Education, society and the 11 plus exam

There is an indisputable fact the world is unfair and becomes more apparent when growing up, in the finite steps between childhood to adulthood success and failure is determined. The availability of opportunities determines the direction where an individual is going. Not their actual mental ability. Whilst, an espoused theme is educational attainment level relates to opportunity. This is not true, for education is not particularly the most important thing for a child. It is the alleged educational level decides a child's future. Yes, education can be a highly significant factor in a child's future however a further advantage can be sort by providing a child with the want and the motivation to get the highest grades possible. Paying for this through private schooling, tutoring or lots of parental assistance is always adding to their advantage.

No matter how the political system of the UK changes, any conscious person can see the wealthier and more engaged parents are with their children the more opportunities there will be. Parenting skills and upbringing have a direct relationship to where a child ends up as an adult.  The unfairness of Britain's education system or rather life opportunity system is that parents behaviour will decide how well a child progression in life. Adult can make their own opportunities yet again with the help of a family network or a wealthy to wealthy network they will go further. The educational achievements of the vast majority of Tory MPs and ministers is testimony to this, just as does their public speaking.  They are from a different social class one which endeavours to increase the advantage of their kin whenever possible. It is an open secret. However, regardless of their class there is a unchallengeable truth, the majority of politicians, leaders and world leaders actually fail to impress with their intelligence and quiet often their personality.

In the UK an argument continues about education, Prime Minister Teresa May, who is unelected has decided to introduce two further changes to the education system. The re-introduction of grammar schools and the allowance of 100 per cent selection for faith based schools. Faith schools are based on selecting pupils who are of a particular faith, the notion is if both education and faith are intertwined they will be congruent with each other.  Of course this does not question whether their faith is a faith which should be used as a model of society. When considering the number of faiths there are in the world. A system based on this notion would ensure the homogeneity of a select part of society for a long time. When we are living in a secular society this is abhorrent. Secularism gives individuals the chance to change their faith a when it doesn't make sense. To move away from something they may not believe and don't want to be controlled by. A 100 per cent faith school will be 100 per cent control. Society will become even more segregated than it has ever been. A person going to a faith school may never know what the thoughts feelings and attitudes of someone from another different faith background. They will be susceptible to believe their faith is above the laws of society and not have to follow the same rules as everyone else. Ultimately society will become polarised, with separate groups defined by their faith, clothes and practices and seclude themselves from contact with those who are not the same. I can not think of a more destructive societal system. If a faith is strong it should not matter how it is challenged, for strength comes from challenge. If a faith is weak it will fail in the face of challenge. Importantly in an equal society all faiths are equal and so is the belief in non-faith (Atheist) logic and scientific.

Grammar schools were developed with the idea education attainment should be a guide to where a child progresses from the age of 11 onwards. If they pass their 11 plus exam they then have the automatic right to attend a grammar school. This is a school with a lot more resources than the normal state secondary school and fewer pupils per teacher. Grammar schools have high standards, not the standards of faith schools which are based on specific religious contexts but standards based on educational attainment with good teaching.

The 11 plus exam is made to weed out those children who do not have dedicated parents, who do not have indigenous links in society and a wider network to call on and those who are likely to be relegated to the lower echelons of society. More than this it is another stab into the self-esteem of children. Children who for a moment are noticed by parents who want them to do well, but at the same time think, well if I didn't pass it then I don't expect my child to pass it. This is self defeatism of the poor and the weak minded. Who perceive their world to be the downtrodden and it will always stay there. They are broken and in turn imbibe the same broken spirit in their children. Social movement cannot even be considered in their mindset. Their place is their place, full stop.

Secondary state schools are where the rest of society go, these are persons who are not considered elite and are not given additional help up the ladder. They don't stand on the shoulders of helping hands. The majority will go to secondary schools, but of course not all secondary schools are the same they to have a league table and the term 'secondary' is now being replaced with 'Academy' school. Meaning the head of the school will determine the pay levels of teachers and can seek to get private sponsorship to help the school. And just like 'secondary' schools Academy schools are not all equal. It seems equality or rather inequality is rife.

Here is a notion one which would even the field. Why not have just one type of secondary school, no private schools and no faith schools. Make it compulsory all children must attend one of these schools and illegal for full-time home based education. Those parents who want the best for their children can then either chose to engage with the school to bring up it's standard or engage private teachers out of the school system. In addition the school should be in a relatively close area, perhaps within a three mile maximum distance. Each of such school would have to be accountable, teachers would be accountable and students would be accountable, and lastly parents must be accountable. Society would integrate as different faiths are crossed at an early age and so are challenged. Those who want better for their children can become school governors and push for the school to improve. Governors can advocate for changes to systems in use, set standards, push for bad teachers to be sacked and lets face it we've all memories of bad teachers. Burnt out teachers who should never of been in the profession because they didn't have a love for it but needed the money and a job. Lastly eduction should be based on sound educational learning theory and psychological theory. Children love to learn when it is fun and there is encouragement for effort, not just for achievement. In the end it is passion for something which results in real results.

Crack the glass floor - the social divide

I was reading an article which makes the claim that stupid wealthy kids had more of an opportunity to get into well paid jobs than their smarter lower class equivalents.  This was the findings of a study by The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission (SMCP), which has become termed the glass floor effect. It's interesting to call it a glass floor, a bit like the glass ceiling which prevents women from achieving higher success than they should. Glass must mean it is invisible but it's there, this glass however is probably toughened and even bullet proof. Such a glass floor or glass ceiling means social stereotypes remain valid stereotypes.  The parents of such stupid children have an advantage because of their social status and their money.  The findings are:

• They invest time and resources in their children's education.

• Better careers advice and guidance.

• Ability to move to the right catchment area to enable choice of school.

