Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it wrong that privately educated, middle classed people take most of the top jobs? watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by around)
    Or it could be because that the only people who have the same ideas as the Tories and who would want to give their lives working to perpetuate those ideas are public schoolboys...

    seriously, do you think 'working-class' (hate this term but i don't know a better one) people support the tories?
    Fair point, that wasn't the best example. But, I stand by the rest of what I said.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's wrong, but it feels so right.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Once you have Education you will get ANYWHERE!!! Scholarships grants etc will be given to those who shine above the others. Not having money is a thing of the past. Just stick to your work. All of that said, it is more likely that someone in middle class would have it easier, to scrape marks and be able to pay for higher education, obviously because they don't have to rely on scholarships etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jinglepupskye)
    I've been working since I was 17. I love my job and don't begrudge a second that I spend on it.

    My point was, that you can't say that poor people can go to university because there are grants and so they get plenty of money. A person from a poor family, in most cases, is expected to contribute towards the family income.

    So the money they get is not just for them, it's also to help to provide the money that they would have given their family, as a contribution to rent/living expenses, if they were working rather than going to university.
    But why are they expected to contribute if they are away at uni?

    I appreciate you live at home, and so you get less grant because your living costs are supposed to be cheaper than if you live out, no? So if you were supposed to contribute as much rent/bills etc as you would living alone in a different city, the grant would reflect that?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    I disagree that privately educated quite often means better educated. I know many people who have been to state schools (myself included) who have gained better GCSEs than those at private schools.
    If a private school education is not better (possibly worse) than a state education, why do parents pay tens of thousands of pounds to put their children through one? It doesn't make sense.

    Ok, so you know a few people who may have got better grades than some private school students but that doesn't mean that you've achieved better grades than all privately educated students, nor that state students achieve better grades on average.

    The results speak for themselves, if you're in any doubt check out your local league tables.

    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    Moreover, education isn't always academic, and I strongly believe that state schools provide a more well-rounded education, thus producing broad-minded individuals which are highly valued by employers.
    Private schools have more resources, they can afford to dedicate more time to sports, they can afford to offer a greater range of subjects and/or activities to widen participation, they can afford to take the students abroad, they encourage participation in the cadets and the like, etc.

    If we're being honest here I'd personally say that a private school student would be more likely to have a more rounded education.

    In the same way they have a greater emphasis on discipline, respect, politeness, etc which are all valued in the 'professional' occupations and other institutions.

    Sure there may be some sort of stereotypical view that all privately educated students are snobs, out of touch, whatever, but from my experience that isn't the case. While being at university education has sprung up a couple of times and nobody has ever been able to guess right.

    Again, the results speak for themselves.

    (Original post by robin22391)
    i think private school pupils have a higher dropout rate at uni
    Thinking and knowing are two completely different things.

    (Original post by robin22391)
    infact i know for sure that a privately run school near me cheats on its courses by giving the students an esssay to copy off the board and send away to be marked.
    You think that's any different with state schools?

    I've seen teachers using sign language to tell students which tense to use in oral exams. I've seen kids doing 10+ drafts on coursework and teachers re-writing sections. I've seen kids being pushed into less academic ('easier') subjects to improve grades. I've seen kids being given 'example' essays from which they can base their coursework on.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    If a private school education is not better (possibly worse) than a state education, why do parents pay tens of thousands of pounds to put their children through one? .
    I think that sometimes, parents pay money because they feel that by paying for education, it must be of a higher quality. Don't get me wrong, valuing your child's future in not something that I have a problem with by any stretch of the imagination.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Ok, so you know a few people who may have got better grades than some private school students but that doesn't mean that you've achieved better grades than all privately educated students, nor that state students achieve better grades on average.
    I never claimed this. I just think that it proves that excellent grades can be achieved without having to pay for private education. Perhaps, at present, private schools do achieve better results, but that's perhaps because the large majority of parents sending their children to private schools care enough about their son or daughter's education to pay for it.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Private schools have more resources, they can afford to dedicate more time to sports, they can afford to offer a greater range of subjects and/or activities to widen participation, they can afford to take the students abroad, they encourage participation in the cadets and the like, etc.

