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?

Depends whether you judge the value of education to be results/destination or whether you value the journey. We value the journey and DDs enjoyment of school
I don't care what she does as a job as long as she is happy.
I don't want return on investment other than her happiness.

It's interesting that the last Duke of Westminster sent his kids to the local comp, but what they do extracurricular means they have everything public school kids have anyway. And I doubt he'd have chosen that if the local state school was in special measures.

Of course not, and I don't condone ridiculous generalisations about privately educated kids either.

However, when posters say that they send their kids to private schools because they want them to be happy/develop confidence/learn good manners etc, the clear implication - unless they qualify their statement very carefully - is that they assume that children in the state sector are somehow less happy/less confident/lacking in good manners etc. And once you have accounted for socio-economic differences etc, I really don't think that's true.

I think parents should do whatever they sit for their children, but blanket generalisations about children in either sector aren't usually helpful.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves exactly but that PP thought that it was fine to call private school kids names.
I 100% agree with sweeping generalisations on either side aren't good however on these posts it is usually the opponents of private schools who fire the first shots with no thought behind their statements. It is seen as acceptable to attack the character of private school kids in a way that isn't acceptable for state educated DC.

Private Schools don't have to stick to the National Curriculum and are better resourced. Their pupils have access to facilities & support that most state schools don't provide.

The divide has actually gotten worse, especially for arts and languages.

We will have to agree to disagree on this point. I think the attacks on privately educated kids are often more shameless and explicit, but the assumptions made by state school kids are just as bad and just as ignorant.

OP I think it’s both - our DC did state for primary & private for secondary, and we’re seeing them gain confidence in themselves from the opportunities to eg join an orchestra, prepare and give a talk to other kids in a lunchtime club, have interesting conversations in PHSE lessons because they split the class of 23 into 2 groups for that so that everyone can get involved in the discussions. There is disruption and messing about in the classes - more than we expected when we chose the school - but there’s no fights or feeling scared of the bigger kids in the same way there is in the state secondaries nearby, and I think that all combines to mean kids in private schools get to discover and feel proud of their talents and grow in confidence rather than just keep their heads down to get through it. I think that’s where the polish comes from.

Private Schools don't have to stick to the National Curriculum

And they don't have to enter them for accredited qualifications. Students in maintained schools have to sit GCSEs and level-1/2 certificates offered by the BTEC boards, which are regulated by Ofqual. Private schools can enter students for IGCSEs, which are not regulated and in many cases are not intended for use in the UK. There is no guarantee of equivalence of standard/grading between the qualifications. Universities that have minimum GCSE requirements are expected to accept IGCSEs as equivalent without question, and are threatened by organisations of private schools if they suggest state-school students are having to meet higher standards than their private-school counterparts (I've been on the receiving end of this.)

https://ofqual.blog.gov.uk/2019/04/04/some-facts-about-international-gcses/

And there it is again. I don't support the blanket nastiness about privately educated kids, but I don't accept the ridiculous characterisation of state school kids either.

In this example, "kids in private schools get to discover and feel proud of their talents and grow in confidence" while state school kids are assumed to have to "just keep their heads down to get through it". And state school kids are supposedly less "polished" as a result!

It is absurd and offensive, frankly.

If you're happy with your child's private school, that's great. Just say that. I'm genuinely pleased for you. You don't have to make up a load of nonsense about the state sector to justify it. Believe it or not, there are loads of kids in the state sector who get to "discover and feel proud of their talents and grow in confidence" too.

Our kids went through / are in some of the top London day schools, St Paul's etc. I don't think they're any more 'well-rounded' than the average teen. I think though, that the schools do something that normalises a certain type of confidence. Public speaking just seems to be something they do. Also, there are very few (if any) children who can't look adults in the eye or feel st ease to hold a conversation with adults, this kind of thing. Like a social ease. DH and I were state educated and can see a difference in very general terms. Obviously, this goes too far in certain cases 🤔but on the whole they're fine. Despite this, I still believe parents have far more influence on 'roundedness' than any school. I can't really speak for boarding schools though, that's a whole separate matter. I can't speak for state schools today either, as ours never went to them, but if we lived outside London they may well have done. It's very area-specific. A family member's children attend an amazing state comprehensive outside London - pastorally, academically and in terms of facilities. It really depends. In general though, independent schools don't have put up with disruptive behaviour, so they don't. Also, the more selective a school is, the easier the job of teaching is because you're not presented with a class where some are aiming for 9s and others will barely scrape a 4 if they're lucky. So they all move at the same pace and high standards are normalised. The independents in London are very international, lots of ex-pat 'high flier' families, so this also affects the general atmosphere and expectations.

