Turn on thread page Beta

Discrimination against Middle Class students??????? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Ignore any grammatical errors or mistypes, i rarely look)
    Had to start a completely new thread about this ridiculous topic, as the other one is waaay too long. Nosos, i am new to this forum and i havent bothered to read the rules and stuff, so i dont know that i wouldnt be thrown off if i offended you by calling you a barrage of names, so i won't but know what i am thinking!
    Your argument is so narrow- minded it is hard to know where to begin. Firstly, you exclude the little details, such as the fact that there are plenty of people with middle class values, and middle class jobs, who use comprehensive schools. The school i go to is the number 1 comprehensive school is my city, 3rd only to the two private schools. It is in the most well-off, exclusive area in Coventry, and practically all the students who go there have parents who are accountants, teachers, lawyers, etc. This type of school is just a microcosm of every city in the country, so there, already i have (sort of ) identified thousands upon thousands of middle class children who use comp schools. More middle class parents than you think disagree with the unfairness of private schools, and the fact that those sorts of institutions turn the children who go to them into materialistic, egotistical morons who think they are a cut above hoi polloi.
    You then mix up ( and not just nosos, but many of the other tory ranters) being black wih being gay, or poor, not thinking that everyone is an individual, every family is an individual, and that because you are black or gay, or whatever, you dont automatically fall into these silly categories. The general tone was that you presume all black people are working class. By saying unis are discriminating the middle classes and juxtaposing that with the fact that black people/gay people etc are beind positively discriminated for, you are saying that blacks/gays do not fall into the category of middle class. You should or could have made your point by saying you believe that they are discriminating the middle classes by positively discriminating for the working class, withoiut assuming that all the poor little minority groups are working class. Doing this has offended a lot of people, and has contaminated your thread, as now people are not arguing on the right lines.
    And isn't it about time that more working class kids are accepted into top unis. I know plenty of working class children with super brains, who leave school at 16 because their families are so poor that they dont even entertain the idea of going to uni; they go and get jobs to support their families. They have been woithout money their entire lives, and so leaving school as soon as possilbe to obtain money seems great. They have no concept of deferring gratification, and who blames them? This is why i think the EMA scheme is a good idea. I hear girls with docotor daddies saying it isnt fair, but i say it is, as ema's sole purpose is to stop the w.class kids leaving for money, with all the potential they have going down the drain.
    Middle class kids have it comparatively easy their whole school lives. From simple things such as going to nurseries (which is proven to greatly enhance learning ability later in life) to speaking in the same language codes as their teachers ( making classses easier for them to grasp), to having the money for the latest books, tutors, travel to gain wider knowledge of the world, etc. All of these things added makes school life so much easier for m.class kids. Now consider the w.class, or even underclass child, no ,money, tiny house, cant even do theit homework in peace, cant go on school trips, parent not very academic, cant even get help with homework at home. Who has it much easier? m.class- small class sizes, oxford educated teachers, latest computer technology, top-of-the-range school equipment.w.class- schools, falling apart, no money, 50,483 to a class. Now tell me: if a middle class student gets three as at a-level, and so does a w.class, in the same subjects, who has achieved more?Who has had to struggle through more to get these grades?Which grades then, are more valuable, and more of a measure of a persons will and determination to do their best, despite living conditions? The rhetoric is easy to answer, and the unis can see this. Remember, the top unis are relatively objective, and pick people with high grades. I think it is about time that the govt, and unis honed in on the fact that there are plenty of w.class kids out there who are just as clever, if not more so, than m.class kids, and made measures to ensure they get to uni. It's for the good of the country, because lets not forget, these kids will end up making something good out of themsleves, something beneficial to the country. So does it really matter what class that person is from? Let's also remember that it was society that created the need for w.class kids to get a leg-up in the forst place, so we "middle class" kids can blame our own class- look what the tories did with school, creaing all these teirs, look at the whole tory mental attitude, the fact that they believe they are the best. When they were in power, they left everyone who wasnt wealthy to rot, and now, finally, the w.class are being helped back up. And about time.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Now tell me: if a middle class student gets three as at a-level, and so does a w.class, in the same subjects, who has achieved more?
    Neither - that's it in my world at least. Please remember that the vast majority of the middle class people you are ranting against send their children to be schooled by the state, and have kept this government in power for three terms.

