to be annoyed at school for giving DS 'a mark' if we have walked to school and him feeling bad if he gets a dot

[majorydoors]

DS is in reception and has said he gets another mark (other than register) if he has walked to school. He told me today he got a dot and said it as if it was a bad thing (we used the car this AM)

I asked him why they are doing these marks and he said it is 'because of exercise'. I dont know how this has been put across to the children but DS seems to think it is bad if we use the car to go partway, as I do if I am going somewhere instead of doubling back to collect it.

So I said to DS if anyone asks you explain what exercise you do, and that he wasnt in any sort of trouble.

The school have not informed us that this data is being collected. They did write home about the measuring height and weight last week, is it related?

I feel a annoyed as if I want to use my car to goto shops/gym/work I bloody well will and not have DS feel its wrong. We are an active family and feel like shoving this in their faces - or on their chart!

"How I get my children to their statutorily required school is my business and mine alone. If the government wants to provide school buses, better public transport and so on, fantastic. But to make my child feel bad because her mum drives to her work every morning. Not in my household."
onetoomanycornettos

that's what i'm saying - its nothing to do with the school

Why do primary schools seem to go in for this sort of star chart stuff/pestering of parents, but not secondaries? Does some magic happen over that summer holiday between year 6 and 7?

YANBU- I get really antsy about the school trying to use my dd's as a lever to try to change me.

Like others here, I walk. We have 2 dogs who get a good hour a day through woodland, and my children have walked it with me since they could get out of the pram. At weekends we walk, swim, they play outside. But, terrible mother that I am, I work. To walk the kids would be impossible. Luckily mine get a school bus (though for how much longer is anyone's guess..)

dd2 wouldn't care, but dd1 is always desperate to "do well" in all things like this, and thinks the teachers are shining oracles and know much better than I do. For example last week she had an outing with the school, and the teacher told them they had to bring a snack in a poly bag, with a label on it. Since dd was only getting 1 item, I refused to put it in a bag, although I labelled it. dd got quite hysterical with me, "but it has to be in a bag!!" (and this from the same school which preaches endlessly about recycling!)

(Some) kids take everything the teacher/ school says as gospel, and get upset if they think they are somehow letting their teacher down (through the fault of their nasty old mum) I don't think it's fair to use children to pester their parents. You want to stop parents driving to the school if possible, speak to the parents. Speak to me- don't use my poor dd as a pawn

Bravo to Custardo.

I always walk to school but I fail to see why other children should get it in the neck because their parents drive them.

Teachers should stick to teaching and parents can do the parenting. I don't blame teachers for this just successive governments who seem to think we would like our children brainwashed with their latest "initiative".

But it is to do with the school

It has a direct effect, both on the children's behaviour and on the schools' relationships with their local communities.

It also has an effect on school budgets, on staff time etc. - staff have to come out and arbitrate between sweary parents, kids have to be escorted into school away from congestion by teaching assistants. Car parks cost money, whcih comes out of school budgets, to maintain.

And school lunchboxes do affect schools as well. If kids are hungry or high on sugar, that has a direct effect on their learning and their behaviour and therefore on the learning of the other kids.

I'm not arguing that schools do these things particularly well - some schools are fantastic at them, some are piss poor. But the idea that they shouldn't be done at all, would actually be a real disaster for some areas. The only reason the congestion is being contained at the moment, is because the schools have managed to cut traffic by 10-20% in some cases. If they hadn't done that, the problems would be even worse.

I think this is harsh on the kids whos parents haven't got time to do the walking as they're dropping off kids on their way to work.

Might be fairer to give the parents a chart instead of the kids as mine never had a choice in how they got to school

DS school do 'Walk to school'. Seems to last a month though!!! They do get given a card which can be signed if they do other walking.

