Does the national curriculum quash children's natural love of learning and curiosity?

[Closetlibrarian]

DC1 starts primary this year. We're deciding between a local state primary and a local independent school. Both are equally convenient in terms of school run. We liked both a lot when we looked round - got a good feeling, etc. Kids seemed happy. Teachers nice. Facilities good.

The independent isn't a 'prep' type school that teaches them Latin at 6, but rather one based on an educational ethos that claims to foster and promote children's natural curiosity and love of learning. Lots of outdoor-based learning, etc. The notion being that the national curriculum, SATs, and the ways that teachers have to teach (to the test, etc) quashes children's innate curiosity and makes school a chore. Our decision between the two schools basically comes down to this rather abstract difference - that the indie school fosters curious, independent confident children whereas the state option doesn't (not because it's not a good school or the teachers aren't good, but because of the system in which it has to function). It's making it impossible to decide - it's something that seems impossible to actually measure, or prove, but at the same time, I suppose, it's really fundamental, and important.

So, I'm wondering how much it's actually true? Does the state primary system wear them down? Have your children had their innate curiosity quashed by school? Or do they bounce off to school every morning, keen as mustard?

...foster children's natural curiosity and love of learning

I think this phrase probably appears somewhere in a policy statement for every primary school in the country

OP I strongly advise really looking in detail at the state school web site but more importantly the live twitter feed, blogs, newsletters, events, galleries etc All our local schools have them and e.g. I see their twitter updates. The PTA updates are also useful as I am on our PTA and we share ideas.
This will give you an insight into what they are actually doing in the school.
I'd also try and find a parent or two at the actual school and ask them. Some schools are more creative than others.
Our local prep school web site is full of stuff that sounds amazing but its also exactly what all the local state schools do lol

Lowdoor - in my experience its the bigger state schools that can offer the types of things you have with your prep. All our local ones are 3 form. We have dedicated sports coaches, music teachers, cookery room, music room, massive choirs, 2/3 learn a huge variety of instruments, they all do French from year 2, albeit for one lesson a week, but its there with French speakers and all have forest school. We have coding club, gardening club and lots of other things, All our local schools have wrap round care too from 7.45 until 6pm or later on site. They all have decent level of extra pupil premium money for enrichment activites etc
I appreciate that many small schools cant offer this due to less funding but its not only private schools that can.

I think if you have average child, it doesn't really matter which school you send them. If you have less able, better to send them to state, since they can't ignore their needs. And if you have more able child, independent may be better, since you may have more say in their everyday leraning.

Single form entry school ...dedicated sports teachers as part of the School Sports Partnership also a School Sorts apprentice on site four days per week (lots of inter county completions) , music teachers for variety of instruments and vocal coach from Opera company, gardening club, cookery club, chess club etc

smellyboot's school or mrz's school sound ideal. Problem is that not all state school are like that.

We're actually the poor relations compared to many of the schools in more affluent villages nearby (but parents at those schools pay via a compulsory donations ) who provide things like riding lessons.

Well, I read on some thread that school with more children with deprived background has better resources due to pupil premium.
My ds' larger than average school has less then national average PP and 95%+ white children, and not doing so great.

I think that it all depends on the school. Some state schools do suck the love of learning out of a child in the name of the national curriculum. Other state schools take the national curriculum as a springboard for their lessons and produce lessons which really engage their pupils. Unfortunately you probably won't really know which you have chosen until your child is in them. I would still apply for the state school and do some more digging.

Yes, smellyboot I did make the point that it is all available in some state schools.

I have been on SLT in a 4 form entry primary. There was a LOT going on. However, with 1200 pupils it only went so far. I would say only 10-20% of the pupils with the pushiest parents had the breadth of experience every pupils at DS's prep has, because the majority of the co-curricular stuff is in the school day at the prep, not a bolt on.

My current school (which is super) has loads of clubs. Looks great in the prospectus but in reality but there are only 10-15 places in each one, waiting lists are massive, kids can't do the same club two terms in a row so everyone who wants to gets a chance. That is not ideal in my eyes. Some kids play in sports teams that compete externally, but it is a minority. Everybody does at the prep, there is no choice. I think the difference is the breadth of experience being expected, not extra. I believe it comes down to time. DS is there 8 - 5, the older ones are there 8 - 6, and there is Saturday school solely for enrichment activities/ matches. My school is 8.45 - 3, anything constructive outside that is down to the goodwill of staff.