    The problem here is that we should allow individual circumstances to be considered, but all I here from both sides is attempts to pigeon-hole (like your quote there). There should be a good and well publicised system of bursaries so that if people are to pay for higher education (much to my chagrin) then they only pay what they can afford. Realistically there is actually very little to stop a bright working class student from going to university now, they don't pay tuition fees until they earn above a certain amount, and they get a full student loan - okay you might not be able to endulge yourself as much as some of the wealthy students, but that isn't why you are at university is it?

    The fact is we have a state education system that has such varying standards that what school you go to will drastically affect your chances of getting to university, but this is something the government needs to sort out, and it won't be acheived by pointing fingers at certain sections of society.

    University is about academic study primarily and the best students should get to the best universities, regardless of background - any discrimination severly damages the credibility of universities in the world stage.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChemistBoy)
    Neither - that's it in my world at least. Please remember that the vast majority of the middle class people you are ranting against send their children to be schooled by the state, and have kept this government in power for three terms.

    The problem here is that we should allow individual circumstances to be considered, but all I here from both sides is attempts to pigeon-hole (like your quote there). There should be a good and well publicised system of bursaries so that if people are to pay for higher education (much to my chagrin) then they only pay what they can afford. Realistically there is actually very little to stop a bright working class student from going to university now, they don't pay tuition fees until they earn above a certain amount, and they get a full student loan - okay you might not be able to endulge yourself as much as some of the wealthy students, but that isn't why you are at university is it?

    The fact is we have a state education system that has such varying standards that what school you go to will drastically affect your chances of getting to university, but this is something the government needs to sort out, and it won't be acheived by pointing fingers at certain sections of society.

    University is about academic study primarily and the best students should get to the best universities, regardless of background - any discrimination severly damages the credibility of universities in the world stage.
    Look, i totally agree with what you are saying about best students getting best places, and i do believe there should be equality. I personally disagree with positive discrimination, im sure people find it patronising. I am not pointing fingers as such, i am merely defending a side that people are not in the other thread, People are too quick to jump down the throats of w.class people, and i am ranting against these people- people like nonsense nosos. I totally agree with the fact hat unis should just pick the best candidates. But- it is plain fact that people who have more against them in terms of education- w.class kids in most circumstances- obviously have achieved more in getting these top grades, because theyve done it with much less help. It is common sense. One has done better than another. This is why unis are trying to get more w. class kids into uni- it has been established that there is too much wasted talent.
    An "realistically" there is a still a great deal of thigns keeping w.class kids from attending unis. The money issues, the fact that they dont want debt, the fact that it doesnt even occur to them to go to uni becuase noone in their family has before, the pressures from families who dont want the kids to go because they need their help at home. I wish people who have no experience of w,class life would stop going on about how it must be "easy" becuas it isnt. I have plenty of w.class friends who havent entertained the idea of going to uni, though they could easily get into one. I can see the issues from both sides, because my parents were working class growing up as childrem, and theyve told me how hard life was, and still is, for a lot of kids today. And i dont know what you mean when you say there "should be" a well publicised system of bursaries- there is one! And i also agree with paying tuition fees. We who go to uni are going to be in the higher earning bands when we get jobs, the stats say. Why should other people pay for us to get higher wages in the future. It is an investment into YOUR future- you choose to go, you should pay. Otherwise, go and get a job in McDonalds or somewhere. If you want the lifestyle that a degree can bring, then you should be happy to invest in it. Unis need their fundings too, to make themselves better, for you and everyone else.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    to speaking in the same language codes as their teachers ( making classses easier for them to grasp),
    I think even Bernstein eventually relinquished this idea.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    But- it is plain fact that people who have more against them in terms of education- w.class kids in most circumstances- obviously have achieved more in getting these top grades, because theyve done it with much less help. It is common sense. One has done better than another. This is why unis are trying to get more w. class kids into uni- it has been established that there is too much wasted talent.
    I really don't think that the situation is as simplistic as you have insinuated.