    If we're being honest here I'd personally say that a private school student would be more likely to have a more rounded education.
    But you're largely mixing with similar people - those who are middle-class and come from relatively similar backgrounds. Naturally, there are those whose parents struggle financially to send their children to private schools but continue to do so, as well as those who are recipients of scholarships or bursaries. However, for me, being well-rounded isn't about how many extra-curricular activities a person does, but more about appreciating the diversity of life. You can go on as many trips abroad as you like, but a broader knowledge of a historical period won't make you more attractive as a potential employee.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Sure, there may be some sort of stereotypical view that all privately educated students are snobs, out of touch, whatever, but from my experience that isn't the case.
    I know - I have several friends who are educated in the private sector, and they are my friends for who they are rather than because of what school they attend.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I see that this question has provoked a predictable barrage of vacuous bourgeois mythology and – even worse – the bile of that most contemptible of creatures: the working class Tory. What an unpleasant bunch.

    In short, yes, it is clearly wrong that privately educated, middle class people take most of the top jobs. Although patronage and nepotism – as others have mentioned – obviously play a part in helping some privileged youngsters secure the best jobs, the main reason for the preponderance of the middle-class in the top professions is obviously inequalities in education.

    How can anyone possibly justify these inequalities? Well, you can – as some on this thread have done – argue that “if my parents have the money, then they should have the right to choose private education”. But this is quite clearly rubbish. In the end, what it comes down to, collectively, is the furtherance of middle-class interests behind the meaningless shibboleth of “freedom of choice”.

    Why should somebody receive a better education than anybody else? On what ethical principle could you base such an argument? Clearly, there is no such ethical principle.

    And yet, since there is no incentive for the middle-class (i.e. the empowered class) to improve state schools – so as long as private schools continue to exist – the inequity looks set to continue for some time to come.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PAPAdawg)
    You're boring me.

    Oxbridge can't give places to everybody. Get over it mate.
    So instead of engaging in my arguments you have just dismissed them with ad-hominem attacks? Good stuff. Really shows your intellectual abilities.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What would the world be like if we all had the same wealth?

    ...You wouldn't be getting those 10p noodles from the supermarket
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Can people stop confusing meritocracy with socialism and communism? It's really annoying.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by hawflo)
    What sort of classes? I'm confused :p:
    Well, there are a few different systems. It all started in Rome when they had to divide people into the lower classes which had to do military service and the upper that did not, and systems follow from there. Marx had his own system.

    The most famous system would be Registrar General's:
    I - professionals
    II - Managerial
    IIIA - skilled non-manual
    IIIB - skilled manual
    IV - Semi-skilled manual
    V - non-skilled manual.

    Clearly referring to profession. The chances of you being born into class V and moving to class III and above are pretty minimal, even if you are extremely talented when you are born.

    The correlation between the class you are in and health is pretty amazing - in one part of Glasgow the life expectancy is 82, and in a neighboring, less-wealthy area it is some 28 years less at 56 (less than quite a few African countries). In the past (as recently as 25 years ago) the government actually tried to hide that this was true!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Of course its wrong the worse part is when they act like they deserve it or have actually achieved anythin. Only 7% of people go to private schools yet 85% or our top judges politicians etc were privatel educated.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jodie_lee)
    But why are they expected to contribute if they are away at uni?

    I appreciate you live at home, and so you get less grant because your living costs are supposed to be cheaper than if you live out, no? So if you were supposed to contribute as much rent/bills etc as you would living alone in a different city, the grant would reflect that?
    My grant would only be a few hundred pounds more if I was living away. Certainly it wouldn't be sufficient to live on and I would lose my job unless I was able to transfer to another place. So I would be no better off. And my mother would be worse off if she didn't have my contribution which would reduce my standard of living when I returned home for holidays.

    You don't seem to get that poor families have to help each other out financially and there is no 'this is mine' and 'that is yours' because everyone's contribution is needed. And even if they leave home for uni they can't expect that their parents can help them out because by moving out they have made the family worse off.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Most people at top law firms went to oxbridge? What a surprise....

