Britain, one of the worst social mobility rates in the West
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
Ambition comes from atitude. A poor atitude comes from poverty. Not poverty of money, but popverty of spirit and poverty of hope. That mainly comes from within.
I disagree completely with that. A persons, especially a young persons, hopes and self belief come from their experience and environment. I grew up in a deprived area and thought I had ambition and thought I had an attitude geared to success, it's taken me a full decade to realize that I didn't know the half of it- had I really known what the world had to hold for me, I'd be a much wealthier and upwardly mobile sort by now.Looking at myself and the friends I left behind, I'm reminded of the adage about the baby elephant chained to the post, whilst its mother was held only by a threadbare rope. If your life experience teaches you that it's useless to try because the doors will never open (if they're even there), And if your peers and culture mock you and accuse you of getting above yourself for daring to think thst you deserve better, then it's much easier to become an also-ran happy with his call centre job than a man who rails continuously against his circumstances.
Then, eventually, you yourself become one of those discouraging peers, and the cycle is reinforced.
glazbagun said:
Eric Mc said:
Ambition comes from atitude. A poor atitude comes from poverty. Not poverty of money, but popverty of spirit and poverty of hope. That mainly comes from within.
I disagree completely with that. A persons, especially a young persons, hopes and self belief come from their experience and environment. I grew up in a deprived area and thought I had ambition and thought I had an attitude geared to success, it's taken me a full decade to realize that I didn't know the half of it- had I really known what the world had to hold for me, I'd be a much wealthier and upwardly mobile sort by now.Looking at myself and the friends I left behind, I'm reminded of the adage about the baby elephant chained to the post, whilst its mother was held only by a threadbare rope. If your life experience teaches you that it's useless to try because the doors will never open (if they're even there), And if your peers and culture mock you and accuse you of getting above yourself for daring to think thst you deserve better, then it's much easier to become an also-ran happy with his call centre job than a man who rails continuously against his circumstances.
Then, eventually, you yourself become one of those discouraging peers, and the cycle is reinforced.
A smart kid in a comprehensive is a swot, a boffin, a nerd.
This will probably turn them into a target and victim
(some exceptions obviously)
But, a smart kid in a Grammar school is the norm.
It isn’t cause for ridicule.
Also, grammar schools normally have a strict dress code and uniform.
This brings every pupil down to the same level in terms of family money.
There aren’t any kids in expensive trainers or designer clothes at the school.
Everyone is in the same uniform with plain black shoes.
Snowboy said:
And, we’re back to grammar schools.
A smart kid in a comprehensive is a swot, a boffin, a nerd.
This will probably turn them into a target and victim
(some exceptions obviously)
But, a smart kid in a Grammar school is the norm.
It isn’t cause for ridicule.
Also, grammar schools normally have a strict dress code and uniform.
This brings every pupil down to the same level in terms of family money.
There aren’t any kids in expensive trainers or designer clothes at the school.
Everyone is in the same uniform with plain black shoes.
I attended a pretty good Grammar School in the late 1970's and don't actually recognise your description at all. You seem to project an image of school and society that all but disappeared a long time ago (if it ever really existed at all), there is far more to this than selective education, the problems start a little earlier in the process.A smart kid in a comprehensive is a swot, a boffin, a nerd.
This will probably turn them into a target and victim
(some exceptions obviously)
But, a smart kid in a Grammar school is the norm.
It isn’t cause for ridicule.
Also, grammar schools normally have a strict dress code and uniform.
This brings every pupil down to the same level in terms of family money.
There aren’t any kids in expensive trainers or designer clothes at the school.
Everyone is in the same uniform with plain black shoes.
I would be interested to see how social mobility is measured in this. Did a quick Google and couldn't find anything, but the fact that we are at 50%, compared to 47% for the US and Italy (a lower score indicating more social mobility) suggests it's not something we're outstanding in either way.
