Aibu to wonder why private schools produce more "well rounded" children? Is it the school or the parents?

[Kenthighst]

I know all state schools produce well rounded children eg those kids that are academic, musical, sporty, confident, excel at drama & can try their hand at anything.

But private schools churn out well rounded kids so aibu to wonder if it is the actual school who produce these kids or is it parental input?

There's private and there's the private that the angst ridden MNetter is obsessed with. I know of dc in three different private schools:

1. Steiner school
2. Post primary school for dc with social/emotional behavioural issues (most pupils have been excluded from several schools previously, tiny class sizes (3-5) and emphasis on lovely activities such as kayaking, art, music)
3. Independent secondary. Nice school, nice facilities, but certainly not producing future politicians.

All have engaged parents who are passionate about their dc's education and want them to fulfill their potential, and they have the financial resources. All three of the above produce vastly difference 'sets' of students, none of which would fit the MN definition of well rounded. No 3 is the closest fit, but nothing that a local grammar couldn't replicate.

I grew up in NI where there is a grammar/secondary modern system. Plenty of grammars to go around, but the % of FSM pupils is still very low. They largely attract those in the higher socio economic demograph. My friends tell me that tutoring now starts in P4(!). There are still plenty of families who wouldn't even enter their dc into the 11+/transfer test/SEAG as "grammars are for snobs/rich people".
I went to a good secondary modern all girls school. The most confident pupils were the lowest achievers, whose parents would threaten to come into school and hit a teacher because their dd was told they were wearing non regulation shoes/coats/jewellery. They certainly weren't polished in the MN sense, but they had very straight backs, were entitled and knew their opinion would count for something. The more wealthy, hard working, high achieving pupil knew they had to lie low and keep their mouths closed.

My 4 dc all went to private school from year 7 - dd3 is in y11, the others are adults.
My ds entered y7 having had severe speech problems ( largely sorted out by then), never having been in any sports team and generally not liking sport, playing violin but not really enjoying it (I think he had done grade 2) and also he's ND.
He finished absolutely loving sports - the school really encouraged the idea that there was a sport for everyone. He also got a distinction in his grade 8 LAMDA, was lead violinist in their orchestra and had also taken up and got grade 7 in piano. He was the head of their CCF corps and Lord Lieutenants Cadet as well as getting gold in various olympiads in maths, chemistry and physics. Finally he left with 4A* A levels.
He's obviously still ND but he was given the chance to shine and took it. I'm sure he would still have done well academically at a state school (though he was already being bullied when he left the sector) but the rest - not a chance!
We are on universal credit and he had a full bursary.

Dd3 recently chaired an international debating conference, is grade 8 piano, loves athletics particularly triple jump, enjoys ballet and has completed all her grades, is doing her grade 7 LAMDA, is doing very well at CCF - and is on course for all 9s in her gcses this summer. The school is very supportive of her athletics and music. Again she has always been strong academically and would probably have done well at state school but the extra curriculars at her private school have given her confidence to be herself.

The smugness dripping from this post is insufferable.

The reality is, you have no idea how your dd would have turned out if she had gone to a state school. She might still have come out with a string of straight 9s, an impressive list of extracurricular achievements and "the confidence to be herself".

But that's the point isn't it? No-one knows how their DC would turn out if they stopped sectors ie private to state OR state to private. That is all what if-ery. I'm sure some private DC would excel in state just like some state DC would excel at private. We all make the best decision for the child in front of us at the time

‘Dire’ how, exactly?

Results, behaviour, progress 8, destinations, bullying and aspirations

100% this.

DS went used to go to a weekly activity at a private school with the children. He realised they weren't brighter than him and his mates at secondary. But the school had no challenging children, masses of sport with amazing facilities (plus Sat am sessions) and small classes.

He went to a few of their evening meals and was amazed that all the kids had to pile their phones and ear buds up on a table as they went in and none of them were stolen. That blew his mind.

Don't private school kids generally get an hours lunch with a proper meal? That and the extra sport must do them the world of good. Comps get a crappy 40 min break and a canteen scrum.

@Taylormiffed yes a full 1 hour lunch break and then can go to common rooms to chill out with music etc. However remember they finish later ie 5pm so they do need a proper lunch break

My kids state school has an hour and 20 break . They have over 40 lunchtime groups available from sport to album club and art and orchestra. They do everything at lunch as it’s rural school and catchment is wide and most go straight home on buses. I think it’s not helpful to judge schools generally like this. There are some really awful Private schools and some really awful state schools. Some turn out well rounded individuals and some don’t.

And you know this how, exactly? I assume some is contained in the much-fetishised OFSTED report, but not all.

Exactly this but most won’t listen.
As someone who went to state school, I think it is a shame that those who are strong proponents of the state sector come across badly on these sorts of threads. Inverse snobbery, lazy generalisations, narrow minded, using derogatory terms and seeming like they have a massive chip on their shoulder.
I have done very very well from my state education. My parents prioritised our education above all else. I am not sure I would have done as well at private school if it weren’t for my parents attitudes.

