Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:35 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 6:08 pm 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/ed ... asses.html


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 6:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am
Posts: 8112
I wonder if the intake would actually be much different if there was no coaching at all?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 6:33 pm 
hermanmunster wrote:
I wonder if the intake would actually be much different if there was no coaching at all?

The implication being that middle class children are inherently more intelligent than low income children?
the evidence being?
Even Dominic Cummings report does not claims this
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 76170.html
but it would be interesting to know if generations of poor families are indead poor because they are less intelligent and more feckless than middle class families-I am not aware of any such research.
this nature/nurture debate could be quite contentious IMO but interesting!
maybe Amber our resident educationalist has come across any research/articles to help us?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:30 am
Posts: 2248
Surely, although no evidence to prove, the assumption would be fairly made that in a cohort of 10,000 poorer, vs 10,000 "middle class" then more of the middle class group would be academically more highly qualified than in the poorer cohort. This is absolutely exception that proves the rule of course. We are highly qualified but relatively poor compared with those that are in the sort of higher paid occupations that the middle classes tend to end up in. (I gave up highly paid job, husband is nhs). But nevertheless, this tends to be the case. And of course the more highly paid jobs are going to be more highly occupied by those with a middle class upbringing than not. Or at least but those who were academically driven by parents with high aspirations. Of those from households with parents with low qualifications who are not bothered about their children aspiring to higher, it must be quite a low proportion that beak the mould (again, plenty notable exceptions, I am talking large statistics here, there will always be individual exceptions, just like the grandad that lived to 110 despite smoking 100 fags a day doesn't disprove that smoking is dangerous!).
So 'no shi*t Sherlock', of course the grammar schools will be emigre slewed towards the middle classes!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:01 pm 
yes but thats not quite what I am getting at.

Lets agree that children from high aspirational families/university educated , backgrounds would be expected to

1) belong to the middle-classes

2)have more childfren going to Grammar/Selective schools

seems self evident? this is the nurture part

But my point is

1) did they get to be middle class because they are genetically more intelligent and have passed on these genes generation after generation? in a Darwinian sense( the nature part that I am interested in)

or have the intractable issues of poverty itself prevented the poor from socially moving up?

I think this my help
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23881780


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:30 pm
Posts: 583
On a personal level I don't believe in anything to do with Darwin theory

If parents are in mentally challenging vocations then kids will tend to be bright as well. It is a freak of nature where this is not the case or child has deliberately set out to be rebellious.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:21 pm
Posts: 11931
We have had a number of threads like this in the past and they get nowhere.

Let's debate the following instead:

Private schools 'distorted in favour of Upper classes'


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:32 pm 
Guest55 wrote:

Private schools 'distorted in favour of Upper classes'


O.k first you need to define what you mean by "Upper classes" then define/explain what is being "distorted"


Last edited by JSN on Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 5921
Are grammar schools distorted in favour of the middle classes?
Or: 'is the Pope Catholic?'
Or: 'Do bears s**t in the woods?'
Or: 'Does JSN mistrust 'educationalists'?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:45 pm 
Amber wrote:
'Does JSN mistrust 'educationalists'?

no not always :wink: , I have learnt a very good lesson from you , that formal education before 7 in not necessary nor advisable ,I did do my own basic research prompted by your views , and I could not agree more now ,a complete 360 degree turn on what I thought before , so thank you , but I still reserve the right to disagree and be thoroughly disagreeable :lol: but hopefuly not obnoxious


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016