However, when posters say that they send their kids to private schools because they want them to be happy/develop confidence/learn good manners etc, the clear implication - unless they qualify their statement very carefully - is that they assume that children in the state sector are somehow less happy/less confident/lacking in good manners etc. And once you have accounted for socio-economic differences etc, I really don't think that's true.

Presumably you don't actually know that it's not true on average though. I don't know for certain either, but I have taught in both sectors and it wouldn't surprise me if it were true. Sire, there are some things about some private schools that make some students unhappy. But some of the problems in a LOT of state schools at the moment are pretty much bound to make quite a high proportion of students unhappy.

I'm sorry to say that in terms of manners, respect and courtesy there has been an enormous gulf between the normal state schools I've worked in and the independents. Imo there is no point in discounting socio-economic differences, since thise are a large part of the reason people choose private schools.

Reading your link it states some igcse exams were easier. Some were harder and some were the same.

This is also found between boards setting GCSEs.

Not sure what the overall point is

I don't think my Oxbridge, state educated DC got that memo.

You're completely missing the point about adjusting for socioeconomic factors.

Kids from similar backgrounds tend to have similar manners. And no, I haven't undertaken detailed research on this, but I have encountered hundreds of kids from both sectors over the years, and this is what I've observed.

Yes I agree the home environment is more impactful than the school. I suppose if it's a boarding school though, the school will be more influential.

It’s related to wealth.
nothing to do with the school or parenting.

wealth protects you from the stress of poverty- unsuitable housing, instability, food security.

wealthy creates access to experiences; musical instruments, hobbies, holidays.

only wealthy people send their kids to private school therefore they appear to be generally more accomplished, cultured or confident as you say.

it depends how you define well rounded. I would argue a wealthy child at a state school is likely to be more “well rounded” in having all the benefits that wealth brings, combined with a dose of reality of living and functioning in the real world which brings empathy, compassion and motivation.

private school just makes wealthy kids more elitist.

I don’t put a price on my DS. My parents worked hard to support my sisters and I through university. We all studied professional vocational degrees so we’re at uni for a minimum of 5 yrs, my DF ‘s salary excluded us from maintenance grant. I suspect the total cost of higher education for all three of us was probably the same we have paid out ( for DS’s education) in today’s prices.
DS is an only, not through choice, so we were able to choose where he was educated. A privilege, in some people’s eyes but only possible because of the education I received. Like my parents we chose education over luxury cars and holidays. Although being the daughter of a tight northerner does rub off.

Kids from similar backgrounds tend to have similar manners. And no, I haven't undertaken detailed research on this, but I have encountered hundreds of kids from both sectors over the years, and this is what I've observed.
Same here.
I've taught in state schools where it was the norm to be greeted with "good morning" and thanked at the end of the lesson.

I've known friends teach most of their career in independent schools and love the polite atmosphere and culture.

I've also taught in state schools where I've said hello/good morning and the response would be "don't even start because I'm not doing a fucking detention".

I've known friends in the independent sector be spoken to like something on the bottom of the pupils' shoe.

Do they?

I think looking at the current government and our MPs, they seem to also produce a fair amount of lazy, entitled, useless and corrupt sociopaths...

Surely the very sad death of Thomas Kingston shows that you can be as well rounded and polished as you like, but the only real thing that matters is the happiness of our children.

Kids from similar backgrounds tend to have similar manners. And no, I haven't undertaken detailed research on this, but I have encountered hundreds of kids from both sectors over the years, and this is what I've observed.

There has been research on this in Ireland. Now our private schools in Ireland are no where near as exclusive as the UK, but research demonstrated that the socio economic profile of the students was the main determinant on achievement and outcomes and not whether the school was private or state. So in other words if you live in a good area and go to your local state school you'll do well.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/education/2022/apr/07/england-state-school-pupils-as-happy-with-life-as-private-school-peers-survey

Positive survey results here on mental health