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?

Lots of teachers post on MN about the horrendous challenges in many state schools right now. Underfunding, no SEN support, crumbling buildings, terrible behaviour, teachers leaving etc. Is it a myth?

"In fact there are not many things that builds inner strength and character like horse riding."

Ooh, I don't know. What about ploughing on with your education even when you've got nowhere to study at home, because you're a family of 5 living in a one bedroom flat? Or looking after younger siblings because your single parent mum has to work 50 hours a week to pay the rent? What about having to walk through a grim housing estate every day to go to school - talk about facing your fears.

Because the thing with owning or riding a horse, is that if you don't want to do it any more, you can sell the horse and stop the riding lessons. The things I've mentioned - you're stuck with whether you like it or not, and nobody's coming to help you.

Saying this as someone who rode for years - it was a massive bloody privilege and huge fun.

There is certainly underfunding in state schools at the moment. As a school governor, I have seen our reserves eroded year on year, and the situation is not sustainable. However, we do not have any significant staffing difficulties and we have consistently been able to recruit excellent teachers when we have had vacancies.

Our buildings are in a good state...we did have a significant issue which was costly to address but our insurance paid out in full.

SEN funding is undoubtedly inadequate. It isn't true to say that there is no SEN support, and some of it is excellent, but there certainly isn't enough support for all of the children who need it.

Other schools will no doubt be different. It is unfortunately a bit of a postcode lottery.

It only applies when you are attacking private schools. Then, it seems, all is magic rainbows and unicorns in the state sector. In general discussion about state schools most people acknowledge the crisis in state schools.

I certainly wouldn't blame people for sending children to private school. But I don't agree they churn out well-rounded children.

It certainly isn't all magic and rainbows. However, a lot of state schools have worked very hard to maintain a high quality of education in challenging circumstances.

The funding challenges do have consequences though. For example, when my dd was at primary school, she was regularly taken out in small groups for various activities to stretch the most able pupils. Her old school still provides an excellent education overall, but they do not have the resource to provide that added value any more. Any additional resource that they do have is inevitably - and quite rightly - focused on the children that need it most.

It's a shame, but the kids still seem to be thriving and I am not convinced that their education has suffered. I suspect that the main impact has probably been on their teachers who are now having to work twice as hard to ensure that all kids are appropriately stretched in class. They seem to be doing a grand job of this right now, but I do have a question mark about how sustainable this in the long run. The school's SMT is working very hard to streamline things as effectively as possible in order to reduce the workload in areas where it isn't adding significant value.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves that's the issue, the lack of underfunding. The attacks against private schools are a diversion away from where the real blame lies: at the hands of politicians and people who have voted for tax cuts and austerity.
If people challenged their politicians and stood up for state education as vehemently as they attack private schools then maybe the situation would be different.
But no, some people would rather blame private schools for all the inequality instead of fighting to raise the standards of state schools.
In many countries state education is so good that there is very little uptake of private education. However in this country the electorate seems to care more about the charisma of their politicians rather than their policies which creates the shitstorm we are currently in across every state department.

From working in both state and indie, I think that having parents invested in education, telling their children they can (rightly or wrongly) achieve anything and having the highest aspirations for them is the ground level for all the polish.

Then there is the social side where families will mix with like-minded families and the children will grow up with certain expectations for themselves and others.

Assuming a good family income with money for musical instruments, sports clubs and the like the children are going to be rounded.

Adding a school to the mix where there are lots of extra curricular clubs, good behaviour in lessons and teachers are not ground down by DFE rules and regs and the child is clearly going to be rounded, polished etc.

I think the school is the cherry on an already well-iced cake TBH.

"But no, some people would rather blame private schools for all the inequality instead of fighting to raise the standards of state schools."

This is utter nonsense.

For a start private schools will always be different from state schools primarily because they serve a completely different cohort.

There's not a single private school (other than SEN private schools) that has any significant intake of middle and low achieving children from low income families.

Poor, low achieving and disruptive children are a cohort that's completely missing from mainstream private schools.

What private schools do is they take academically successful children from highly supportive families, and they both lavish resources on them (private schools have double the number of teachers per head compared to state schools) and protect them from coming into contact with the educational fallout of social disadvantage.

