If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Medical school
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I was reading on one of them free papers on the bus that a recent report out shows that 60% of people going to medical school, and other high paid jobs like law etc. are of the middle class.
The article spoke of how it was not actively discriminating against the working class but the middle class are getting the better grades as they tend to be at private school etc.
Something stuck in my mind at the end of the article; something to the extent of:
"Who has the most potential? A working class person getting good grades in a school with poor achievement records or a student getting the grades in a good private school?"
Your views?
The article spoke of how it was not actively discriminating against the working class but the middle class are getting the better grades as they tend to be at private school etc.
Something stuck in my mind at the end of the article; something to the extent of:
"Who has the most potential? A working class person getting good grades in a school with poor achievement records or a student getting the grades in a good private school?"
Your views?
0
Comments
At least here you'll see more often that it is kids with an academic history, of who hang around with people of an academic history, that pursue that academic road.
Though I would think that once you have your nose set for it, and give in the same amount of work as anyone else, then your chances will be the same.
Maybe not to the same prestigious schools (though as I understood, they do make an effort to include all, in order not to get an elitist name), but somewhere, yes.
I guess I could agree with that to an extent, but what are the percentages of young people who are in private schools compared to state schools? What they're saying is theres a lot less people in the middle class yet they're taking all the best jobs: and surely the figures don't match - with middle class being that much more academic than the working class...
I don't believe that state-schooled children should be favoured if they ahve lower grades, however, because I strongly believe that the cream will always rise to the top.
If a state-schooled child cannot achieve the top grades then it is because it is not bright enough to, or not motivated enough to. It is perfectly possible to get very high grades from the state system, just as it is perfectly possible to get low grades from the private system.
People shouldn't be favoured because they come from a different system, but because it requires more work to get good grades from the state system then they should be favoured, all else being equal.
You answer your own question there.
A lot of the working class are not interested in academia, or parenting does not permit children to achieve their full potential.
A child's life prospects are determined by the time it starts school- if it is taught at home by its parents it is at a distinct advantage to a child whose parents believe education starts at school, and that is a gap the other child cannot ever close up.
The Government is pouring money into initiatives to get working class children to achieve more at school- lowering child poverty, creating the Sure Start scheme, paying children to continue post-16 study.
Most middle class children do not go to private school, they go to state school. But state schools in "good areas" do as well as many private schools- that is because of parenting. State schools in "bad" areas get significantly more funding, but they still do not do as well.
It sounds harsh, but quite often how well a child will do is determined by its parenting and young upbringing. Some factors are in parental control, and some (like poverty) are not; it's a sad fact of life that poverty breeds poverty in most cases.
Not really, to be honest.
Stupid people won't have ambitions to have top careers; I don't mean to sound harsh but it is true.
So I'm not sure, I heard that Oxbridge and a lot of universities and schools have a bias, but I'd say it's more about the way you present yourself. They want to look good probably and by bringing in private school rich kids and people who dress and act sophisticated this would be achieved. Perhaps then it's more about cultural differences and values... Or these colleges are idiosyncratic?
As for private school, I know somebody who went and she said that doing well isn't about intellect as for a lot of students are helped a great deal by teachers and thus are bound to do better. Another girl from a private school in Chester couldn't make herself a cup of tea... didn't know how! :eek2:
Doesn't have anything to do with intellect.
Just like IQ is merely a way of meassuring logics, and has got nothing to do with actual and practical intellect.
you seem to be suggesting people at state schools are stupid.... now thats certainly not the case !
I certainly was not.
I shall explain better.
If a child is from a professional background, or its parents take the time to teach it at home, then that child grows up seeing academia and learning as something to desire. If the child is bright it will set its ambitions high, and it is only people with high ambitions that apply to Oxbridge and the other top universities.
Good parenting and a comfortable background fuel ambition; without ambition people will not apply to the good universities, and without ambition they will not try hard enough to get the grades to get into those universities.
The simple fact of the matter is that universities can only choose from the people that apply to them. If poorer people do not have the ambition to apply there then they won't get in; if poorer people don't have the ambition to work hard to get good grades then they won't get in,
It is all well and good lamenting the fact that "not enough" poor people go to the top universities, but it is to completely miss the point. If a child's ambitions go no further than working for a mobile phone company for £350 a month then that child is NOT going to go to Oxbridge, and that chjild is NOT going to come away from school with the grades required to get into those universities.
But as for us, in the USA? Economically disadvantaged students are given high priority for funding for medical school via Federal Pell Grants. There is NO discrimination, except if your grades are not good. In other words, you MUST meet the academic criteria. If you don't? You won't qualify. But if you do? You will likely get an extremely good scholarship, fellowship, or loans from the Federal gov't. If you are of an ethnic minority group (African-American, Native American, etc.?) Then you have a plethora of opportunities for funding opened up to you.