The reason why political party socialists dislike grammars is that these schools are indeed effective social mobility engines and remove labour voting fodder as efficiently as anything else. The way in which sharp elbowed paretns are said to manipulate entry is by getting coaching but with standardised tests there's only a small margin of improvement before the lack of intellectual horsepower kicks in and the fees are wasted. Smart kids from poor homes at least get a chance with selective schooling. After all it should be seen not as some political football being kicked about in the lefties' class war arena but as no different to elite athletes getting coaching of one type that sporting muppets couldn't cope with. Horses for courses, but in terms of an academic education for those capable of hacking it. As a nation we agonise about the muppets while forgetting that the elite pay all the bills via taxes. Clever working class kids would get just what they need with a grammar school in every town but misguided egalitarian delusion prevents it, to the detriment of individual children and the country as a whole.
supersingle said:
English workers didn't suddenly become genetically lazy in the last half century.
No one has mentioned genetics in any of this discussion. However laziness could be due to a number of factor e.g. the over-generous welfare state, a dumbed-down education system, poor parenting, adn of course politicans making excuses for their laziness and blaming foreigners/bankers/tories.Blue62 said:
Snowboy said:
And, we’re back to grammar schools.
A smart kid in a comprehensive is a swot, a boffin, a nerd.
This will probably turn them into a target and victim
(some exceptions obviously)
But, a smart kid in a Grammar school is the norm.
It isn’t cause for ridicule.
Also, grammar schools normally have a strict dress code and uniform.
This brings every pupil down to the same level in terms of family money.
There aren’t any kids in expensive trainers or designer clothes at the school.
Everyone is in the same uniform with plain black shoes.
I attended a pretty good Grammar School in the late 1970's and don't actually recognise your description at all. You seem to project an image of school and society that all but disappeared a long time ago (if it ever really existed at all), there is far more to this than selective education, the problems start a little earlier in the process.A smart kid in a comprehensive is a swot, a boffin, a nerd.
This will probably turn them into a target and victim
(some exceptions obviously)
But, a smart kid in a Grammar school is the norm.
It isn’t cause for ridicule.
Also, grammar schools normally have a strict dress code and uniform.
This brings every pupil down to the same level in terms of family money.
There aren’t any kids in expensive trainers or designer clothes at the school.
Everyone is in the same uniform with plain black shoes.
^I attended one in the 90s and it was one of the few decent schools (in fact better than the private school next door). Sure we had a couple of scrotes from the sink estates in the area, but apart from the occasional theft from the Electronics and Music department, i think everyone benefited from having similar IQ and aptitude for studies.
turbobloke said:
The reason why political party socialists dislike grammars is that these schools are indeed effective social mobility engines and remove labour voting fodder as efficiently as anything else. The way in which sharp elbowed paretns are said to manipulate entry is by getting coaching but with standardised tests there's only a small margin of improvement before the lack of intellectual horsepower kicks in and the fees are wasted. Smart kids from poor homes at least get a chance with selective schooling. After all it should be seen not as some political football being kicked about in the lefties' class war arena but as no different to elite athletes getting coaching of one type that sporting muppets couldn't cope with. Horses for courses, but in terms of an academic education for those capable of hacking it. As a nation we agonise about the muppets while forgetting that the elite pay all the bills via taxes. Clever working class kids would get just what they need with a grammar school in every town but misguided egalitarian delusion prevents it, to the detriment of individual children and the country as a whole.
Just out of interest, is there anything you won't blame on Labour / the 'Left'?Why is it that so much effort is put into studies in negativity? Politically motivated perhaps?
Anyway, as the product of bog standard secondary school education in the 70's/early 80's I reached the dizzy heights of failing all my A levels because I found out too late what I actually wanted to do with my life, still at least it helped me find that out and so can't have been a total waste of time. I can sympathise with students who find themselves railroaded onto degree courses when they don't have a clue what they actually want to do, learning for learnings sake is just pointless and demoralising.
