Private companies running classes in state schools, DD can't go because we are poor, AIBU to complain??

[PollyPeppa]

We are below the poverty line as we have 3 DC's and DH and I are full time uni students. We worked in low paid jobs and decided enough was enough and are now hoping to get better ones after university.

DD's school had just started up after school Spanish club. We sent her along to the trial session and she loved it. We had foolishly assumed there would be a concessionary rate (as there usually is with after school clubs) but there is not as it is run by a private company so we can't afford for her to go again.

I feel this is very unfair to offer this as only children whose parents can afford to send them can go, I think it creates a divide in the 'state' system.

Polly instead of just complaining about why other children can go you can do some more productive things.

The Spanish they do i'm sure it is very basic, alphabet, songs etc. Go to Library and get some books and tapes. Go on the internet and find websites. Get a Spanish lodger and have free conversations in Spanish. Place an ad here for any Spanish mums with Spanish speaking children, and invite them for tea and 'playdate'. Ask one of the mums whos children attend that class which book or material they use.

I'm going to side with the minority opinion here - I hate the idea that there should be a two tier education system in this country, with decent education (supplemented by extras like music lessons, which were free back in the 70s/80s when I went to school) for the well off, and a basic minimal education for the proles to provide factory fodder for the next generation. We're not talking some sort of fancy class here, this is someone who wants their child to learn a language.

And I detest the fact that so many of you would consign the OP and her partner to a catch 22 situation where you tell them they're so poor they can't expect freebies and at the same time that they should not have the affrontery to try to "better themselves" by going to university. As far as I can tell, OP and her partner know that with the level of education they got (presumably from bog-standard comprehensives like the one their daughter is likely to be consigned to) they can't get a decent job, so they're trying (by taking on student loans -note, rabid free-marketeers, loans that they'll have to pay back) to get more training so they can get better jobs. But no, you'd like them all to stay where they belong, at the bottom of the heap, and make sure their daughter stays there too.

OP, can I say that I wish you and your partner the best of luck at university. I used to teach in a Russell league university and many of my best students were mature students from financially disadvantaged background. They were bright, highly motivated and worked bloody hard. And I can well believe your student loans leave you better off than a low paid job - my job as a research scientist leaves me worse off than a PhD bursary once you take into account the fact that the latter aren't taxed.

x-post halcyon

Thanks, these are good ideas I will be trying!

Complaining about them advertising through the school is daft. They are using the school building and you expect them not to make the most of having easy access to hundreds of possible children?

Very few children get to do everything they want/there parents want them to. It does children no harm to realise this and to grow up appreciating things they have.

As a child I wanted to do lots of clubs, my parents could only afford to pay for me to do one so I picked that one carefully. It hasn't done me any harm!

Y'see, PollyPeppa, if only you and DH hadn't gone to uni at the same time, you'd be able to afford these things, wouldn't you!? So it's all your own fault really.

At least it's a test of who's read the thread or not, right?

LurcioLovesFrankie - thank you, that was a fantastic post

So LurcioLovesFrankie I agree it's not fair, but do I understand you correctly that you think because the OP can't afford it noone should be able to go to the club?

"you make your own chances. "

Not if you're rich.

You don't have to bother, they're made for you.

I went to school in the 80 the only free music lesson was recorder I only learnt violin because of my gran. The education system cannot teach the basics in some parts of the country never mind MFL and music.

To be honest, if you really want to give your kids a language advantage, forget completely Modern Foreign Languages and do mandarin. 'Tis the future, I tells ya

"you expect them not to make the most of having easy access to hundreds of possible children?"

Um... YES, I fucking well do expect the school my children attend, with a duty of care to my children to prevent private companies from having "easy access" to them.

Jesus, what does education mean to people like you?

Education means a lot. It doesn't mean that I have a problem with a letter/posting coming home to inform parents of a class that MAY be suitable for the child. I really can't see an issue with that.

I am a Youth Leader. I used to lead a group that met is a school, we advertised in the school (and other local schools) for members. A handful of children were interested and went on to join. It would be exactly the same for the private company.

The private company will also be putting money into the school by using there premises.

Blimey - its offering an opportunity to learn Spanish not an invite to a crack den.

Glad to pitch in on your side, Polly.

No, I don't think that because some people can't afford it no-one should get it. I just don't buy into the idea that we should back off providing decent education for all, just because of a free-market ideology which keeps pushing the idea that choice should be available (for those who can pay) at the expense of a decent and fair system. Some people up thread have said that of course this is impossible because the country is financially in the shit, but somehow we can find the money to fight numerous wars in the middle east, and provide money for so-called free schools, which in fact involve syphoning money away from schools in areas with real social need and giving them to the likes of Toby Young. So no, I don't want to take away after school clubs from those who can (I am not advocating some sort of dog-in-the-manger politics of envy), but I'd be far happier to see my tax money going to subsidise classes for Polly's daughter than to bombing Iraq into a state of complete social collapse where we've created a power vacuum to be exploited by fundamentalist madmen.

