The article boldly states, “A study of 11,000 seven-year-old children found that those with parents in professional and managerial jobs were at least eight months ahead of pupils from the most socially disadvantaged homes, where parents were often unemployed”

These findings collected University of London’s Institute of Education come just three months after British Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, spoke at the Hugo Young Lecture of 2010 about the Labour Party’s commitment to ending poverty in UK  before sheepishly suggested that ” good parenting could make a bigger difference than class to the destiny of a child.”

Clearly the UK, like the rest of the world has serious “class issues” that undoubtedly effect the progress of children. But to say that parenting has no effect on the success of one’s children? Without knowing the specifics of how the University of London conducted its study, it’s hard to say whether this data is really statistically significant (and the Guardian neglects to provide its readers with any such information). But it seems like data is being presented for political, rather scientific means here. What do you think?