Anyway, finally, having discovered something I actually had some enthusiasm for I managed to become the very first member of my extended family to attain a degree...ever! So I guess that must be some sort of social mobility thingy. But what's more, I couldn't have done it without there being quite specific government initiatives at the time with pretty clear cut goals (oh...erm...what colour was the government at the time? Oh yes, that well known scourge of the education system, the Tory party, if you believe what teachers and academics say that is!) And don't just take my word for it, I know one other PHer who was lucky enough to study on the same scheme as I did (albeit at a different college) and reaped the rewards thereof. So, from A level failure to Company Director and acknowledged expert in my field, no sign of mobility ceilings there, especially since my Dad built buses in a factory and my mother has had a wide and varied career from making cardboard watch boxes at home, through petrol pump attendant (when they actually filled your car for you), cleaner, shop worker through to bookkeeper for a multi-million pound turnover company and head of HR. So the only person that seemed to lose out was my father due to the collapse of manufacturing in Britain, something he lays the blame for squarely at the feet of the unions. Anyone see a pattern emerging here?
Recent successes have been the turning of my teenage nephew from the dark side of council estate living to a highly motivated, distinction scoring computer science student. So what is wrong with the education system? The courses and opportunities are there if you want them, proper ones y'know, not effing sociology and hospitality studies...I mean..good grief! It's hardly aspirational to study for 3 years to work behind the night desk at a Premier Inn is it? I'm sure that a couple of weeks on the job training would sort that straight away!
Socialism and Socialists, that is the root cause of the problem, too many rights with too few responsibilities. The poverty of 40in flat screen TVs and a full SKY subscription is no poverty at all, it's their rights an' all innit? Yooman rights. Yeah, right, like feck it is!
Anyway, as the product of bog standard secondary school education in the 70's/early 80's I reached the dizzy heights of failing all my A levels because I found out too late what I actually wanted to do with my life, still at least it helped me find that out and so can't have been a total waste of time. I can sympathise with students who find themselves railroaded onto degree courses when they don't have a clue what they actually want to do, learning for learnings sake is just pointless and demoralising.
Anyway, finally, having discovered something I actually had some enthusiasm for I managed to become the very first member of my extended family to attain a degree...ever! So I guess that must be some sort of social mobility thingy. But what's more, I couldn't have done it without there being quite specific government initiatives at the time with pretty clear cut goals (oh...erm...what colour was the government at the time? Oh yes, that well known scourge of the education system, the Tory party, if you believe what teachers and academics say that is!) And don't just take my word for it, I know one other PHer who was lucky enough to study on the same scheme as I did (albeit at a different college) and reaped the rewards thereof. So, from A level failure to Company Director and acknowledged expert in my field, no sign of mobility ceilings there, especially since my Dad built buses in a factory and my mother has had a wide and varied career from making cardboard watch boxes at home, through petrol pump attendant (when they actually filled your car for you), cleaner, shop worker through to bookkeeper for a multi-million pound turnover company and head of HR. So the only person that seemed to lose out was my father due to the collapse of manufacturing in Britain, something he lays the blame for squarely at the feet of the unions. Anyone see a pattern emerging here?
Recent successes have been the turning of my teenage nephew from the dark side of council estate living to a highly motivated, distinction scoring computer science student. So what is wrong with the education system? The courses and opportunities are there if you want them, proper ones y'know, not effing sociology and hospitality studies...I mean..good grief! It's hardly aspirational to study for 3 years to work behind the night desk at a Premier Inn is it? I'm sure that a couple of weeks on the job training would sort that straight away!
Socialism and Socialists, that is the root cause of the problem, too many rights with too few responsibilities. The poverty of 40in flat screen TVs and a full SKY subscription is no poverty at all, it's their rights an' all innit? Yooman rights. Yeah, right, like feck it is!
Edited by TeamD on Wednesday 2nd May 13:59
There always used to be aspiration.
But now, why bother?
An average salary no longer buys anything like an average house anymore.
Price of petrol and insurance means young adults can no longer aspire to things like car ownership and so on.
Everything has got so out of reach for people without parental help that theres not much point for the average working class kid who isn't endowed with a better than average brain. You get a better life on benefits.
But now, why bother?
An average salary no longer buys anything like an average house anymore.