Wow time to leave post

OK - thanks I understand your view now and must say I agree with you, but still think getting stroppy with school for letting private companies hire their facilities out of school hours is unreasonable.
It's sad the OPs school doesn't run more free clubs, but again that is down to the staff as they are not paid to run these clubs, that's why parents are not charged or only charged for materials / resources.

Extra-curricular activities are just that, things done in addition to the curriculum. Whether that be a term of language lessons, drama, ballet or football.

Not attending all or any of these activities doesn't mean education is lacking or substandard.

You decided to both give up work and study. Good for you, and I hope it will bring the rewards you both wish for.

When I was growing up, (Primary School) my dad was setting up a business, working 2 jobs to keep things going. OK so we weren't the poorest, but I do remember others having more than us. For a while.

By the time it was time to go to Secondary, things were better, and did get better and better and we lived well enough. There were still people much better off than us. We STILL couldn't go on EVERY school trip. There WERE no extra curricular lessons/activities.

What you and your DH are doing right now is building for the future, you made the decision, rightfully or wrongfully to put your family 'below the poverty line' for future advancement.

You want your kids to have the things you'd like them to have. NOW.

They don't NEED them NOW. There is always time to learn... as you and your DH are demonstrating.

WHEN your decision has started to pay off, you will be able to afford to pay for EXTRA-curricular stuff.

This time last year, i could barely make the rent. There was no way I could sign DS up for anything. Now I can afford to pay for after school stuff, swimming etc.

for whatever reason you and DH didn't study at uni when others did, but now you are going back and getting a higher education. You need to understand, as do your DC that you simply can't do it all, and do it all now. The time will come. Be patient. You do at least have HOPE of it getting better, many here, as you have seen, don't.

I don't think the lessons are expensive - £7.70 per session. I pay £30 per hour for my ds's French tutor and that's at his home without the overheads of hiring anywhere and paying insurance to boot.

Scott; what you want won't be achieved. Stand in any playground at the beginning of the autumn term and you'll hear about where the kids went (or not) on holiday. There'll be those who went abroad, those who went on holiday in UK, and those who didn't go on holiday at all. It'll be much the same with the Spanish lessons - some will go, others will be made to go and others won't want to/be able to. That's life.

The OP still hasn't answered my earlier question about her after school care. If she's paying for a CM after school, then couldn't that money one day a week be diverted to the Spanish lessons, as she wouldn't need the CM provision for that child that day.

I too do not think these sessions are expensive. They are certainly much cheaper than private tutors for languages for secondary school children, which would benefit their education.

These are primary lessons and are unlikely to give OP's DD more Spanish tuition than watching Dora or Handy Manny! It's nine lessons, not an A Level. So they are a 'nice to have', not something that will mean OP's DD will be at a disadvantage if she doesn't do it.

No-one here has slagged off parents that cannot afford ECs, in fact quite the opposite, there have been lots of ideas for things that do not cost the earth.

If we stop schools letting companies use their facilities (because not everyone can attend) then all it means is school buildings being empty from 1500 to 0800, earning nothing for the school. When the school earns nothing they cannot subsidise the necessary and fun school trips that people on low incomes cannot afford. Trips get cancelled, and the childrens education suffers.

I honestly do not believe that, if you can't afford all the 'extras', all your children will get is a minimal education of the proles to provide factory fodder. My dc go to a state comprehensive school - we can't afford to send them to private schools, nor do they have private tutoring for any subjects at all - but they, and all their schoolmates, are getting a top-quality education at a school ranked in the top ten in Scotland. For free, and available to anyone in the catchment area.

Where we lived before, we had the 11+, with selective grammar schools. Ds1 had no coaching for the 11+, and got into a selective school, thanks to the education he got for free at his state primary school. We did get ds2 coached, but his best friend's mum couldn't afford any coaching, so worked with her ds at home, and they both got places at the selective school.

Do I think that education in Britain is perfect, cannot be improved? No, I do not. I do think it does a pretty good job, across the board, and I am damn sure that most state school teachers would be insulted to be told that all they are doing is producing factory fodder. But I would absolutely agree that education is the key to ensuring every child makes the best of his or her abilities and opportunities, and the system could clearly do that better.

(Before anyone asks, I am sure that ds2 would have got into the selective school without the coaching, so we didn't 'steal' a place from another child - he was in the top 25 pupils out of 150+, so it's fair to assume he'd have got in anyway, just not as high up the list, without the external coaching).

It is not unreasonable to want children to be shielded from advertising - wasn't there a leaked government proposal recently to ban adverts aimed at under-16s? The information about after school clubs could be transmitted to parents in a way that bypasses children's pester-power.

However, it is unreasonable to expect to get something which is outside of school hours and not part of the curriculum for free just because you are poor.

How do you suggest a school gets information to parents that bypasses the children in a way that is manageable for the teaching and office staff?

OP hoped for a concessionary rate as is the norm with after school clubs, not for "part of the curriculum for free" ie paid for by hers and others taxes.

I too am flummoxed by the 'how dare the poor stop tugging their forelocks for a moment or two and have the aucadity to want to learn another language or have attend an interesting class after school' tone of this thread.