I added what is in the bracket, as it is in the first paragraph of the article, but not in the title. Without this caveat, the conclusion may seem obvious, as poorer people may not go to University leading to the disparity.
Tories: We are now removing all free school meals to improve future prosperity
wrong conclusion with missing premise.
Missing premise: the gov failed to solve child poverty. Children who are poor then failed to do well generally in life. therefore, the gov is to be blamed for failure to develop citizens for the economy.
From what I’m seeing, the biggest gaps seem to be between FSM and Independent Schooled young adults who leave university with Master’s or Bachelor’s Degrees, or who leave school with A levels.
The DfE don’t seem to have adjusted based on what subject the degrees/A levels were in, which I think is a pretty major factor that needs to be considered. Theres a big difference between a young adult with a degree in medicine and a young adult with a degree in media studies.
Yeah it’s not *because* they get free school meals is it?
The article title should read “people who are poor in school are likely to be poor when they leave.”
But that isn’t an attention grabbing headline and people won’t get divided over it.
If people truly understood how limiting being poor is, they’d detach themselves from the false notion that anyone can work their way to the top. For the vast majority of people living in poverty, that’s all they’ll ever know.
The system we have is made by and for the rich, and they’ll forever tell you the poor are to blame for being poor and it’s up to the poor to sort themselves out. Hence headlines like people in the receipt of benefits aren’t likely to do very well, making people think it’s the benefits that cause this problem.
Why? What’s in them!?
Poor people tend to stay poor.
How surprising.
There’s a message here about privilege and opportunity cost.
It’s almost as if there is a cycle of poverty which people find it difficult to get out of. If we didn’t focus on the few exceptions who make it out then we might be a bit more willing to help everyone who is trapped in it.
If you don’t eat yer meat, you can’t have any executive positions
How can you have any equity if you don’t eat yer meat?
Is it the lacked of vitamins and minerals so they don’t grow right and be successful?
Great example of the danger of hiring arts graduates as journalists. These factors are correlated, but not cause and effect. They are both caused by other common factors.
We all knew this before the study, and there have been plenty of studies before that told us this. Why do we keep on having studies to re-discover and then do nothing about the problems we already knew exist without needing a study to tell us?
13 comments
I added what is in the bracket, as it is in the first paragraph of the article, but not in the title. Without this caveat, the conclusion may seem obvious, as poorer people may not go to University leading to the disparity.
Tories: We are now removing all free school meals to improve future prosperity
wrong conclusion with missing premise.
Missing premise: the gov failed to solve child poverty. Children who are poor then failed to do well generally in life. therefore, the gov is to be blamed for failure to develop citizens for the economy.
[Link to the ONS page](https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/educationandchildcare/articles/whyfreeschoolmealrecipientsearnlessthantheirpeers/2022-08-04)
From what I’m seeing, the biggest gaps seem to be between FSM and Independent Schooled young adults who leave university with Master’s or Bachelor’s Degrees, or who leave school with A levels.
The DfE don’t seem to have adjusted based on what subject the degrees/A levels were in, which I think is a pretty major factor that needs to be considered. Theres a big difference between a young adult with a degree in medicine and a young adult with a degree in media studies.
Yeah it’s not *because* they get free school meals is it?
The article title should read “people who are poor in school are likely to be poor when they leave.”
But that isn’t an attention grabbing headline and people won’t get divided over it.
If people truly understood how limiting being poor is, they’d detach themselves from the false notion that anyone can work their way to the top. For the vast majority of people living in poverty, that’s all they’ll ever know.
The system we have is made by and for the rich, and they’ll forever tell you the poor are to blame for being poor and it’s up to the poor to sort themselves out. Hence headlines like people in the receipt of benefits aren’t likely to do very well, making people think it’s the benefits that cause this problem.
Why? What’s in them!?
Poor people tend to stay poor.
How surprising.
There’s a message here about privilege and opportunity cost.
It’s almost as if there is a cycle of poverty which people find it difficult to get out of. If we didn’t focus on the few exceptions who make it out then we might be a bit more willing to help everyone who is trapped in it.
If you don’t eat yer meat, you can’t have any executive positions
How can you have any equity if you don’t eat yer meat?
Is it the lacked of vitamins and minerals so they don’t grow right and be successful?
Great example of the danger of hiring arts graduates as journalists. These factors are correlated, but not cause and effect. They are both caused by other common factors.
We all knew this before the study, and there have been plenty of studies before that told us this. Why do we keep on having studies to re-discover and then do nothing about the problems we already knew exist without needing a study to tell us?