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?

Hmmm, nope.

I know a lot of very damaged ex private school pupils, myself included, who had horribly dysfunctional family lives & being in that pressure cooker environment just caused even more trauma.

For the ones whose faces 'fit', no matter how academically mediocre or lacking in any artistic talent, it was probably a breeze, but those kids were already at an advantage due to their families' social status.

This is true and I often think this on schools should teach [whatever random topic] threads because at private schools they probably already do. My children seem to benefit greatly from just talking to their teachers about whatever interests them. They often diverge from the curriculum but they learn so much about the world that way.

This. They don't. Some may be and some may be better at masking.

I've always been a bit against private schools - though in truth we would have struggled to pay the fees. I suppose I've been a bit chippy about other children having opportunities mine didn't, although obviously we did our best within our resources.

But reading the posts on here about primary school children experiencing violence from fellow pupils every day gives me pause. I honestly think if my DC were in that situation, I would be looking to get them out of it. Whatever it took.

I think due to the smaller class sizes/smaller cohort it basically enforces kids to be a bit kinder to each other as there’s a limited pool of friends.

my dd goes private but previously attended one of the best state schools in the country. It had great facilities etc but she wouldn’t use any of them as the culture of bitchyness and everything being used as leverage for social media was too much.

Having the space where your classmates are a bit more accepting can do wonders for long term confidence.

@YouTulip
Describing it as an “artificial leg up” presupposes that people should only be allowed to achieve in accordance with natural (genetic?) ability at birth though. Education, particularly years of good education throughout childhood, can improve academic ability. It can literally remould your brain. Education doesn’t artificially improve ability. It actually improves it. The same way someone with little innate musical talent could become a decent pianist with sufficient work and training.

One word - entitlement. I don't mean that in a sneery way necessarily, I think it's not so much public school kids are all rounders, but a private education makes them confident they can fit in anywhere they want to and pick up any skills they need to. And generally this is combined with a upbringing that reinforces that - they live in a world where doors are open to them.

Agree with you here. Would be great if all children had that pinch of self importance. It is nearly impossible to replicate at home.

I think that the most well-rounded children are state school children who have decent extra curriculars and family support.

chucking your child in a private school long hours and letting school do everything doesn’t produce rounded kids, just ones used to institutions and regimes.

Honestly, I think such a disproportionate number of Mners are socially withdrawn, misanthropic, timid and/or anxious , and just seem to struggle so much with ordinary social relationships or scenarios like the school run, making friends, negotiating friendships etc, that they disproportionately fetishise an ‘air of confidence’ and ‘polish’.

In some cases, I imagine they’re hoping private school ‘polish ’ counteracts the odd and anxious scripts about friendships they’re modelling for their children, when the parents would be better off working on their own issues and having a healthy social life with people they value, rather than delegating this to schools.

Private schools aren't long hours - plus they have shorter terms.

@YouTulip if you actually read my post I asked was it the schools or parents that create well rounded children! I certainly didn't give all credit to the schools.

Money.

I've been to both. (Decades ago so could of changed)

Education was exactly the same. Same standards, same extra curricular options.

Just in private school it was pretty much the same people, wasn't much diversity. Which for me was awful, as if you obviously didn't fit in, bullying was quite rife.

But the parents have more money. So polished = new clothes, no hand me downs ect, can pay for extra tuition and tutors. Usually went on holidays, travelling often skiing. So it was the parents that really enabled it. You also could get into better uni/college/jobs. They would do references, work experience was usually through the parents in solicitors office ect

I mean one summer when i was in state, summer was playing in park. One summer in private a friend took me to their second home and we spent it on a yacht.

Why you so desperate to prove your better than the average MNer?

I agree.

I work in a profession that is largely privately educated. I am in the minority being state educated and people are often surprised if ever it comes up in conversation (which it does as occasionally we do equality questionnaire to gather this info for our regulatory body).

I find that privately educated people struggle to relate to people who aren’t as fortunate as them and actually struggle to engage in conversation about mundane things at a low level.

Just like not all state schools are equal, neither are all private schools. Though people seem to think ‘state’ or ‘private’ are accurate definitions on their own.

State schools - local shit comp (I went to it), grammar, single sex state school (they exist), state schools Labour politicians send their kids to (London oratory, Grey Coat School London).