I guess it depends too whether OP feels the extra bits the Indy may offer are worth £10k of what ever a year. Most of the DC in our area do rugby/footy/hockey/gymnastics/brownies/beavers/cups/rainbows/swimming/martial arts/drame clubs (endless list) with local clubs which also gives the chance to mix with DC from other schools and experience different things outside of their own school - this can be valuable too.
People can try out different activities and decide what they like and just pay for that; or do afterschool club until 6pm etc

As the deadline is looming I definately apply for the state school and secure a place. Between now and March OP you can ask lots more questions, maybe visit the school again and seek out existing parents

OP here. Thanks for all the responses. Good to hear that your DCs who are at state primaries haven't had their love of learning quashed! (p.s. whoever said it was the indie scaremongering - this wasn't their phrasing, more the way I'm trying to interpret the difference between the indie and state).

I just want my DC to love learning. I work in higher education, and by the time my students get to me they have pretty much lost that innate curiosity that they/we had as young children. The majority (not all) just want to know what they need to do to get the marks. Very few (but some) are learning to satisfy their intellectual curiosity in the subject. I wonder when this happens? Perhaps it's not at primary, but when they get to secondary or to the GCSE/A-level stage?

I may have an idealistic view of what is possible in the compulsory education system, but I just want my DC to learn how to learn and enjoy doing it.

The thing is, it's all very well talking about their natural love of learning and letting them follow their own interests, but you might well be questioning that attitude if they weren't up to speed with maths and literacy by the time they got to secondary.

Lots of children don't really love learning most of the time. Not because their school isn't good, but because learning what they need to learn simply isn't always fun and they'd rather be playing lego/watching tv/playing Pokemon Go/kicking a football/WhatsApping their mates etc depending on age. My dc are bright and academic but to say they love learning would be an exaggeration.

From what I have observed with my own children and where I am a Governor, the majority of children are happily learning in school, for most of the time. The curriculum is balanced, with some fun and games as well as the national curriculum. Schools have their own personalities and ethos and children actually sign up to this. Hard work in the morning, and slightly lighter work in the afternoon. Great fun at sports day, Y6 end of school residential, Christmas play etc all add up to the spirit in school - even the chicks that come into YR for the life cycle of an egg!

From what I have observed, some children find life at school more challenging. Nearly always these are children who do not have sufficient support at home, no culture of learning in the family, no great ambitions in life, possibly a very disrupted life, and often have low self esteem. It is little to do with the national curriculum. You are not going to have these children in most independent schools for obvious reasons. Some children find learning a huge challenge and it is extremely difficult to keep them engaged all of the time because they struggle and have to work hard to make a bit of progress. Few of these in independent schools either.

Most people acknowledge that the inspection regime (ISIS) for many independent schools is light-weight and nowhere near the standard of Ofsted. Some independent school coast shamelessly because lots of pupils get external tuition.

Lastly, I have yet to see an independent school that bows to individual parent pressure regarding ethos and teaching. Paying the piper definitely does not get you playing the tune! They are the experts and make the decisions. If a parent is unhappy, they go elsewhere. You do not negotiate your child's education in very many independent schools.

I think that by the time they get to Y10/11/12/13 a whole load of other priorities have kicked in for them (being cool/hanging out with mates/breaking free into adulthood) as well as a ton of hormones. I know teenagers from supportive homes, who went to excellent schools and still just want to grab the grades they need and move on to either uni or a job and earn cash. They dont want to be struggling in e.g. double maths.
They may fancy learning to be a mechanic or doctor and earn cash but not the maths that will help them get there. I loathed maths A level as I found it impossibly hard. I did also two sciences - loved one and thought the other was boring. However I needed those specific subjects to do my degree. Loved my degree subject. Still do.
There is a middle bit IME that is very dull compared to all the other things that teenagers would rather be doing....