    No its not fair though society sucks you often stay in the class you're born in but you always have an opportunity in this country, which is more than most can say
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LurkerintheDark)
    The only way to solve this problem is to bring state schools up to the same standard as public schools. Clearly, this will take years to achieve, and enourmous amounts of cash. At the moment, it is far easier to achieve a row of 'A's in a private school than in a state school; a state pupil who has mustered say AAB for A-Level with limited resources, with possibly poorer teachers and in more crowded classes could indeed have much more natural ability than a private pupil who got AAA. Good state-educated grades demonstrate a greater accomplishment than good private school grades. It realy is true that money can 'buy' good grades; if providing your child with an expensive education did not in some way boost their grades, and give them a real advantage over state pupils, then the entire enterprise of private education would be a meaningless waste of money.


    So, in short, the most obvious route to greater equality among poor and well-off students is to improve the state sector, as difficult as that is. Obviously, this does not change the current culture of "It ain't what you know, it's who you know" which prevails among elite (and often privately-educated) society. This is a problem which be around for years to come, believe me.
    It's not just about the grades. I've grown up with people from private school (my school), and state school (a group of girls in my neighbourhood), and there is a visible difference in social grounding.

    I don't want to cause offence here as of course, it's only from one experience and perspective, but I found my private school friends to be much more confident and at ease in the presence of powerful adults, or in upper class situations (i.e. very expensive London restaurants, when speaking to a wealthy businessman, or at Royal Ascot)...whereas my state school friends would often be rather flustered. Furthermore, my private school friends were more inclined to discuss topics other than gossip or television, things that were philosophical in nature for example...then again perhaps we're all just nerds! My private school friends also had much more ambition and drive than my state school friends, who did A-levels but looked for jobs in childcare even though they were clever and perfectly capable of going to university.

    I know there are many exceptions to this, and I am friends with quite a few people from state school at uni who are like me...but to be honest, the majority of people I meet at uni are Southern, middle class and privately educated/educated at a grammar school. I think that just might be the way it is.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Check who sponsors those researchers. Oops, it might just be some private school. Other than that, it sounds like crap to me - no employer asks where you went to school, that's just way too back in time and irrelevant.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flying Cookie)
    Check who sponsors those researchers. Oops, it might just be some private school. Other than that, it sounds like crap to me - no employer asks where you went to school, that's just way too back in time and irrelevant.
    Erm, do you know what you're talking about? They may not ask for your previous school/education history, but it's exactly that education that gives you the opportunity to be able to get that job (i.e. university, ambition, etc).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    why do people think thy're middle class if they go to a private school etc?

    normally, they're upper class
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Socialite)
    It's not just about the grades. I've grown up with people from private school (my school), and state school (a group of girls in my neighbourhood), and there is a visible difference in social grounding.

    I don't want to cause offence here as of course, it's only from one experience and perspective, but I found my private school friends to be much more confident and at ease in the presence of powerful adults, or in upper class situations (i.e. very expensive London restaurants, when speaking to a wealthy businessman, or at Royal Ascot)...whereas my state school friends would often be rather flustered. Furthermore, my private school friends were more inclined to discuss topics other than gossip or television, things that were philosophical in nature for example...then again perhaps we're all just nerds! My private school friends also had much more ambition and drive than my state school friends, who did A-levels but looked for jobs in childcare even though they were clever and perfectly capable of going to university.

    I know there are many exceptions to this, and I am friends with quite a few people from state school at uni who are like me...but to be honest, the majority of people I meet at uni are Southern, middle class and privately educated/educated at a grammar school. I think that just might be the way it is.
    Very few working-class / lower middle-class people have been in a position to enjoy (?) these luxuries. I'd hate to dine in an excessively posh restraunt or go to the Royal Ascot; privately educated kids are perhaps more used to these environments than their less well-off counterparts, and so can probably fit in with greater ease. Surely everybody feels a little ill at ease when plunged into an alien situation. I guess a rich lass wouldn't be able to fit into a rough and ready working-class sort of environment...I dunno.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe because people who've gone to private schools want it more. For example, if you'e been to a state school with an average family; if you end up a highly paid barister with a far nicer house than you had when you were a kid you probably feel ******* great. But if you're like my cousins (so top of their proffesion parents, multi million pound house, expensive education) then you're going to want more than what you had as a kid, plus you're to some extent want to be as good, if not better your parents. However, if you want this you still have to be very good to get there.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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.