Aibu to think that the most successful kids in schools are the ones with money pumped into extracurriculars & camps?

[Imarealwoman]

In the dc's school the dc in the top sets are the ones who do expensive extracurriculars outside school eg piano, dancing, horse riding, swimming lessons, Spanish etc..
They stay after school for the baking or yoga clubs. It's Easter & the top set kids all seem to be doing expensive camps next week & some gone skiing this week.
Aibu to think one needs to have the money to pump into your child in order to have a high performer?

I massively disagree, I think it's correlation not causation.

I think it's a combination of the child's aptitude and the parents involvement. Parents that are facilitating all those extra curriculars (financially and with time) are probably heavily involved in all aspects of their child's development.

I think most parents can make a large difference to their children by taking an active interest in their schooling/homework and just generally being a really good role model. Taking them out to experience things (nature, libraries, museums, charity work etc) all helps them to get ahead. But expensive time consuming hobbies definitely aren't necessary at all.

And some children will just have a natural aptitude for school and do well regardless.

I think it's a combination. Unless the parents have time and are prepared to put the effort in, the reality of the holidays for many children is going to be mooching around the house having too much screen time. I don't see screen time as a problem in itself (everyone needs down time sometimes), but too much undermines children's ability to concentrate on other things and it's not developing other skills like social, reasoning and motor skills in the same way that camps and other activities will - they push children out of their comfort zone and give them experience in making new friends in different environments. So it really depends on what children will be doing if they're not at camps.

I would say that the best way to have high achieving children is to invest in them yourself…. Ie take an interest in what they are learning at school and build on that (over the internet if you dint have the money to physically take them places). There are loads of free resources online. I buy a lot of mats/English books from the poundshop, they read religiously every day, I check through their school spellings, and do extra. I teach them tge times tables on way to school It takes effort, but it’s rewarding to me and rewarding to them.

I’m more inclined to think “why should they?” They haven’t been interested in any extra curriculars. They partake in sports and drama as part of their school day, they have a good friend group they see outside of school and a large family of cousins etc. We’re quite an “outdoorsy” family so spend a lot of time on beaches and in forest parks etc. My eldest has a part time job and had no problem receiving offers for the unis she wanted so it hasn’t held her back in terms of competing with her peers.
In Northern Ireland extra curriculars aren’t such a “thing”, the vast majority of their peer groups in primary and secondary didn’t attend clubs/sports outside of school.

Not grew up in UK but my sibling and I were the top set in our respective years.
We had no money for exepnsive clubs etc, but what money we had my parents spent on science (all rounder) magazines, trips to museums and national trust like properties and most importantly, they encouraged the curiosity and reading and taught us how to find information pre google.
Most kids with lots of money at my school were not top set.

I also agree with the screen time comment. We didn't have a TV when the older three were growing up and the younger two are only allowed screen time on Saturdays.
Soo much time can be wasted without even realising with screen time.
They all love reading, the library is our first go to on a weekend and in the holidays and they gravitate towards the bookshelves even in charity shops!
My oh works in social care, I'm a teacher but always worked part time until the youngest at the time was in reception so true that they did all kind of have one parent at home.

This is going to sound boastful but whatever. I had 10 A and an A at GCSE and an A, an A and a B at A-level with an additional A at AS-level. I was also very successful academically after A-level. The only extra curricular activity I did was horse riding for one hour a week. I guess I did also do guides until I was about 13 but I hated it and don't feel I got anything from it.

No, non of mine do extra camps etc. I’ve always been of the mindset they need a rest. It’s actually good for them to learn to entertain themselves in the holidays. Eldest at uni doing history/politics, middle just got 9/8 in gcse mocks. They’ve done cubs/scouts etc. there is cheap activities they can attend. But don’t feel guilty

It depends on your definition of successful.

It is a shame that poorer children miss out on extracurricular activities such as scouts and other hobbies. It is also a real shame that a lot of bright children miss out on academic places such as grammar schools because, some not so bright children, are tutored to pass tests.

Unfortunately, this has always been the way, and will continue.

Why should they? You do know that the generations that were raised with “benign neglect” - mine and every previous generation - all had high achievers? Hothousing children and keeping them busy every hour of every day is a relatively modern concept.

I completely disagree. Local posh school fields 5 rugby teams in all age groups. The probability of 'playing rugby for your school' is nearly 95%. Local 9-form entry Comp fields 1 rugby team. Probability of 'playing rugby for your school' is 11%

95% of the kids from the posh school and 11% of the kids from the Comp will have the same line on their UCCAS form, their CV, and to trot out at interview. Which one actually means more? And look at the reverse. Why do posh schools tend not to play football? Because the competition is so intense they'd never win anything. Best stick to lacrosse or fives, where Shrewsbury can play Eton every year and each cohort has a 50% chance of lifting the Kinnaird Cup and telling everyone they are the UK champions. But sure ... they are 'exceptional' at what they do ... LOL

@shard5 it is the love of reading which sets kids apart imo. We have tried to instill that into DD and at 11 she will spend all day with her head in a book which then stimulates interesting conversations with her, fires her imagination and improves her written English and level of verbal communication. I would much rather she read than watched a screen but I know they need a balance so we do allow limited screen time per day.

