To think DD's school could have managed expectations a little better.

(45 Posts)
Tallalime Tue 30-Apr-13 21:27:44

DD is in reception.

Her school are running a school trip, for reception and Yr 1, to a local castle. The day that they sent the letter home, they had obviously talked to the children about it and DD was beside herself with excitement. She has mentioned it pretty much every day since, "how many sleeps 'til the castle", "I can't WAIT to have my packed lunch at the castle", "Me and X and Y are going to be cats (I know, confused ) at the castle" etc etc. They have spoken about the trip at school several times since as well, last week they all made crowns to wear "on the bus" and painted pictures of castles and dragons.

Today, her class teacher was speaking to the parents as they dropped the children off to tell them that not enough people had paid for the trip (which is fine, I only managed to scrape the money together on Monday so fair enough) and it was quite likely going to be cancelled.

At bed time, the last words out of DD's mouth were "is it the castle tomorrow?"

If the trip is cancelled she is going to be really upset, DH and I will take her anyway, but obviously that won't be the same, as we're unlikely to 'be cats' with her there, and we won't be able to tailor the trip to appeal to 4-6yr olds the way that school trips are.

Am I unreasonable to think that the school could have held off on making a big deal out of the trip (it's another 2.5 weeks til they are supposed to go from now) when they weren't sure it was going to go ahead?

I completely understand why they may have to cancel, but I think they could have made less of an issue about going - especially given the age of the audience. I can explain to DD that there wasn't enough money to go - she will offer to pay with her money etc etc. I know if they cancel tomorrow, there will be tears, lots of them, and it will be brought up tearfully for days (she's one of those children who has to go over and over and over things that bother her). I am a little annoyed.

Thank you for explaining, Twinkle. Seems a really unfair system, though, if people can avoid paying.

RFLmum Tue 30-Apr-13 22:08:27

PSA is parent staff association. I don't think many people would deliberately try and cheat the fund - hope I'm not being naive. I think the anonymity of it is important because it protects people from any embarrassment if they can't afford it.

Myliferocks Tue 30-Apr-13 22:10:40

My DS is going on a trip with his school next month that costs £8.
The school sent out a letter asking for a voluntary contribution but also said that parents could pay in installments if they wanted too.

WhiteBirdBlueSky Tue 30-Apr-13 22:11:31

It's the parents who haven't paid you should be annoyed with, not the teachers.

McNewPants2013 Tue 30-Apr-13 22:12:46

i think the school should make sure they can afford to do the trip 100% before organising it.

then if the parents pay, this then mean the school pays less.

CloudsAndTrees Tue 30-Apr-13 22:17:48

Pants, the school has to at least begin organising it to know how much it's going to cost.

I don't believe that there are many parents that couldn't pay anything at all towards the cost of the trip. I do appreciate there may be some, but not enough to me a the trip has to be cancelled.

spottyparrot Tue 30-Apr-13 22:25:59

Yabu

I think they prob told the kids to encourage the parents to make the payment. Plus, they are warning that they might not be able to go ahead - again to encourage parents to pay. They are trying everything to get people to pay.

It must be a nightmare being a teacher organising stuff like this. You can take your dd either way so don't worry. Perhaps invite the cat friend as well to make it more fun.

freemanbatch Tue 30-Apr-13 22:28:13

if the school includes a number of children who are 'poor' then they should be funded by the pupil premium for the trip and if their parents contribute that should be a bonus. Providing children with larger life and educational experiences is what he pupil premium is for.

soverylucky Tue 30-Apr-13 22:32:03

I always think with trips that if you can afford to pay you should. If you can't afford to pay the whole lot you should pay what you can afford - be that nothing, £1 or half the cost etc.
I hope your dd gets to go to the castle. I think the teachers are probably just trying to prompt people to pay.

Floggingmolly Tue 30-Apr-13 22:32:48

They cancelled because some parents refused to pay. That sounds reasonable enough to me. You seem incredibly focussed on the school being responsible for your child's disappointment, why?

musicposy Tue 30-Apr-13 22:43:42

"I find this "voluntary" payment really odd. At the schools my DC went to, there was a price (and maybe people on free school dinners could get subsidised) and if you didn't pay, your child didn't go."

Agent this would be illegal in England. Payment for trips taken mainly in school time has to be voluntary and schools have to make it clear that it is. They are not allowed to charge more to make up for parents who might not pay, either.

"i think the school should make sure they can afford to do the trip 100% before organising it."

McNew, there is not really anything in a school budget that schools can pay for trips from. Everything is allocated and set and has to be overseen by the governing finance committee and auditors. They can't just take money out for school trips, or at least that was the case for the school I was on the governing body of. They can find for the odd non-payee but they could not afford generally to fund whole class trips.

