Social Mobility Tsar Cut Up- The Door of Before.
(A cut up of Katharine Birbalsingh’s inaugural speech as Chair of the Social Mobility Commission, who said it’s time for a radical shift in how the UK views social mobility)
We are life for a few — thinking about people who are born into a family in social housing in between these two groups - they are presented as an important theme in social mobility, and inequality does shape it and it is a difficult time to be taking over. We have been using evidence which is about inequality. Inequality is clearly needed to take some brilliant educational credentials and add quite a lot of confusion.
We want to chart a new course for the Commission, with the notion that social mobility should just be about the “long” inequality. If inequality is increasing, is it a route to high skills and good occupational opportunities? All the more important that we try the approach which holds people back — and how we can make our opportunity for upward mobility. Stepping from one rung means thinking differently and collecting data differently. If they are unable to access higher paid work? “What policy should focus on closing the gaps — so dreams come true. If he was born in Lancashire today, to make this “Dick Whittington model” fairer.
Attention is then along this same geographical route — from the north to an elite profession, we might still take the thinking that will inform this fresh approach. Much social mobility work has been dominated by trying the “levelling up” aspect to mobility. That he grew up is not enough. We want to promote a broader view. Today, I would like to introduce you to some — and then find his way through the door of before. It will be even harder now to overcome. This makes it leap upward mobility, from bottom to top in one generation — particularly not for those with low levels of basic literacy so social mobility now will be in decline.
You may be away from the poorest person, then the challenge of moving groups is more equal. Frequently — but not always — it is about London. Instead of a picnic and a cat, social mobility for a wider range of people, who would otherwise be left behind — those who either did social mobility — as clearer about the various factors which help to those who have not followed the higher education pathway, but still what we are actually measuring. Most of the time, policy is going to move away from the popular narrative about the focus on how to make sure opportunities shared equally.
Become an accountant, banker or big CEO. The one rung to another is harder. This often leads to an elite professional company — to make his way in the geographical aspects — both in terms of local neighbourhoods, where a whole variety want to improve their lives, and sometimes in smaller steps. So the debates appear to be talking about social mobility, but as evidence of inequalities of opportunity and what is recommended. The folklore version of Dick Whittington was definite that the opportunities in managerial and professional jobs are familiar with the metaphor of the ladder. The ladder represents how to improve opportunities for those after the pandemic, followed by a European war and the cost of the poor, across generations. We want to move away from the space between the disadvantaged and everyone else. Where disparities or gaps are at the bottom — not just by making elite pathways because they are only born.
There is no consensus about what measures upward mobility from the bottom into the top. The growing inequality is where the richest person is further and further away from the “Whittington model”. In this model, the focus is on the big people to overcome the circumstances into which they are born by breaking from the circumstances to make this happen. It also means being clearer about obstacles and reasons: educational and economic outcomes and opportunities appear to be accepted in this country. We are very aware that this is a recommendation that is going to make a difference.
We are living in a crisis. There were already many challenges to deal with and numeracy is one. Who cannot take advantage of higher learning as it reports on the state of social mobility to a fairly pessimistic and dismal set of conclusions about this approach, accompanied by the view that even the social is in decline. This is usually inferred from data relating to achievement (in various combinations) such as fame, fortune and occupational status. For “What can we do for those young people and adults challenged in improving social mobility with clarity, and that we are just another one”. But if the rungs are further apart, because of being clearer about where mobility is working well — decreasing — the argument goes: then opportunity is not fair, we do not want to, or could not “leave to achieve”. This want brings our fresh approach and some new questions. Lancashire had but to leave for London to make it, by identifying the gaps in opportunity.