Private - the ‘public schools’ Eton, Winchester, Rugby, then the average private school and then the small local ones.

To suggest children can be described by the type of school they went to is pretty limited. We can all generalise Eton / public school toff old boys, vomit. But apart from that I’m doubtful.

I went to a crap state mixed comprehensive. We were lucky if we had the same teacher for longer than a few terms, kids had many issues all the time, set school on fire, huge class sizes etc etc. But I had fantastic parental support which made all the difference. I was confident, accomplished and happy - despite the shit school. I didn’t even know it was, at the time.

So my children understand social realities and understand how I’m sending them to private school. Because I can. Facilities are better, class sizes smaller. Do more sport (and more drama etc).

The politicians fcked the curriculum years ago. Not enough sport / drama especially - these things aren’t expensive (music can be). They really do give confidence to children.

If a child has parents who do not support him / her, it doesn’t really matter what school they go to.

To answer your question OP it's money

I'm not sure whether well rounded is the right word but if you've got decent facilities then your much more likely to want to do sport. If you can afford musical instruments and decent music teachers then your more likely to want to play an instrument

When you've been part of a sport team you will then find it easier everytime to slot into a team.

I also think a lot of parents who send their DC to private school obviously want to justify the expense so will spend a lot of time telling you how well their child is doing and all their hobbies.

It's a bit of both.

There's not much in it if I compare the excellent state school I worked (that happened to have a more affluent catchment than most) or the private schools near by.
All those schools could spend a substantial amount of their time on education, behaviour was good overall, teachers could offer enrichment opportunities because they weren't spending every night dealing with the growing list of non-teaching pastoral burdens that disproportionately affect some schools. The state school was able to offer a rounded curriculum because they had the teachers to do it and they weren't having to limit the curriculum to do lots of English and Maths catch up.
The parents in all schools generally valued education and wanted their children to do well. Most of the children did some enrichment opportunities outside of school, probably because a lot of the parents had their own interests and hobbies.

Across those schools I'd say the biggest factor affecting being well rounded was having well-rounded parents who value education, hobbies and a range of interests, and have the means to give their children those opportunities.

In a situation where someone can't access the sort of state schools like the one above then I think the school makes a big difference.

It's the parents, not the school.

I attended and work in a state school and see lots of "well rounded" children.

The key factor is the parents - they have TIME for their kids, encouraging them to do different things, limited how much time they spend on a screen, or doing the hobby with their children. It's not about money, as lots of hobbies are free or really cheap.

Where I don't see well rounded kids, I usually find families that have more children than they have time for so kids are left to their own devices, or quite a few parents who just don't seem to care that much what their kids get up to, and are quite happy for them to come home from school and straight onto a screen. I know some don't even sit at a meal table and eat whilst on their PS4!

At private school, then I guess a lot of parents perhaps use money rather than time to achieve the same, depending on if they both work or not.

Who says they do produce more well-rounded children? I don't even agree with the question.

Sounds like class discrimination talking.

They also produce a lot of illegal drug taking teenagers, useless politicians and completely rubbish nepobabies.

Well-rounded my arse. (Yes, it is).

Define ‘better’?

If ‘better’ involves having recognised I was brought up with very counterproductive scripts about friendships by timid, withdrawn, people-pleasing parents, working on myself in adulthood, and, despite moving around a fair bit internationally, making and maintaining good friendships, and not imagining ‘cliques’ and ‘exclusions’ everywhere, people-pleasing to people I neither like nor respect because I can’t handle the repercussions, or needing a week’s notice so I can have my house ‘visitor-ready’, then yes, perhaps. Certainly a better relationships model to DS than I had.

Private schools choose their customers, state schools have to take everyone.

Gosh, what a lot of nonsense! Private schools are not all equal, some are ghastly and despite appearances, great facilities etc you cannot polish a turd. The best ones do turn out well rounded individuals who can get on with anybody but the worst feed all this lower middle-class smugness.

I agree with this too. Our dcs state school does no music, drama, debating, has no choir or band. I asked the principle & was told there wouldn't be the demand or interest plus the teachers are already spinning too many plates as it is.
So there is lots of opportunities for cultural capital being missed here unless the parents have the time, money (or ability) to do it outside school.