If the child is keen to do these things then maybe they have greater capacity to manage them on top of their school work. Some kids find school so exhausting that they need down time.

I have seen plenty of kids whose parents live vicariously through them, force them to learn instruments when they have no interest or shove them into every club going so they can pick them up later. These kids are usually very unhappy.

Other kids need to stimulation, find their school work easy and live for their extracurricular activities. Doing something you love can be energising, even after a whole day at school.

Some kids whose parents can't afford expensive hobbies will find an affordable or free interest and pursue it to expert level. Other kids don't find it or prefer socialising with friends. All the clubs at our local primary are free to encourage the children from less well off families to attend, but the reality is that it is mostly the more affluent families whose children go. My daughter's best friend at primary school came from a very deprived background. She was super-indulged with anything she wanted from Amazon, despite money being tight, but she never went to after school clubs.

Interesting comments on screen time. As a child 11+ I spent the vast majority of my spare time on my computer. I was top sets for everything. I don't think screen time is the measurement - more like what are they actually spending their time doing on a screen. For example I wasn't just sat on there watching videos / looking at MySpace (😱). I taught myself how do photo manipulation/editing, web development, research, connect with people who had similar interests etc.

Unfortunately, this has always been the way, and will continue.

It hasn’t always been this way at all. My kid went to scouts when we hadn’t got a pot to piss in. Bright kids will always do well without tutoring. As my mum once said “You can’t buy brains”.

@Mark19735 try telling that to DDs school which has continually produced cricketers, hockey + rugby players for England across the decades.

That's a great move, plumbers & electricians make an absolute mint in my area. They're the ones who can are sending their kids to the local private & DH's plumber friends with kids in the local private are skiing in Austria at the moment..

Generally ( I speak as a teacher ) In My Opinion ….
parents who send children to extra curricular clubs can afford to as they are successful and want the same for their children . This means they are the type to always read each night with kids, learn the times tables , ensure all homework is completed. These children speak properly and are encouraged to be the best they can be . Now this doesn’t guarantee an academic child but gives children are far higher chance of academic success then maybe the children who are not pushed , never read at home, don’t learn their times tables . Without being rude - you can easily tell whose parents are on benefits and those partners who are way too pushy ! Or just those parents who are so loving and want the best .

It isn’t just teachers who are responsible for learning . If a child is learning at home and then being exposed to clubs and being pushed of course they will thrive .

Harriet reads each night, is fluent in times tables, can sit and concentrate and goes to a variety of clubs. She speaks properly and has respect for her peers. Her parents work full time and have the funds to send her to lots of clubs.

Jayden was never read with , his parents use slang , rather sit on their phone , don’t engage with homework and critic teachers in front of him. Parents can’t afford to / don’t see the point of clubs.

regardless of the clubs- we all know who will be more successful academically.

Ahh - I can see why you interpreted what I said in that way. I meant cross-country as in running (as an example of something that everyone can do, respective of their wealth) - not the specific equestrian event.

My bad - sorry.

Oh my, @Nimbostratus100 - have you added up the cost of these activities?! It’s not that I disagree that they’re good things to do, (because of course I don’t) and it’s not that they’re equivalent to an annual skiing trip - but for a single parent on benefits or working all the hours in the day, or even two parents on NMW / zero hours contracts, pretty much all these things involve an investment of money (and time) they may simply not be able to afford.

Agree with everything about correlation. It’s viciously sad that the children whose parents can enable enrichment activities are the ones most likely to be enriched, and to deploy that enrichment at school.

Yes this is it exactly!

My children are high achieving. I'm not a pushy parent as such but they do a lot out of school. I have dragged them places, they read and books are provided, they all do sporting activities and dance. All have learnt a musical instrument. If you met me you would think me entirely normal working class woman. I always had loads of hobbies when i was a kid. My parents weren't rich but they prioritised activities to a point where they volunteered for it.

i do think a lot of learning happens outside the classroom.

High achieving parents (who have funds/interest in researching extra curricular activities) often produce high achieving children. Model the behaviour and experience you want to emulate.

You don't need to pump money in but they need someone to invest time. My kids achieved well at school because I could do the stuff like read their school book every night because they weren't collected at 6pm.
Surely the camps are a different form of childcare? Sometimes parents need longer hours than the standard or even overnight because they travel for work. Plus they may be outsourcing entertaining because they find it difficult. No idea why skiing helps academics unless your school has a ski course or something ?

I have parents who paid for a top education for me and I have top grades but it always blew my mind when I shared a meal with the families of high achievers at these schools. They brimmed with confidence and knew a lot about stuff that they don't even teach at school because it was shared. They don't fear getting things wrong because they know that their parents are going to explain where they went wrong and what to do next time which means they make the strides and life gambles that others wouldn't. I can totally see why kids like this would go to an interview and get a job- they are so interesting and interested in all sorts.

Look at the characteristics of the successful kids? They are probably motivated and driven to do the extra curriculars and also have aspirational parents. The activities don't need to be expensive. Plenty of cheap / free activities but unless you are living pay check to pay check, may need some sacrifice. Eg my friend doesn't have a cleaner so she can pay for additional tuition for her son