So for DS who gets car to breakfast club and then mini bus to school and reverse homeward bound he could still get his badge which he lost before it even got home

really sorry about the sut and paste but i want to answer each point in turn
'It has a direct effect, both on the children's behaviour and on the schools' relationships with their local communities.'

on the childrens behaviour how? id say making a child feel undervalued becuase mum dropped him off on the way to work is really rubbish. other than that i don;t see how dropping a kid off in a car affects behaviour.

the relationship with the local community i can see - but then that is for the local community to police - not the schools. if they complain to the school the schools have to tell them to contact the council and get a parking ticket person out - or contact their mp or councillor

'It also has an effect on school budgets, on staff time etc. - staff have to come out and arbitrate between sweary parents, kids have to be escorted into school away from congestion by teaching assistants. Car parks cost money, whcih comes out of school budgets, to maintain.'

i dont see many schools with car parks these days but i would say that for the newer ones that do - the maintenance costs would be nothing in comparison to the time you are arguing that the school staff resources are taking at the moment. - As to the affect on staff time and arguing parents - if the schools just oped out of this as their responsability for the local highways around their school - WHICH IT IS NOT - then they wouldnt have to do this.

And school lunchboxes do affect schools as well. If kids are hungry or high on sugar, that has a direct effect on their learning and their behaviour and therefore on the learning of the other kids.

yes yes i agree - but only twat for brains parents give their kids nothing but sugar. a penguin bar, a butty and a piece of fruit is not a demon going to make - kids have been told that cereal bars are being thrown in the bin fgs - the whole thing is ridiculous and IS A WASTE of time and resources.

and if the govt really wanted to invest in parenting they would invest in parents and proper parenting lessons rather than taking valuable time and resources away from teachers.

'. The only reason the congestion is being contained at the moment, is because the schools have managed to cut traffic by 10-20% in some cases. If they hadn't done that, the problems would be even worse.'

but the schools now parent by proxy, recycle by proxy and regulate the highways by proxy. the whole thing is ridiculous. the local council and highways department need to regulate these things and its letting them off the hook by doing it for them

i mean we wouldn't parent this way would we?

you wouldn't tie your kids shoelaces until he was 17 becuase its easier than getting himself to do it - so i don't see why we need to run the whole country through schools

highways need to do their bit

parents need to do their bit

schools need to teach my children academia so they are productive qualified useful members of society so that academic knowledge coupled with my highly excellent parenting and socialising skills will a productive member of society make

There are so many reasons to encourage children to walk to school. Not just exercise. Less pollution so better for the children - and other adults. Less congestion in the streets which were often old and not designed with cars in mind. Less pissed off residents when parents park in stupid places.

At my DS's school the road to the school only goes to the school and church, then ends. Yet still there are loads of parents (who live in the village) who drive up this road which is only one car width. Only to have to reverse back if they meet another car ( half the time mounting the curb ) . Then once at the top they deposit their DC's within 100 foot of the gate, only to have to do a 3 point turn in a narrow road to go back to their houses/farms/estates.
I walk and beat them all home then go off to work. It makes my blood boil. It's just laziness. Their kids arn't the ones that will get hit by their cars.

Most kids don't feel bad about themselves because they don't get a sticker.

There is very good evidence that exercise before school, affects behaviour positively.

I agree that the govt. should invest in parenting, but hwo much more outrage would there be about that? People resent being told that they should give their kids a square meal at lunchtime, how receptive are they going to be to parenting classes?

As for the highways, the policing etc. - it's all money. It's all priorities. Unless people want to pay massive, massive coucil taxes (which they don't) the level of policing you would need to keep parents under control, is simply unbelievalbe.

As an example, in one area I work with, there are 70 schools. There are 10 PCSO's for the area. The government are about to slash the police force budgets.

Policing just ain't gonna happen. If it were to happen to the extent that is needed, every family in the land would have a member in the police force !

And highways budgets are being slashed. Cambridgeshire has stopped funding its speed cameras, so more people are going to die on the roads in that county. Even when budgets were good, highways enginners cannot engineer out fuckwittery and selfishness. Or they can't cut down half a farm and put a car park in...