I know in education so I am very aware of the limitations of Oftaed thank you. I know several teachers from the school as well as friends whose DC go there. Results are obviously on school website.
I very much don't have to justify my decision to you but I appreciate if you have good local state schools then you may not appreciate exactly how dire some are.
I also wanted to give DD a break from the god awful national curriculum and to have the freedom to a wide range of subjects/topics to find out what she loves.

If all state schools are so fantastic why are there so many posts about moving house to get into catchment areas/tutoring/adding a huge amount of extra curricular activities/the number of teachers leaving the sector and crisis in recruitment?
If state is so great then leave us idiot private parents to pay the fees and laugh at our stupidity. If private schools are so bad just leave them alone and bask in the smugness of being able to send your DC to the superior state schools.

Gosh, that awful national curriculum that everyone else has to study.

And I have to laugh every time I see that self-serving old chestnut ‘I am forced to send my child private because of a lack of good state schools’ coupled with ‘It’s all right for you, you clearly have good state options’.

Because Mn skews towards a strongly aspirational lower-middle-class mindset which is terrified of ‘not getting on’, and their child ‘being left behind’ and, in a particularly class-bound society, is eager to seize any perceived advantage.

I went to a very good comprehensive school but our local secondary school has been in and out of special measures - currently (inspected late last year) requires improvement. Dd's friends go there and there is a merry go round of teachers, a lot of bullying and most leave at the end of year 11 to go elsewhere. As I've said dd has always been strong academically and probably would have done very well in her gcses there - she got 119 greater depth in year 6 but I do think she would have dropped some of her extra curriculars by now if she'd gone there. And she'd probably be stressing about boyfriends etc.

It is an awfully narrow and repressive curriculum. We are lucky that we can afford to give DD an alternative, I accept that. I was brought up with the view that education should be about installing a love for learning, not exam results.
You seem to have an awfully big chip on your shoulder about this. However at the end of the day if we didn't choose private we would have moved house into a different area because we can afford to do that, private was the cheaper option. That would have meant pricing another family out of that state school though.
There will always be people who can afford to make choices. Our choice was to stay in a small 3 bed semi and send our DD to private. No apologies from me about prioritising the education of my daughter.

Shouldn't we all have aspirations for our DC though? Those aspirations will all be different according to the starting point but if you don't have aspirations then you just accept the status quo and eventually it becomes a race to the bottom.
I can not see how it is bad to want our DC to do better than we did. Surely this is what progress is built upon?
Otherwise my dad would have stayed in a northern manufacturing town instead of going to Cambridge and working in London. My mum would have stated in her Welsh village and never gone to London to become an artist.

It's both. There are many perfectly capable and well-rounded state school kids also, schools vary massively as do parents - dependent on area, income and their own education. My experience of private school and the parents is that kids are pelted with extra curricular activities all through term and weekends. Because of the lengthy holidays (almost 7 weeks over summer) are often also sent to language/sports/science/coding camps to fill the time for working parents. The result of this is children often find their talent/passion early on and this is polished up over the years. Private schools are experts at admissions processes (how scholarships are awarded) for secondary schools and this along with their advocacy for students - means measurably they generally can deliver better outcomes. Speaking to friends some of their kids absolutely thrived in state school, others didn't and they moved them to private school - it's very dependent on the specific school, parents and the child.

I don’t accept the status quo. Private education is ethically indefensible. My ‘aspirations’ involve everyone getting a decent education.

I have more than enough money to educate DS privately, but would never do it. He has gone to the geographically nearest school everywhere we’ve ever lived, and will be doing the same when he starts secondary next year.

Because Mn skews towards a strongly aspirational lower-middle-class mindset which is terrified of ‘not getting on’, and their child ‘being left behind’ and, in a particularly class-bound society, is eager to seize any perceived advantage.
I think this is really unfair.
My family was working class and there was a strong culture of learning and wanting to work hard and do well for yourself so you can offer your future children opportunities.

What I actually hate on MN is the endless assumptions that being interested in education, being interested in a range of topics, having hobbies, want to your DC to do well is middle class. It's seen all over the place from the suggestions that wanting your child to get on is middle class, to other threads where going to museums/local education events etc isn't for working class people.
It's like a certain section of Mumsnet thinks working class families are uneducated idiots who don't have aspirations for their children.

I don't know whether to be sick or cry!

Oh that brings back memories from going with my state school English class to take part in a regional debating competition. Even then as a teen it was blatantly obvious to me that the private school children had been coached and regularly practiced public speaking whereas we were thrown in at the deep end with no preparation or practice. So obviously we and the other state schools came across badly. Later, at university I noticed that the private school students, while full of confidence didn't have anything more intelligent or interesting to say than anyone else!