Working class? Don't think that Oxbridge is for you.

I disagree with you Maizie and so do most researchers.

volver

Whitewavemark2

volver

Is that you Katherine?

?

Katherine Birbalsingh. The person the thread is about. The person who thinks any change in circumstances should be considered social mobility.

But she's right!

What I object to is her claim that young people at the bottom of the social ladder shouldn't aspire to the top, if that's what they have the ability to do.

No social mobility is not in sociological terms based entirely on your employment, unless if course you are a Marxist?.

A sociologists uses a number of indicators - depending on his underlying philosophical belief system.

The one being discussed is just one of many.

That was to maizieand volver

growstuff

volver

Whitewavemark2

volver

Is that you Katherine?

?

Katherine Birbalsingh. The person the thread is about. The person who thinks any change in circumstances should be considered social mobility.

But she's right!

What I object to is her claim that young people at the bottom of the social ladder shouldn't aspire to the top, if that's what they have the ability to do.

I agree growstuff one person is able to reach the stars, another the top of a tree, both are relevant and upwardly mobile if their parents are at the bottom of the tree trunk.

(Sorry for the crass analogy but I am trying to get other things done)

Whitewavemark2

No social mobility is not in sociological terms based entirely on your employment, unless if course you are a Marxist?.

A sociologists uses a number of indicators - depending on his underlying philosophical belief system.

The one being discussed is just one of many.

A proper sociologist should use all indicators and variants and be as scientific as possible which means any underlying philosophical beliefs he is she has should not enter in to it.

I guess if you left school at 16 with no qualifications and married a hedge fund manager you would have achieved social mobility.

25Avalon

Whitewavemark2

No social mobility is not in sociological terms based entirely on your employment, unless if course you are a Marxist?.

A sociologists uses a number of indicators - depending on his underlying philosophical belief system.

The one being discussed is just one of many.

A proper sociologist should use all indicators and variants and be as scientific as possible which means any underlying philosophical beliefs he is she has should not enter in to it.

A sociologist will of course use the agreed indicators to come to a conclusion - in this case education and employment, but her underlying beliefs regarding the persons position in society will remain the same.

I have a particular belief in many things but it did not stop me from carrying out my job.

Germanshepherdsmum

I guess if you left school at 16 with no qualifications and married a hedge fund manager you would have achieved social mobility.

?. How about a drug baron? Or a renter exploiting his tenants?

One thing I learned in my Sociology degree was that the definition of social mobility the government uses is also flawed. It’s based on occupational groups, which doesn’t take account minority career choices. I wonder what they make of TikTok stars and influencers.

Casdon

One thing I learned in my Sociology degree was that the definition of social mobility the government uses is also flawed. It’s based on occupational groups, which doesn’t take account minority career choices. I wonder what they make of TikTok stars and influencers.

That's why the Sutton Trust report draws together a number of definitions by different stakeholders.

25Avalon

Whitewavemark2

No social mobility is not in sociological terms based entirely on your employment, unless if course you are a Marxist?.

A sociologists uses a number of indicators - depending on his underlying philosophical belief system.

The one being discussed is just one of many.

A proper sociologist should use all indicators and variants and be as scientific as possible which means any underlying philosophical beliefs he is she has should not enter in to it.

Agreed.

GrannyGravy Your reference to the "top of the tree" reminded me of an inspirational headteacher in a school where I once worked. His mantra was that pupils should aim for the top of the tree. They might end up somewhere on a branch half way up the tree, but if they aimed for that branch, they probably wouldn't leave the ground.

I imagine that this is why the government don't know where we are going, only where we have been then Casdon. No real surprise.

Do you know if any independent bodies/think tanks use different modelling?

Casdon

One thing I learned in my Sociology degree was that the definition of social mobility the government uses is also flawed. It’s based on occupational groups, which doesn’t take account minority career choices. I wonder what they make of TikTok stars and influencers.

Those who pay the piper call the tune.

DaisyAnne

I imagine that this is why the government don't know where we are going, only where we have been then Casdon. No real surprise.

Do you know if any independent bodies/think tanks use different modelling?

The Resolution Foundation, the IFS and the Sutton Trust do (from the top of my head) - I expect there are more.

What I object to is her claim that young people at the bottom of the social ladder shouldn't aspire to the top, if that's what they have the ability to do.

Having read the speech Birbalsingh gave on 9 June, which was a precursor to the State of the Nation report coming later this year, I don't think that's what she said.

She makes a clear distinction between social mobility and occupational mobilty and argues that we need to broaden our thinking about diversity of talent to move away from a focus which is almost always on cognitive ability and the acquisition of a lucrative professional job. She says: we believe that other talents and jobs should be valued too. Few would disgree with that.

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/bucking-the-trend-a-fresh-approach-to-social-mobility

Euan Blair was awarded an MBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours for services to education, for setting up a company which encourages employers to offer apprenticeships for training and development. His company Multiverse matches school leavers with more than 300 employers to provide on-the-job training tailored to the needs of employees as well as personal coaching and extracurricular activities and societies akin to those at university.

Training is funded by a 0.5% levy placed on all companies with an annual payroll bill of more than £3m. This can be spent on their own training costs or transferred to other organisations.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/01/euan-blair-from-pms-son-to-700m-business-and-an-mbe

This strikes me as a very positive rollback to a time when university was not seen as the only route to a career.

ifs.org.uk/uploads/IFS-Deaton-Review-New-Year-Message.pdf

growstuff

DaisyAnne

I imagine that this is why the government don't know where we are going, only where we have been then Casdon. No real surprise.

Do you know if any independent bodies/think tanks use different modelling?

The Resolution Foundation, the IFS and the Sutton Trust do (from the top of my head) - I expect there are more.

They are different, and none of the definitions are perfect growstuff, as you’d expect in the ever changing world, although better than the government definition in many ways. I struggle with this because pigeonholing individuals into groups is always difficult - which is why I have some sympathy with the view that an individual’s perception of their success is the most important element rather than a strict definition of social mobility based on occupation and educational background. What’s the most important is that people have equal opportunity and the tools to make the best use of their talents. Who’d have guessed at the potential for financial success of influencers 20 years ago?

If you read the Sutton Trust report, it's acknowledged that there is no simple definition of social mobility.

I have just seen this and it made me giggle (I know it is not relevant to OP)

I would go further than you Casdon and look at the dynamics of power. In any society, some people will have more control than others. Pathways to power/control are blocked for some people, which means that an unrepresentative group makes decisions for everybody, which undermines the concept of democracy. Hence the criticisms of the "metropolitan elite" and people feeling they have no control over their own lives. That's another topic really, but it's a feeling that's been effectively exploited by a group of people who want to seize power for themselves.

Well nannarose, our house is six years old and the ring on the hob that I use most has just packed up!

growstuff

I disagree with you Maizie and so do most researchers.

What do you disagree with, growstuff?

That a degree doesn't automatically make one socially mobile?

Oh dear, posted on wrong thread. Sorry!?