    An "realistically" there is a still a great deal of thigns keeping w.class kids from attending unis. The money issues,
    What money issues? - this is too vague, please explain.

    the fact that they dont want debt,
    Don't "want" debt? That doesn't sound like something stopping them going to university it sounds like a personal choice not to go.

    the fact that it doesnt even occur to them to go to uni becuase noone in their family has before,
    Well no-one went to university before in my family but it occured to me - does that mean I'm special?

    the pressures from families who dont want the kids to go because they need their help at home.
    And that occurs in every working class family? I doubt it.

    I wish people who have no experience of w,class life would stop going on about how it must be "easy" becuas it isnt.
    Has anyone actually said that?

    I have plenty of w.class friends who havent entertained the idea of going to uni, though they could easily get into one. I can see the issues from both sides, because my parents were working class growing up as childrem, and theyve told me how hard life was, and still is, for a lot of kids today. And i dont know what you mean when you say there "should be" a well publicised system of bursaries- there is one!
    Well it seems you are contradicting yourself a little - you are saying that working class students are put off university by money worries, but then you say there is a well publicised bursary system - if the latter were truely the case then the former wouldn't occur.

    And i also agree with paying tuition fees. We who go to uni are going to be in the higher earning bands when we get jobs, the stats say. Why should other people pay for us to get higher wages in the future. It is an investment into YOUR future- you choose to go, you should pay. Otherwise, go and get a job in McDonalds or somewhere. If you want the lifestyle that a degree can bring, then you should be happy to invest in it. Unis need their fundings too, to make themselves better, for you and everyone else.
    I did not go to university to earn more money - at the moment I am thousands of pounds in debt and I am 24 years old with no job - someone at McDonalds earns more money than me. I went to university to study chemistry, because I want to be a scientist. The government is financially punishing me, not based on my earnings, but on what I might earn - this is not fair. Not everyone who gets a degree goes into a well paid job, people work in public services, academic research, etc. - why should these people be taxed for being intelligent? If you use your degree to get a good job then you should expect to pay higher income tax - it is the only fair and just way to ensure that people give back to society in accordance with their means.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChemistBoy)
    I really don't think that the situation is as simplistic as you have insinuated.
    It is as simple as this. It follows logically that a person who has tutors, internet, a relaxing environment to work in, parents who can help them, and take an interest in their work, etc, will find exams and revision and homework much easier than someone who does not do these things. So if the same grades are met, then surely it follows that because the former had more help, be it literal or circumstantial, then latter has achieved more on their own.



    What money issues? - this is too vague, please explain.
    Money issues such as debt. The way i looked at it was, (and it may be patronising), debt (to a person with no money or no concept of money and the way economy runs), would be more more likely to scare off a w.class person than a m.class person, who would be annoyed with the debt, but would copw with it, as theyve seen credit cards be used, mortages taken out, etc- they know how to cope with debt. Then there are smaller things such as surviving on the small amount they get from the govt- budgeting, which they probably dont have any concept of, being that their parents live pound by pound, etc. I hate bangin on and on!



    Don't "want" debt? That doesn't sound like something stopping them going to university it sounds like a personal choice not to go.
    see above


    Well no-one went to university before in my family but it occured to me - does that mean I'm special?
    No, but thanks to govt initiatives more and more w.class people are going to university. And stop being pedantic; i do not mean all w.class, i was listing general reasons.



    And that occurs in every working class family? I doubt it.
    no of course it doesnt! im not talking about EVERY family!!