Long term, the only solution is to reduce reliance on the car. It really is. We cannot keep building roads and concreting over fields and then not being able to police the rules. Schools, businesses, highways, parents, police, all have to do their bit. How well they do it, of course, is very much an individual thing. Some do it better than others.

we drive to school, but walk further (just) than one of dd's friends. we park one house further up the road than she lives plus dd has the walk up/down stairs to get to to/ from the flat. I would be cross if dd didn't get a mark and this child did. (neither childs fault after all)

custardo she speak sense.

Going through the whole class giving out stickers for walking to school is a big fat waste of school time.

Fuck, the School Travel Plan, we have no public transport, the school bus takes 40 minutes to do a 10 minute journey and I'd have to pay for it (house 2.9 miles from school, but would be stuck on the bus for about 10 miles) Not safe to walk, single track lanes most of the way. No car-park at school due to councils interpretation of School Travel Plan. No car park in village (which would be a nice walk to school) due to village politics and the same useless council.
Result lots of cars up at school and lots of grumpy residents in the surrounding houses.

oh btw whoever asked, no I'm not a teacher

I work full time. I love half terms and holidays as I get in in HALF the time. Seriously, the amount of extra traffic in term time is a nightmare - I can't believe the amount of people who must drive their children to school. Oh, and before I get called a hypocrite, I am a recent car driver and am required to use my car for work. Before that I always used public transport and when my son was at school he always walked / got the bus.

Yes, Euphemia, all pointless non-core activities which haven't made us, or our children, thinner in the slightest, we are all fatter than ever.

What galls me is then you drive home through the rush hour traffic to find a letter asking you to do homework every night plus reading (which I do do). The reason: not enough time in the school day.

I do think schools have got their priorities wrong with 5 and 6 year olds when there isn't enough time for one-to-one reading, but there is enough time for monitoring snacks, asking children how they got to school and generally interfering in the private lives of their parents rather than getting on with the core business of teaching academic skills. If I wanted them indoctrinated, I'd have sent them to a church school

I agree that there has been far too much reliance on placing the burden of stopping all society's ills on school, without the funding and training to actually enable schools to tackle that task.

But I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to look to schools as the logical place where children spend most of their time, to influence behaviour and attitudes. It's no good saying it's up to parents; if we left it up to parents, lots of them would put donuts and crisps in their kids lunches and nthig else. It makes sense to target the next generation of citizens, in the place where they spend most of their time and are receptive to messages.

I don't understand why schools should have an opt out on doing their bit to re-inforce socially necessary messages, any more than anyone else.

I just have an objection to the very heavy handed approach and to the lack of funding and training which should go along with that.

But again, HerBeX, there are plenty of social level intiatives the government could take to solve eating at school, starting with school dinners for all, and removing all vending machines/adverts which creep in. I am personally against advertising crap monolithic food providers who sell fatty disgusting quality food that would be rejected by most of Europe in schools (e.g. Tesco vouchers!)

This government wants the individual to take responsibility, but actually fears they won't do what they want, so then tries to intervene again at the individual level through poor school-teachers who must dread having to enact some of these brilliant schemes.

Is there any evidence that nagging children and parents about Penguin biscuits is changing behaviour or attitudes? The evaluation of the free School Fruit initiative showed that whilst everyone loved eating the fruit, it made sod all difference to fruit eating levels in families out of school.

It's just constant low level state interference, in my opinion, how did you get to school, what do your children eat, it goes right over the heads of the truly poor and disadvantaged (who do what they do to get by) and just annoys the hell out of the rest of us.

"I don't understand why schools should have an opt out on doing their bit to re-inforce socially necessary messages, any more than anyone else."

Who else has an obligation to re-inforce socially necessary messages (although I don't like that term)? Who else are you referring to?

Why are secondary schools able to 'opt out' of this stuff?

And I think primary schools should be able to opt out of a lot of it on the basis that their priority is to teach numeracy and literacy skills.