The only discrimination going on is NOT by the academic institutions, but by the simple fact that if you are fighting for your life in the poor area of town, you likely will not have the luxury of making good grades unless someone, like your parents, or some other authority figure, takes an interest in you. There is no "bad guy" to put blame on. It is simply a matter of the responsibility of parents to get their crap together as parents, with Federal aid (if needed), and encourage the kids academically. It is a shared responsibility...but individual as well as by our government, as far as I can see. But giving people a free ride for poor performance? That is unexcuseable.
Hmm and yet we have a president who was given just that all the way to the White House.
He even has the gall to repeatedly boast nonsense to his occasional college audiences about how far a C student can go. Unsurprising he fails to qualify his claim further by acknowledging that family name and priviledge was used to cover his lack of merit.
Are you attempting to ascertain whether or not I'm a Bush supporter? Because if so, the most direct way to find out the answer is to ask the question.
No. I'm not super impressed with Bush. However, Clinton was not the height of ethics either. :rolleyes: I'm skeptical of basically everybody in Washington, DC. But do I believe that other governments in other countries are paragons of virtue, ethics, and fiscal discernment? Not at all! We in the USA are not perfect, but neither are others who want to point their fingers in derision. Clean your own back yard before you look into mine, basically. When you can claim NOT to have your dark moments, then come bash the USA.
However, my perspective on the war in Iraq is that I don't feel we necessarily needed to get involved for the stated reasons by Bush. I do and did support our actions in Afganistan, however.
And ultimately, the time to protest a war is BEFORE you undertake it. Once you start it, then you need to do what it takes to see it through, for a variety of reasons.
Regarding Bush, yes, I would tend to agree with you that he is a rich kid. No doubt about it. However, his ride was not free, but was paid for by Bush Senior. Keep in mind, I'm a Texan, so I'm well aware of Bush's wealth, since I am a native of "the Bush state."
By the way, Bush's academic resume is somewhat tangential to the topic of this thread, since he is not an MD. So, that is enough from me regarding Bush.
When I started reading at 2 and I was reading books for 11 year olds when I was 4.
Because my parents taught me, they read to me every night, they made me follow the words and I learnt.
This only seems to go on in middle or upper class houses though.
A fair enough explanation of your position which i respect. However, kindly refrain from the sort of knee-jerk reversion to "USA bashing" we've come to expect from mil.com types. As a US citizen my scrutiny and criticism of our government is a Constitutionally upheld right and, indeed, duty to hold elected leaders accountable.
Having said that, I agree my reference was tagential to stated topic, but was a clear example of the sort of "free ride" (and it was a free ride for Dubyah (as it would be for anyone receiving placement in any walk of life for reasons other than demonstrated merit)) regardless of whther the ride was made possible by the state or by daddy and his Yale connections.
As for the rest of your comments, those certainly belong to other thread discussions so i shall desist from further discussion here.
"However, kindly refrain from the sort of knee-jerk reversion to "USA bashing" we've come to expect from mil.com types."
I was not directing that to you personally, but making a more general statement regarding the lack of perfection in any administration in any country. Many of the criticisms leveled at the US are ones that apply to other counties as well, such as selling weapons to hostile nations, etc. But point taken.
Seeking to evade OUR national wrongs (perpetrated by our leaders of course) by constantly pointing the finger at other nations is a grade school tactic to evade responsibility for our own actions.
Also note, that many of these "other" offending nations are not the ones pontificating routinely against proliferation whilst supporting the largest percentage of all global proliferation across the planet and routinely to many of the most unstable or brutal regimes (only to use the possession of those weapons so provided by Washington years later as a pretext for fullscale invasions and ever more destruction and destabilisation to ensure the maintenance of US corporate friendly governance).
As a world leader (if not THE world leader) our example in my 40 years alone is enough to caution the militant types as to the inevitable repercussions we shall one day suffer at the hands of the next super power when our day in the sun has ended (and history is clear enough on the follies of dismissing such inevitable decline).
Valuable words our Christian Right would do well to remember amidst their continuous vitriolic pronouncements were uttered by the figure they claim to serve...
Are you a United States citizen? If so, are you still living in the US?
I reside in Brussels and have done since finishing university. I do however make it back fairly regularly for both business and family visits.
was inclusive enough to be understood as an acknowledgement of OUR mutual citizenship.
I shall attempt to be more specific henceforth.
But thats the blindness you see, this doesn't just go on in middle class and upper class. My family is of working class - probably the upper end of working class but we do regard ourselves as working class. So do a lot my friends at school, and we are all of working class.
Actually can we just clarify on boundries before we go on, some people may see middle class as something different to me. Can someone just tell me how they would distinguish between classes?
And the difference between middle and upper class on income.
Well, that's how it is here. Or where you live sometimes too.