    Has anyone actually said that?
    i hear it aaaall the time at my school, people with no idea.It is actually quite shocking to hear people asking what tax credits are, and sentences such as "what?who could live on £5 a week?"



    Well it seems you are contradicting yourself a little - you are saying that working class students are put off university by money worries, but then you say there is a well publicised bursary system - if the latter were truely the case then the former wouldn't occur.
    i meant that people already pay according to how much their parents earn. And there are many bursaries around. But plenty still don't go do they?



    I did not go to university to earn more money - at the moment I am thousands of pounds in debt and I am 24 years old with no job - someone at McDonalds earns more money than me. I went to university to study chemistry, because I want to be a scientist. The government is financially punishing me, not based on my earnings, but on what I might earn - this is not fair. Not everyone who gets a degree goes into a well paid job, people work in public services, academic research, etc. - why should these people be taxed for being intelligent? If you use your degree to get a good job then you should expect to pay higher income tax - it is the only fair and just way to ensure that people give back to society in accordance with their means.
    I was being general. Good for YOU, but most people are subconsciously money- minded, and go to uni knowing they have a better chance of earning much more money than people who don't. The government is acting on the majority's interests, you know they cannot cater for each persons individual means.For everyone in your situation, there are 20 post grads who are doing well. Who said they should be taxed for being intelligent? I dont want to get into a debate about what taxes are for, and whether they are fair. But people should pay their way, i'll stand by that in particular.You say why should they pay, i say why should other people?Yes, these people will be a benefit to society one day (more often than not), but they will take more wages than other people (""").
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Well no-one went to university before in my family but it occured to me - does that mean I'm special?
    None of my parents went to uni. But they managed to work damned hard, bring me up well and send me to a school which had a 65% pass rate rather than the 15% pass rate of my local school. Not all kids are as luck as me. All I have to do is walk down to my local dilapidated shopping centre to see kids who won't even think about going to uni because they've been in an environment where they are taught from an early age that drugs and alcohol are the norm for them, not uni.

    If you use your degree to get a good job then you should expect to pay higher income tax - it is the only fair and just way to ensure that people give back to society in accordance with their means.
    100% agree. Not only does this rmove the ridiculous theory of taxing people who simply want to learn more, but it also catches people who are wealthy from business or inheritance.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, these people will be a benefit to society one day (more often than not), but they will take more wages than other people (""").
    So why not tax the rich instead? This takes away the people who don't get more wages from their degree, as well as getting those who earn money without a degree to pay their dues to society too.

    The argument for fees from a 'it helps the working class' angle just doesn't stand up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    None of my parents went to uni. But they managed to work damned hard, bring me up well and send me to a school which had a 65% pass rate rather than the 15% pass rate of my local school.
    same here, my dads family was in the army, and my mum grew up in a council house in Lancashire, both her parents worked in the factorys near there, my grandma made clothes for her four children, and my mum had an outdoor toilet and a tin bath untill she was 9 (late 60s early 70s) her background didn't stop her. She didn't go to uni but has spent most of her working life doing good jobs because she has natural ability and went to a grammer school and got a good education. Maybe we should bring those back if the argument is the clever kids don't get good enough education to get good enough grades.
    All I have to do is walk down to my local dilapidated shopping centre to see kids who won't even think about going to uni because they've been in an environment where they are taught from an early age that drugs and alcohol are the norm for them, not uni.
    this is an assumption that these kids are completely 'mokey see monkey do' despite tv, poster, and school campaigns to warn them against these things and tell them they can do better. Anyone who gives up school at 16 does so because it is their choice, they know they can do A-levels and get money from the government, they have seen on tv the funding that's available for them. but they choose not to take it. And those who do choose to take it should be judged exactly tthe same despite their background, becaus if you have the ability and work hard you can acheive your potential.


