginger - lots of idyllic sounding things fall apart when you add, 'now think about it as a woman and it's reality for you rather than this hypothetical 'person' who always turns out to be male'.

It's also shite when your husband is handing over your family money that you've earned to his dodgy cousin whose never worked and you can't buy your kids uniform (experience of a friend).

@TheHoneyBadger

Good point Ginger - lots of idyllic sounding things fall apart when you add, 'now think about it as a woman and it's reality for you rather than this hypothetical 'person' who always turns out to be male'.

It's also shite when your husband is handing over your family money that you've earned to his dodgy cousin whose never worked and you can't buy your kids uniform (experience of a friend).

Precisely. I lived a couple of doors down from a pakistani family who all lived in this way. The daughter in law was a bit different. She was from outside their social sphere, she had been educated at a local high school, not the private Muslim Girls School round the area and she had a job.

They came round to look at our house when we were selling and when we declined their offer (because it was way under the asking price) she came round in tears begging us to reconsider. She was desperate to move out of her in laws house but she knew it would only be allowed if they stayed in the same street. They had been given a seta mount of money and that was it. I felt so sorry for her, she said that her own family had very different attitudes and she was finding it hard.

Another work colleague was married off to a man she had never met so that he could get a visa. She told us she had been abused and she felt lucky that once he had been married long enough he left her and their child. She had no money of her own but at least she could work and support her child.

I thought this report on coastal deprivation and education from 4 years had merit. Don't know what progress was made as I no longer work in the wider education field.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/675038/Social_Mobility_Delivery_Plan-NYC.PDF

@TheHoneyBadger

You can't actually get FSM if you work. You literally have to be solely reliant on benefits to qualify so it's a bit of a misnomer anyway. What they're actually looking at is the non working class so yes I agree fsm is a poor indicator of social class and actually just identifies children of households who are long term fully reliant on social benefits (doubt people jump through the hoops required to get free school meals during a brief spell of unemployment).

That's going to be people who are disabled or have caring responsibilities that don't allow them to work or those who either genuinely cannot get work (eg. lack of qualifications or skills, live in area of high unemployment or language barriers) or those who are just in the cycle of living on benefits for various reasons.

I wonder if the different ethnic groups have different reasons broadly/at the statistical level for being reliant on benefits and therefore accessing fsm?

From my own experience in schools I would say working class British white and caribbean boys have way more in common with each other than for example British caribbean and recentish African immigrants do. @Piggywaspushed do you have stats on what happens if you isolate and compare White and Caribbean boys on fsms' achievement?

Teaching just now honey. I have them somewhere but not sure where. It was certainly reported on in response to Sewell's latest offering.

@TheHoneyBadger

You can't actually get FSM if you work. You literally have to be solely reliant on benefits to qualify so it's a bit of a misnomer anyway. What they're actually looking at is the non working class so yes I agree fsm is a poor indicator of social class and actually just identifies children of households who are long term fully reliant on social benefits (doubt people jump through the hoops required to get free school meals during a brief spell of unemployment).

That's going to be people who are disabled or have caring responsibilities that don't allow them to work or those who either genuinely cannot get work (eg. lack of qualifications or skills, live in area of high unemployment or language barriers) or those who are just in the cycle of living on benefits for various reasons.

I wonder if the different ethnic groups have different reasons broadly/at the statistical level for being reliant on benefits and therefore accessing fsm?

From my own experience in schools I would say working class British white and caribbean boys have way more in common with each other than for example British caribbean and recentish African immigrants do. @Piggywaspushed do you have stats on what happens if you isolate and compare White and Caribbean boys on fsms' achievement?

You can't actually get FSM if you work.

Not true. Very low income working parent(s) qualify

If you worked you qualified for working tax credits, if you qualified for working tax credits you didn't qualify for free school meals the last time I looked but it seems you can now get them if you earn less than 7,400 a year if you're on universal credit rather than tax credits. So yes, a household with only one person doing very part time work at minimum wage could qualify now. Apologies - I hadn't looked to see how universal credit had changed things. Still similar reasons as to why only one person would be working and earning less than 7k a year though - disability, caring responsibilities etc.

@TheHoneyBadger I read this -

Child Tax Credit (provided you’re not also entitled to Working Tax Credit and have an annual gross income of no more than £16,190).

There is a universal credit limit of £7k.

I don't know anything about child or working tax credits but I read that as some people are entitled on £16k?? Apologises if I've misunderstood.

[quote EwwSprouts]I thought this report on coastal deprivation and education from 4 years had merit. Don't know what progress was made as I no longer work in the wider education field.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/675038/Social_Mobility_Delivery_Plan-NYC.PDF[/quote]
I do too. Thank you for posting.

[quote meadowbreeze]@planderaccordement I came on a coach in 1999 😂😂[/quote]
The poor coach. What did he/she say?

Sorry cheap and predictable but I could not resist

Hits it on the head

twitter.com/AllyFogg/status/1407275189163921410

Interesting outline.

Sweak That's confusing. It includes the CTC so I guess you could have a ton of kids so make a good whack on CTC and then have a little job that is less than 16hrs a week so doesn't qualify for wtc? Not sure how that gets to be an option though - can you work less than 16hrs and qualify for support? Who knows. CTC is on the way out anyway and the UC rule seems a bit clearer.

committees.parliament.uk/publications/6364/documents/69838/default/