AIBU to say private school children are much sportier & better musicians?

[Denimrevival]

Just on the back of comparing with friends & family with dc in private schools. The kids & their families are all naturally sporty & outdoorsy anyways but the school provides a vast range of sports with it's own pool & swim team.
Musically their kids all play 2 or three instruments all at least grade 4 or 5..
How do these private schools do the academics, music & sports to such a high standard? Do they also have a very good base if the kids are having sport & music reinforced outside school through their families lifestyles?

I remember watching a documentary ages ago comparing lessons in a public and private school.
It wasn't particularly that the teachers or content of the lessons were better at the private schools, it was that the teachers in the private schools didn't have to spend half the lessons trying to control the class or manage disruptive students who kept walking out of lessons. The students in the private school just sat there quietly ready to learn. The class sizes were smaller too. So I imagine more of the lesson is spent actually learning, which may explain why they are often ahead.
Also musical instruments and lessons can be costly and so that may be more of a barrier for poorer households.

There's more opportunity for them to be.

Let's be honest, despite what haters are saying, parents spend a fortune on private school because they are better. Better opportunities, better sports grounds. School days are longer because there's more time allocated to sports and art. It's all on site, so parents don't have to chauffeur their children from one club to the other after school, it helps working parents too.

Private schools are more than an expensive uniform and a name, they're a business, parents want to see where their money goes and expect academic results but also sports etc.

Regarding scholarship, of course the competition will be extreme. With only a few spots, it can only be about being the best.

Not necessarily. Depends on the school and the appetite from parents and kids. My two went to a state school and are definitely not musical (we’ve had various failed attempts at the violin, the flute, the piano, and the guitar), but they have both competed nationally and internationally in their respective sports, and the eldest went off to college last year with a string of 8s and 9s at GCSE. So, the school provided plenty of opportunities for the children to thrive and excel.

But that stuff doesn’t matter in the real world. I’d much rather my kids grow up in the real world and learn some useful life skills

Yes-it's amazing what money can do.

How mamy olympians went to private schools?

Facilities and resource.

Look at any number of Olympic athletes in some of the more erm interesting sports eg rowing, winter sports etc. They are usually privately educated.

It’s a massive effort and cost for state school kids to get access to it so it remains the realm of the privileged. Tennis largely the same.

Even if a state school has funding for sports and music (rare) they need the resource to teach it which isn’t there either.

Amazing the damage done by nationalising education. (Nationalise food and we would starve.)

See the success of cheap private schools in the slums in Africa and India “The Beautiful Tree”.

Check out the following Olympic sports

all the winter sports
tennis
rowing
equine stuff
shooting

etc etc

Sports that are much fairer :
football
athletics

It's not so much the schools. It is more that the parents that send their children to private schools push these things out of school and have the money to pay for lots of clubs and private tuition. I have two in private schools and neither are musical. They bother play a number of sports but are B/C teams rather than A.

I can't comment on sport but I grew up in Kent in the 80s when there was a terrific state funded youth music service. Many state educated professional musicians emerged. It was massively cut back and now you only get good quality tuition if you're well off or if you live in one of the few areas that's still got good provision (and even then, funded activities are targeted at the poor). Or if you attend a private school.

I play several instruments and worked in music admin for a while.

Music is expensive especially in a cost of living crisis.

If you love music donate and volunteer!

Could only dream of this for my dc. Sounds like your daughter made the most of all her opportunities & received a fabulous well rounded education.

It is partly about conforming to expectations. It is considered unusual to play one or more instruments at my son's state school - at the local private schools it would be considered unusual not to. This then has a knock on effect (additionally to the facilities etc.) as it is hard to find enough students to create a couple of orchestras of different levels, some jazz bands, different sorts of choirs etc.. which would be beneficial for the students involved. The musical students then join orchestras/choirs outside of school which better suit their needs, and often can't/don't want to also commit to the school groups as there is only so much time after school!

I really disagree with that.

Of course they matter. Being sporty should not be only accessible to the richest ones, or even to the parents who have time and finance to take the children from one club to the other after school.

Physical health, mental health, it all matters. We should push for more sport and opportunities in state school, not accepting the huge difference between the 2 systems.

And scholarships at most are a joke. DS was offered a football scholarship to one of the best independent schools in the country. We didn’t take it. How do we pay the other 90% off fees? 😂

It's pretty obvious in my opinion - nature and nuture.

Nurture because pupils at private school (usually) have access to better equipment and tuition. Pupils at private school are more likely to have a family who can afford to buy them equipment and pay for extra lessons.

Nature because coming from a relatively affluent background is likely to indicate being descended from and growing up in an environment where one or both parents work in a job they are paid well at. The idea that "hard work leads to success" is both a trait inherited from the child's parents and reinforced through demonstration. (Obviously that concept is bullshit, a lot of people work hard and never succeed, other people do fuck all and get lucky. But in the eyes of those in the fortunate position of being successful having worked hard it is convenient to pin that success on their own efforts.)

Yes but music lessons are very expensive privately.

Music tuition is not covered by private school fees; these usually have to be paid for as extras. Have you enquired with your school whether music teachers come on site for private lessons? I know they do at our local state secondary school.

How do these private schools do the academics, music & sports to such a high standard?

charging high fees and being able to weed out the thickos and plebs from attending.

not that bloody difficult to work out surely 🙄

That’s not true, dear.

They just tend to be from over achiever families. My children are at a private school as were we, and yes they’re all expected to be productive. The constant music and sports events kind of encourage it.

They’re lucky but it doesn’t make them spoilt little assholes. My kids are lovely.

Surely it's the money. Independent school fees are very expensive so of course they can offer more and afford much better facilities. I wouldn't be able to afford the fees. I can just about afford one sports club, one instrument tuition and swimming coaching or each child as well as some tutoring for the one who is struggling a bit. State school run clubs are free but usually short term and for a but of fun rather than serious tuition.

Of the county level kids I knew (rugby), all went to state school, but then we were in a part of London with good local clubs with well known academies and the kids did rugby at those rather than at school. Ds's state school (Requires Improvement as far as Ofsted were concerned at the time he was there) also had an enthusiastic 'classical' orchestra, a ukulele orchestra, a tin pans group, a choir and did 3 languages plus Latin plus put on a school play and a wonderful arts festival each year. Play might not have been as glossy a production as the private school down the road with its state-of-the-art theatre but it equally let anyone who wanted take part.

Don’t worry - when it comes to university applications they don’t give a shiny shit about your flute or whether you did d of e. Plus many applications for jobs now are school and university blind. Efforts are being made to dilute the privilege money can buy.

Yes this is very true, thank god.

It's money and time more than the schools ( but appreciate you usually need the money to go to theses schools). Lots of state school DCs round here who are very sporty but do it mainly outside school. Tons of non- school rugby, football, cricket, rowing, hockey, swimming etc. but requires a level of parental involvement and funds.
Equally, being at a private school does not automatically make you sporty and outdoorsy!