Price of petrol and insurance means young adults can no longer aspire to things like car ownership and so on.
Everything has got so out of reach for people without parental help that theres not much point for the average working class kid who isn't endowed with a better than average brain. You get a better life on benefits.
Snowboy said:
We have no education system that fosters talent.
We used to have grammar schools.
At the age of about 10 the smart kids would get spotted and sent to schools for smart kids.
This doesn’t happen any more, so the smart kids get lumped with the rest of them and don’t receive the encouragement or direction that would make them excel.
It didn’t matter who your parents were, you could still get picked up by the 11+ and sent grammar school where you would be guided along the academic path.
(In this context smart means academically smart as opposed to any other meaning)
In the US they have scholarships that spot the smart kids.
Now all we have are same schools trying to teach the same way to the different types of children.
That’s not to say that academics are better than those with more vocational skills.
But it’s just recognising that they can perform better with different teaching methods.
You could probably add to that :-We used to have grammar schools.
At the age of about 10 the smart kids would get spotted and sent to schools for smart kids.
This doesn’t happen any more, so the smart kids get lumped with the rest of them and don’t receive the encouragement or direction that would make them excel.
It didn’t matter who your parents were, you could still get picked up by the 11+ and sent grammar school where you would be guided along the academic path.
(In this context smart means academically smart as opposed to any other meaning)
In the US they have scholarships that spot the smart kids.
Now all we have are same schools trying to teach the same way to the different types of children.
That’s not to say that academics are better than those with more vocational skills.
But it’s just recognising that they can perform better with different teaching methods.
Both parents work full time to meet mortgage on house, which is probably beyond what they can genuinely afford as they're chasing the consumerist dream. As such, although kid gets dropped off in nice car, he/she doesn't get any proper time with either parent, as they're both knackered by the end of the day. Parents are obsessed with child being at nice school in nice area (hence moving there and having huge mortgage), as that's the life they've been sold.
supersingle said:
Caulkhead said:
So social mobility is measured by looking at the differences between the 'status positions' of children compared to their parents.
What a load of sociological cobblers.
How would you measure it?What a load of sociological cobblers.
You can achieve whatever you want in this country irrespective of your perceived class, colour or creed provided you don't expect it handed to you on a plate.
Benjamin Franklin put it perfectly:
“The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”
The same applies here.
Caulkhead said:
I wouldn't, it's sociological cobblers.
You can achieve whatever you want in this country irrespective of your perceived class, colour or creed provided you don't expect it handed to you on a plate.
Benjamin Franklin put it perfectly:
“The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.â€
The same applies here.
Now who's talking cobblers? You can achieve whatever you want in this country irrespective of your perceived class, colour or creed provided you don't expect it handed to you on a plate.
Benjamin Franklin put it perfectly:
“The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.â€
The same applies here.
Background matters enormously to future outcomes. It's why parenting and education is so important. Otherwise why would parents bother to pay so much attention to their children? We're not born as frogspawn and left to get on with it. Biologists call it an extended period of dependency and it's the longest of any living creature.
The small number of exceptions who overcome their bachground only go to prove the rule.
vonuber said:
turbobloke said:
The reason why political party socialists dislike grammars is that these schools are indeed effective social mobility engines and remove labour voting fodder as efficiently as anything else. The way in which sharp elbowed paretns are said to manipulate entry is by getting coaching but with standardised tests there's only a small margin of improvement before the lack of intellectual horsepower kicks in and the fees are wasted. Smart kids from poor homes at least get a chance with selective schooling. After all it should be seen not as some political football being kicked about in the lefties' class war arena but as no different to elite athletes getting coaching of one type that sporting muppets couldn't cope with. Horses for courses, but in terms of an academic education for those capable of hacking it. As a nation we agonise about the muppets while forgetting that the elite pay all the bills via taxes. Clever working class kids would get just what they need with a grammar school in every town but misguided egalitarian delusion prevents it, to the detriment of individual children and the country as a whole.
Just out of interest, is there anything you won't blame on Labour / the 'Left'?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff