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?

Even if you live in an expensive area there is social housing and flat that are rented out to a family of 4 for 2 bedrooms. DH designs housing in the most expensive parts of London and the proportion has to be social housing. Outside of London that situation is probably more favourable. If you are referencing primary school, yes, catchments are small but secondary is not the same. I live in a leafy area and my DC go to an oversubscribed state secondary comprehensive, there are many people that are not affluent and they intake is far and wide.

And like I said, that is a very nihilistic way of viewing the issue, shall we just not bother then. I mean fundamentally, education and lack of it is so intrinsically linked to poverty. We are worryingly ok with this inequality. My state second in the 90s had loads of opportunities for me as a cellist and pianist, equally playing fields for sports. My parents were the Beat generation and active young socialists, they protested and strived for education for all, it is thoroughly depressing how we just accept that education promotes inequalities and the above is only for the rich. Not exactly progress.

in sport, they are certainly better at Eton fives, much better at lawn tennis and very much better at polo. in fact when you're a state school kid and busy clapping the half-coconuts together because you don't have a horse, it is a bit hard to hit the ball at the same time.
It is not just sports and music but also languages. Because you might actually be taught more than one. And classics. Again, because you might be taught some.
For music, private school kids are much better at singing the school song. Firstly because it is likely to be in Latin (see classics above) and secondly because your school might have one. State school kids just have to hum.
Seriously, what do people expect? That pouring expert tuition and resources into specific areas, perhaps from as early as the age of 4, would have no effect?

And yet your siblings choose to privately educate.

"the superior moral fibre of not only privately educated kids, but also their parents"

Fuck me. Now I've seen it all. I've been in and out of a fair few private schools in the last few years, and have yet to see anything resembling superior moral fibre. I have seen a lot of dough, a fair few fancy cars, and a lot of insufferably smug people looking down their noses at others.

Yes they do, precisely because they want to avoid our childhood. However, I think this is overcompensating and actually a huge waste of money as my DS is likely to achieve higher grades in GCSES and we have spent 0 on fees. My DH tells me in Architecture at least they are not interested in the school you go to, he is a director and wants to know you actually have talent in design.

But they literally aren't better musicians as evidenced by non high brow music i.e the stuff the majority of people listen to!

Private schools actively discourage self - expression, it is all about self control and being controlled which is probably why they are more likely to excel at classical music where that technical skill is needed.

This is just utter bollocks

@Goldenbear I get that you don't like private schools and feel that they perpetuate inequality and I have some sympathy with that view. But your frankly bizarre insistence that the only music deserving of respect is rap and grime is just...silly.

Please quote me where I have referenced rap and grime. I don't have any snobby perceptions of them like you but I equally have not even used those words. I listed Hip hop, drum and bass, indie and rock not one mention of grime or rap. You are under the impression that these are all the same things, I wonder why that is?

Don't forget beatbox. Recent research has shown they share this ability with other lower primates such as orangutans.

Load of shite. Went to a 1970s comprehensive - actually, was its first year comp - was a secondary modern before that.

But we had music lessons - I have clarinet and descant recorder to grade 6, can do all the other recorders to grade 3. Credit where it's due, for all my mum's faults, she bought me a clarinet on the never-never when the school said I had an aptitude.

That's probs part of the problem. My dad was hugely musical, never had the chance to pursue itm but could pursue it through me. Not sure other families on the breadline would prioritise a clarinet.

So yeah - it's not the private school - it's the funding and the ability of parents to pay for an instrument.

We also had Latinlessons. Will always remember surprising some bloke in Cambridge cos the oik could read Latin. I get the feeling we were some kind of experiment that was meant to fail but didn't, so had to be stopped by the national curriculum.

It’s true though. Giving a recital of a piece of classical music someone else has written, at a given level of competence, is what private school kids are often better at. But that’s not creativity as such. It’s just a tired conformist convention of what it meant to be “accomplished”.

Metal, dubstep, industrial, large chunks of punk, post-punk and indie, grime, hardcore, jungle, d n b: all genres that have become globally popular and for the most part invented by mostly state school kids, often with no musical grades.

I was originally talking about composers of classical music, not playing other people's work, but I also think being able to play someone elses classical music is worth respect. You don't, that's fine are you 12

My parents were the Beat generation and active young socialists, they protested and strived for education for all

You’ve stated more than once that you attended private school yourself at some point in your life. So, your parents were active socialists who strived for education for all whilst sending their own child to a private school.

"it's not the private school - it's the funding and the ability of parents to pay for an instrument."

This. In spades. The ability and willingness to pay does correlate with school type, even if the musical aptitude doesnt.
I will also say that the most impressive school music concert I've seen was in a state school (with a music specialism, and several NYO members in the orchestra). The rather snooty local private schools were not a patch on it.

I respect it, yes. But I respect innovation more.

Why does it matter if they excel at sports and music? Does it mean they will have a more fulfilling life or does it just enable the parents to show off their children’s achievements to their friends? Why put all the pressure on children to have to play multiple instruments and compete at a higher level? I want my children to be happy and healthy, to discover their own passions and follow their own path. The OP sounds like she just wants to keep up with the Jones’.

Well, there's lots of very innovative modern classical music if you ever find yourself looking for something new to listen to.

Not sure why “are you 12”?

Excelling at something other than academics breeds confidence. I can't quite believe I'm having to tell adults that.

Malbecfan & EctopicSpleen, Godessofthunder was being sarcastic.

But state school children can find passions and interests to breed confidence without having to excel and compete. My children go to state schools. One loves musical theatre and the other loves karate. They aren’t the best or competing at a high level but they enjoy themselves and are happy.

Then that's great.

I agree. I started a similar post on this last year

My DS swim club has lots of kids from private school. They all swim in school team and get several hours coaching at school, on top of the local club. Meanwhile the state kids just get the club sessions. So guess who ends up winning all the medals and reaching the top positions in the sport??? Not to mention that our club offers private 1:1 sessions which the kids who go to private school can all afford. So they get 1:1 sessions and several hours extra coaching at school. Seems v unfair. But I don't know what the answer is!! If you have the money, you want the benefits.

The only way to make it fairer would be for state schools to boost their extracurricular provisions. They don't because sport and music are not prioritised and they have no targets to meet. Change needs to come from government level so sport and music provision in school is valued and prioritised. League tables around sport and music, not just grades A to C in maths and English GCSE.

It's a business. People send their kids to private schools and pay a lot of money because they want their children to have the advantage over other children socially as well as academically. For example, people who can play several musical instruments are more interesting people than those who can't. They are also more disciplined. Private schools teach children to lead and state schools teach children to follow orders. It is qualitatively different.