• Giving their children self confidence, making them resilient and guidance on how to lead.  

• The use of informal social networks to help their children into work.

• Help with unpaid internships.

In reading a press release it states there were a lot of soft skill sets which wealthier parents were able to instil their children.  When looking at these skill sets there are all basically psychological.  Self confidence, is perhaps one of the most valuable items an individual can have when needing to present themselves especially in an interview situation.  Without this what comes across is a train wreck of nerves. However, lower class and working class families do not always have this skill because they are so overly involved in making ends meet. The most predominant item on their radar is just being able to survive.  It is true there is a working poor in the UK, who just about live with the help of government subsidies in the form of  Working and Child Tax credits.  A support which is needed because wages are kept low, because labour is common in an employers market and because the skills needed to do a job are not what they have.  Being confident also means being able to be calm and collected when giving an answer to a question. Performance anxiety is more likely to affect someone who doesn't have self confidence than it does someone who does.

Lets also look at employers.  They clearly want the best employees they can get so they use the interview process and a cursory look at exam grades.  The first hurdle is to be shortlisted for an interview and this is what exam grades can help pass. As well as a competently completed application form. What an employer might look for is a set of grade "A" or grade "B" applications and then disgruard the applicants with grade "C."  They would not be able to see that perhaps some of those applicants who had these lower grades had a lot more to deal with in their family life than those who were advantaged enough to get higher grades.  Such as a manic depressive mother, or an alcoholic father or a parent with a disability and the child being a full time carer, or a large family with siblings where each child just does not get the time and attention needed.  Or being brought up in a household where poverty rules everything and forces choice on the family and especially children.  Opportunity is not afforded to these individuals because they do not get through the selection process. Whether they are motivated or not they must may not have the skill sets and the family support to raise out of their social class.  Some parents will even feel resentment if their children do better than they have done, get a better job or earn more money or get better grades. Their love comes with a barbed tail and spite veiled in what they say and do. Which is great for the self esteem issue as well.  They will deny such behaviours exist, but they would then be liars because I have seen it and experienced it with my own family.

Being lower class doesn't mean you are stupid, but it sure ensures you are at a disadvantage. When your peers think a good time is to sniff glue or get drunk, stealing is a socially acceptable act and rite of passage then the lessons you learn are dictators of your future.  The kids who fight against this  are considered outcasts and may even be bullied. For being different from the pack makes them an easy target. The in-group feel better about themselves and boost their own extraordinarily lacking self esteem. Working and lower class parents just don't have the time to help coach their children. They can't protect them and the bond which comes with small children is a lot easier to form than the bond which is needed to help a teenager become an adult. A teenager who is fighting against the system and fighting to understand who they are, where as those above the glass floor will have a lot more support.

Wealth brings opportunity and life chances.  Middle class kids are likely to have experienced holidays to farther places and had a diversity of life experience the working and lower class kids don't get exposure to, this can be seen in attitudes towards food.  The great frequenters of fast food chains are certainly not going to be rich kids. They will get the vitamins and minerals from foods they eat, so some will either have obesity problems or cases of malnutrition. Something again the more socially advanced families are sure not to have to worry about. Get a child from a working class family and show them a collection of herbs, then ask them to name them.  I bet the results would be startling when compared to the middle and upper classes.

This glass floor ensures not only is the country not run by the brightest people, it ensures the divide of the classes continues and continues in perpetuity.  For it is a strong family, especially one which sticks together where the glass floor which is really a glass ceiling is broken through.  This country we live in is not a meritocracy and this is a fact.

Education should be free

The leveller of all humanity is without doubt education. Someone who has knowledge will have power over another individual especially when the knowledge is needed. However there is also a generalised advantage of being educated because knowledge can be adapted. An argument against this is we forget things anyway, so why waste money on education. What is important is not all knowledge is forgotten and the learning process stays with you. Another advantage is self confidence. For example, I have dabbled with spreadsheets, but I don't need to know a great deal about them, I've heard of a pivot table but don't know how to apply it. I am educated to a high level in statistics and forgotten a lot of it. However, I know in my self, if I apply myself I could pick up spreadsheets and how to use them to a higher level and even possibly apply statistical formula to large sets of data  competent spread sheet users would not understand. It's there, I know I got it hidden away in the recesses of my mind and will over time improve my spread sheet knowledge a little further, but I'm not particularly bothered.

Yet after secondary school in the UK knowledge comes at a cost. I believe Universities should be free and every educational subject under the sun taught for free in evening classes. Further none of it should be compulsory. Of course if there are failing students who are just there to stop getting on with their life they should be kicked out of classes.  The cost of free education would be the continued passing of exams. It is people who have the motivation to learn which matters.  School children should be given the choice to continue school from the age of 16 to 18 it should not be compulsory and in some circumstances I believe if they are 15 there could be special exception to allow them to leave. Unemployment benefits however, would not be free.  There would be a tailored regime for those who are unemployed.  Training in job application, training in interview techniques and if the failure of their getting a job is their own education then educational classes should become compulsory linked to their claims for benefits. There should be no free meal.  In any educational system though there would have to be exceptions allowed for the vulnerable, the disabled and those who need extra help.

Lastly the application of education needs to be thoroughly examined.  The serious question is, do teachers teach their subjects in a way which makes them understandable and can they be remembered?  There are both good and poor teachers, if the poor ones have students who continually fail then the poor teachers should be re trained or helped to find an alternative vocation.

The saddest thing about society is the number of individuals who don't recognise their own worth, the number of very intelligent people who sit and watch TVs, who play game consuls who have opinions on subjects but just don't have a little more knowledge to take their passions further.  Equally sad are those who just don't want to learn and want to condemn their selves to lives of boredom and have no interest in self improvement.  But education is not everything, some life occupations are highly important and just as respectful as the queen's.