However, the PTA could raise money for trips if they wanted.

Sadly, OP, this happens a lot. But the good news is these trips usually go ahead once the parents have been cajoled a little. There will be some who intend to pay but just haven't yet and that's probably why the teacher had to make it clear that without it, the trip couldn't happen. Almost certainly those parents will pay up now and it will be fine. Try not to fret too much.

letseatgrandma Tue 30-Apr-13 22:52:29

if the school includes a number of children who are 'poor' then they should be funded by the pupil premium for the trip and if their parents contribute that should be a bonus. Providing children with larger life and educational experiences is what he pupil premium is for

Fine, but what about trips with children who who don't qualify for FSM, but whose parents just don't want to pay? For the last school trip I organised in the Autumn term for my KS1 class, 8 parents out of 30 paid. Children in the class entitled to FSM is just under 45%. The coach cost several hundred pounds alone. We have 20 classes in our primary; what do you suggest we do? Get our PTA to pay the deficit on trips for every single class?

Not go on trips? (parents will object)
Organise trips but cancel them if not enough parents pay? (parents will object)
Use the pupil premium for trips, but using it to cover the cost of parents who don't qualify for FSM (this won't last long)

??

freemanbatch Tue 30-Apr-13 23:00:12

I wasn't saying that was the total answer letseatgrandma just that the cost of covering children who qualify for it should be provided that way. Some of those parents will pay all or some of the cost and this could be on top of the pupil premium contribution which may make more trips viable.

That's how we've agreed to use pupil premium at our school anyway.

MidniteScribbler Tue 30-Apr-13 23:09:42

I think that parents who can't afford to put even a pound a week away for the year to contribute towards the cost of the otherwise free schooling that their children receive are few and far between. Make contributions compulsory, and those who genuinely can't afford it can apply to make up the difference somehow. One school I worked at allowed parents to work at the school (gardening, or working in the library, etc) if they couldn't pay. Amazingly, everyone managed to scrape together the $10.

tethersend Tue 30-Apr-13 23:22:50

What about children of parents who refuse to pay as they simply don't care enough about their children's education, Midnite? Why should those children miss out on a part of the curriculum? This is why all contributions are voluntary.

I'd like to see schools receive enough money to be able to make trips free for all children.

UniS Tue 30-Apr-13 23:31:15

Reading things like this I'm very thankfull that DS is at a school in walking distance of a National Trust property which has "adopted" the school, most of their "trips" are to said property , walking there and back. Next week DS will be a Victorian apprentice for a day, last time it was pond dipping and bug hunting, the time before was making clay and twig models.
.

CloudsAndTrees Tue 30-Apr-13 23:39:49

That's a good idea freeman, I'd like to see more schools do that.

The pupil premium is often best used in areas other than trips. Head teachers are given the freedom to spend that money in a variety of ways because they are best placed to decide where the money needs to be targeted most.

I don't think contributions for trips should be voluntary in the first place, it should be compulsory. Schools should offer the Opportunity to pay be instalments, or to have a savings fund for parents, but however they do it, parents should have to pay. They are given child benefit, they can get tax credits. It's no surprise that children cost money and that school children go on trips. There are very few reasonable excuses for not paying a tiny contribution towards your child's education.

BlackeyedSusan Tue 30-Apr-13 23:52:49

it is when there is a trip every half term, for two, or three children, plus collect for, harvest, pink day, (cost to provide something possibly) spotty day, victorian day, easter eggs for the spring fayre, discos to pay for for two children, when all their friends are going, birthday chocolates to buy... pe kit to replace because named stuff has been lost in school...

the school do not make best use of the resources they have in the grounds. they could enrich the curriculum this way first.

oh and i would much rather give time than money. i would be happy with that.

MidniteScribbler Tue 30-Apr-13 23:56:22

What about children of parents who refuse to pay as they simply don't care enough about their children's education, Midnite? Why should those children miss out on a part of the curriculum? This is why all contributions are voluntary.

If we had that issue, I'm sure that the money would very quietly be provided, either by the school, our church (school is faith based) or even the teacher putting in the contribution themselves (I would do it if it meant the difference between a child attending or not attending), but we don't have 'voluntary' contributions for the very reason that is being mentioned in this thread - parents don't see why they should have to pay if others don't. Our state based schools have an annual voluntary contributions and I know parents on over $150k who refuse to pay it "because I pay tax so why should I pay anything". At our school, you either pay or you find a way to make it up to the school.

CloudsAndTrees Tue 30-Apr-13 23:58:20

I'd be delighted if my children's schools arranged trips every half term!

It's not as if these things don't benefit the children, teachers don't organise trips for no reason.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now