    I didn't understand why people were talking about taxes so didn't mention it
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    they have seen on tv the funding that's available for them.
    I was elegible for maintenance allowance for 2 years and nobody told me. Not everyone managed to go to a good school or was fortunate as we were in our upbringing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    it is on the curriculum to educate kids about drugs, and alcohol. Every kid is told thay they are not the 'norm' whatever school they go to and if they choose to disregard that it is their own fault. That is definately not a standard of education point, it's a bloody common sense point.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What is stronger: very occasional poor-written propaganda or speeches from teachers you don't trust not to do drugs or alchohol; or constant peer pressure from all your friends?
    Heck, I go to a shcool that had the best exam results in the country 3 years ago and there are still plenty of people who do soft drugs and constantly get pissed. Would be 100times worse in a worse area.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    it is on the curriculum to educate kids about drugs, and alcohol. Every kid is told thay they are not the 'norm' whatever school they go to and if they choose to disregard that it is their own fault. That is definately not a standard of education point, it's a bloody common sense point.
    You are so harsh. It is common sense for some people to know how to behave at a cocktail party. Not for me. Just like it's not common sense for a kid brought up with alcohol and drugs around them to feel that that is wrong. And education on drugs and alcohol in schools is pitiful.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Nosos' statement was actually about middle class students, whether from comprehensives or private schools being discriminated against, not about private school students.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry to bring up old aspects, but today I was speaking to a teacher who claimed that out of the 50 straight-A students from his rural North Yorkshire state school (i.e. lower middle class) not a single one was accepted into Oxford or Cambridge. It used to range between 5 and 10, up until a few years ago. Since several other people mentioned similar things happening all over similar colleges all over the country, I'm now close to bieng convinced there really is something odd going on here, whereas before I just thought people were bieng paranoid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    i posted a reply on the other thread about cambridge and my opinion on the admissions. i can't be bothered to retype it or copy and paste but basically i said that a levels were just an indicator of potential and your dos who interviews you will know whether you have potential to do well at cambridge or not.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    It is right for uni's to give places to poor students who went to poorly performing schools at the expense off middle class students who went to good schools. Because students at poor schools face such an uphill struggle to acheive the grades they have whereas middle class students have a relative smooth struggle. This has GOT TO BE AN ISSUE when admissions tutors select between applicants from different backgrounds.