No state school can compete with this because state schools aren't allowed to exclude children who for a range of social reasons are difficult to teach and to accommodate in school.

Parents of children in private schools want and need to privilege their children above their peers. This is why you get very large numbers of children in private schools in areas where there are high performing state schools. My kid's state school turns out large numbers of student with very very good GSCE results, gets lots of kids into RG universities, and has a cracking music and art department. But it can't compete with the private school next door that literally has 10 times the resources and none of the difficult kids.

What makes you think that posters are not lobbying for better funding in the state sector?

FWIW, I am not attacking private schools or the people who use them. I don't judge anyone who is trying to do the best for their kids, and if I had felt that dd would be better off at a private school, we absolutely would have done that. In the end, we concluded the private schools would be a waste of money for our dd and that we preferred the state options anyway.

I completely understand why some parents choose private, though. State provision varies from area to area. I understand that SEN provision in state schools is not always adequate to meet children's needs. I also understand why some people feel that their kids need the extra push/smaller class sizes or whatever. Some kids will do equally well in any environment; others may need a bit more support. Also, some parents are willing and able to supplement the opportunities that their kids get in the state sector, and they are confident that they can fill in any gaps. Others are less confident and/or they simply prefer for everything to be provided in a one-stop shop by the school. Horses for courses. All children and all families are different.

My issue is not with the individual families who choose to send their kids to private schools for perfectly justifiable reasons. My issue is with those who assume that private schools are inherently better and that they produce happier, more successful or more well-rounded children. I simply don't believe that that's the case, and I cringe a bit on behalf of the smug parents who seem to be labouring under that impression.

When private school kids go on to do a very ordinary job that didn't require private schooling, (as i have seen alot), it must seem a waste of fees

Not if you have a happy, well behaved , bright child at the end of it.

I find behaviour in private schools much better and frankly often children that are more polite.

Obviously there are nice kids in state school.

I agree with you completely. This was so evident during covid.
Also the amount of guest speakers, residential trips in the UK & abroad, music & theatre trips are unbelievable at the local privates. Our school does nothing & goes nowhere!

Kindly stop clouding the issue with facts!

Of course there are nice kids in state schools.

Manners and behaviour are heavily influenced by the parents, I think. The behaviour at our local state school is impeccable... mainly down to cohort imo.

I wouldn't describe any of kids I know in private schools as well rounded. They are entitled snow flakes in my view.

How many do you know?

I don't think this type of comment is accurate or helpful tbh.

I know lots of privately educated kids. A few do have a very entitled attitude but the vast majority don't. I wouldn't describe any of them as snowflakes. Honestly, they are just very ordinary kids with strengths and weaknesses like any other kid - no better and no worse.

Only on private school threads is it acceptable to generalise and call kids unpleasant names based on the decisions of their parents.

😂🤷‍♀️🙈

Indeed. I’d say it is not acceptable but somehow, it is ‘allowed’.

How would you react if I called all state pupils antisocial chavs? Would that be an acceptable thing to say?

Well op has said state school kids are over weight

Why? All I want for my DS is a good work /life balance. The private education was to ensure he had the same start as I did in the state system 40+ yrs ago. We had strong teaching, firm discipline and lots of extracurricular opportunity such as free music lessons, school orchestra, well funded and organised sports opportunities. But most of all no one was constantly whining about the state of the building, school policy, funding the list is endless. The school was in poor repair and we often had to wear coats during lessons in the winter. But teaching standards were excellent.
My DS’s school had the same feel as my old comp. Yes they were both middle class but that was due to the closure of grammars two years before I started and no real private alternative. The only local private was where the middle class thick kids went if they failed their 11+.
Times have changed and selective private schools or grammar schools now skim off the brighter middle class in a lot of areas.
Many of us have lost confidence in the state system. Mainly because it is much easier for children to not reach their potential. There is no place to hide in a private school. Their success relies heavily on results so it is not in their interest a to let pupils slack.
That said one of the benefits recently was during the lockdowns DS received a full education to GCSE level. School went online for every lesson. Regardless of their GCSE results ( guesstimated) they completed the curriculum. Which for me is as far more important than estimated results.
There is a real concern in higher education that DD’s cohort will struggle at undergraduate level because their education over the last 5 yrs was intermittent and often incomplete.

Yeah, it would just be cheaper is all