    Good teachers are attracted to good schools, bad teachers have to end up somewhere - and guess where!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think someone should find the time to list the flow debate so far in a concise list, as to make it easier to jump into, and to avoid the high chance of repeats.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    (Ignore any grammatical errors or mistypes, i rarely look)
    Had to start a completely new thread about this ridiculous topic, as the other one is waaay too long. Nosos, i am new to this forum and i havent bothered to read the rules and stuff, so i dont know that i wouldnt be thrown off if i offended you by calling you a barrage of names, so i won't but know what i am thinking!
    Your argument is so narrow- minded it is hard to know where to begin. Firstly, you exclude the little details, such as the fact that there are plenty of people with middle class values, and middle class jobs, who use comprehensive schools. The school i go to is the number 1 comprehensive school is my city, 3rd only to the two private schools. It is in the most well-off, exclusive area in Coventry, and practically all the students who go there have parents who are accountants, teachers, lawyers, etc. This type of school is just a microcosm of every city in the country, so there, already i have (sort of ) identified thousands upon thousands of middle class children who use comp schools. More middle class parents than you think disagree with the unfairness of private schools, and the fact that those sorts of institutions turn the children who go to them into materialistic, egotistical morons who think they are a cut above hoi polloi.
    You then mix up ( and not just nosos, but many of the other tory ranters) being black wih being gay, or poor, not thinking that everyone is an individual, every family is an individual, and that because you are black or gay, or whatever, you dont automatically fall into these silly categories. The general tone was that you presume all black people are working class. By saying unis are discriminating the middle classes and juxtaposing that with the fact that black people/gay people etc are beind positively discriminated for, you are saying that blacks/gays do not fall into the category of middle class. You should or could have made your point by saying you believe that they are discriminating the middle classes by positively discriminating for the working class, withoiut assuming that all the poor little minority groups are working class. Doing this has offended a lot of people, and has contaminated your thread, as now people are not arguing on the right lines.
    And isn't it about time that more working class kids are accepted into top unis. I know plenty of working class children with super brains, who leave school at 16 because their families are so poor that they dont even entertain the idea of going to uni; they go and get jobs to support their families. They have been woithout money their entire lives, and so leaving school as soon as possilbe to obtain money seems great. They have no concept of deferring gratification, and who blames them? This is why i think the EMA scheme is a good idea. I hear girls with docotor daddies saying it isnt fair, but i say it is, as ema's sole purpose is to stop the w.class kids leaving for money, with all the potential they have going down the drain.
    Middle class kids have it comparatively easy their whole school lives. From simple things such as going to nurseries (which is proven to greatly enhance learning ability later in life) to speaking in the same language codes as their teachers ( making classses easier for them to grasp), to having the money for the latest books, tutors, travel to gain wider knowledge of the world, etc. All of these things added makes school life so much easier for m.class kids. Now consider the w.class, or even underclass child, no ,money, tiny house, cant even do theit homework in peace, cant go on school trips, parent not very academic, cant even get help with homework at home. Who has it much easier? m.class- small class sizes, oxford educated teachers, latest computer technology, top-of-the-range school equipment.w.class- schools, falling apart, no money, 50,483 to a class. Now tell me: if a middle class student gets three as at a-level, and so does a w.class, in the same subjects, who has achieved more?Who has had to struggle through more to get these grades?Which grades then, are more valuable, and more of a measure of a persons will and determination to do their best, despite living conditions? The rhetoric is easy to answer, and the unis can see this. Remember, the top unis are relatively objective, and pick people with high grades. I think it is about time that the govt, and unis honed in on the fact that there are plenty of w.class kids out there who are just as clever, if not more so, than m.class kids, and made measures to ensure they get to uni. It's for the good of the country, because lets not forget, these kids will end up making something good out of themsleves, something beneficial to the country. So does it really matter what class that person is from? Let's also remember that it was society that created the need for w.class kids to get a leg-up in the forst place, so we "middle class" kids can blame our own class- look what the tories did with school, creaing all these teirs, look at the whole tory mental attitude, the fact that they believe they are the best. When they were in power, they left everyone who wasnt wealthy to rot, and now, finally, the w.class are being helped back up. And about time.
    I hate to say this but you do talk some nonsense....

    I live with my mother alone and she does not earn mega-money

    I worked hard at primary school and i therefore got into a grammar which gave me a good start for life.

    I have currently got 2 A grades at A Level and hope to have 5 by the end of the summer. This i achieved through an academic scholarship at a private college.

    I work at tescos as a trolley boy and that earns me 6 pounds an hour. I mostly use this money to by myself books for my a level studies.

    Now what is stopping the rest of the "working class" from copying me?!

    And yes i am a tory because i believe you work hard to get what you want in life- not to get pregnant at 16, have 3 different children with 3 different fathers and vote labour at the general election simply because you know they'll support people on benefit!

    You say that identical grades achieved by a working class pupil and a wealthier family-pupil means the working class pupil worked harder.................. not necessarily.

    You still get cr*p teachers in private and grammar schools. Theres nothing stopping a "working class" student from teaching themselves from a book.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by esx77)
    It is right for uni's to give places to poor students who went to poorly performing schools at the expense off middle class students who went to good schools. Because students at poor schools face such an uphill struggle to acheive the grades they have whereas middle class students have a relative smooth struggle. This has GOT TO BE AN ISSUE when admissions tutors select between applicants from different backgrounds.

    Good teachers are attracted to good schools, bad teachers have to end up somewhere - and guess where!!
    tutors choose those with potential. if a student from a rubbish school isn't as bright and capable as one from a great school, the student from the good school should get the place.

    fyi i didn't go to a private school. i just think the best people should get in.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,373

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.