To Be P***** Off at yet another expensive school trip

[meah]

Hi, my ds has is now starting yr 9 & dd yr 8, in yr 7 a school trip was offered but cost was in the £300s (i forget exactly how much) being so expensive i couldn't afford it and it left both kids gutted when well over half of the kids in their yr got to go. ive just recieved another school trip email (not sure which yr not that it matters) offering a ski holiday trip, abroad for 6 nights for £680. which would be fantastic if i where loaded!! Why cant schools offer school trips that are affordable to all like they're supposed to instead of making those whos parents cant afford it feel left out!!!

Aboutlastnight. Exactly!

So schools should only offer treats that everyone can afford?

Who decides what constitutes affordable then?

Because for my parents it would've been about £5.

Outraged, if you really need it to be explained..

Getting into a team/choir etc depends mainly on a child's own abilities.

Going on an expensive school trip depends mainly on a parents income

Yes, obviously. But that doesn't really answer the question I asked.

If this is all about protecting children from disappointment, then why is one type of disappointment ok but not the other?

It's not about protecting them from disappointment. It's about the school providing equal opportunities.

Thank you for the apology Hully, it's all good

The name is genuine! I may come across on this thread as if I can afford whatever I want whenever I want it, but believe me, I really can't. I am one of few parents at my dcs primary that has chosen to pay for the Y6 residential in instalments, and I already have the savings fund going for secondary school trips.

School trips are often the only way a child will get to go abroad especially for lower income families because the cost for one child on a group trip is always going to be less than booking privately for the whole family. I am grateful they exist precisely because I couldn't afford for us all to go at once.

They are providing equal opportunities. Everyone has the opportunity to go.

It's no different to them offering a maths GSCE and child X having more chance of achieving it than child Y because child Ys parents don't give any educational support.

Life is full of disappointment.

You pick and choose your trips.

I knew one trip would be particularly expensive in Y11 so I had 4 years to budget for it. Consequently DS did not express desire to go to Skiing in Utah in Y7, Germany in Y8, San Francisco and Fiji in Y9, Nepal and the Himalayas in Y10. We also had to forego the South Africa trip which was a sports tour.

He wanted and aimed for his Y11 trip. It was horrendously expensive but I had 234 weeks (4.5 years) to plan and save for it. Unfortunately he's just asked to go on a field trip for his A level Geography to West Africa. Not compulsory but useful. But I'll move heaven and earth for him to go. He wont get the St Lucia trip in Y13.

Selective state school.

Fucking hell, those are one set of seriously outrageous trips though

It isn't NORMAL for 13 year old kids to go to Fiji just for fun

And that kind of consumerist tourism needs to be discouraged for all sorts of ethical and environmental reasons.

The term equal opportunities has a particular meaning and absolutely does not mean the same as offering the same thing to all.

If you offered a group of people, including a person in a wheelchair, a bog standard walking holiday and the person in the wheelchair refused because there is no way they could access it, would that be okay as long as you'd offered it??

It isn't NORMAL for 13 year old kids to go to Fiji just for fun

No, not normal. But if you could afford for your DC to go... Wouldn't you think it was a fantastic thing for them to do?

Blardy hell Robyn - when I was at school there was a week in Scotland every year and a trip skiing in Sixth Form an an alternative trip doing the Coast to Coast walk - which was the one I could afford opted for.

I think the San Francisco and Fiji trip sounds brilliant.

I doubt DC would be able to go, but good luck to anyone who can manage it.

Outraged - I guess if you approach everything with an individualist, market ethos the yes providing everyone an 'opportunity' regardless of whether they can access it, makes sense.

I was brought up differently. And my children, I hope, will have different values to those.

No, I think over-inflated, inappropriate and a bit unethical (don't agree with unnecessary flying really). And that kind of experience is way more valuable when you're a fair bit older and can process it properly.

Fiji was the rugby tour, it took in a bit of NZ too, cant remember what the San Francisco bit of it was for music festival I think.

South Africa was another rugby tour, combined with modern history tour.

Personally I move heaven and earth to facilitate my childs education and experiences. He'll never be able to afford it once he has the mill stone of tution fees, mortgage/rent round his neck. Life is for the living.

He does appreciate the trips, he asks and expects nothing for birthdays or Christmas when he has something he wants in the offing. He's saving for his West Africa trip himself, he knows thevalue of money and that we wont have a family holiday or break for the 8th year running. He doesn't expect anything. That's why I give him as much as I can.

I really wanted him to go to Nepal but he knew it would probably be at the expense of the other trip he wanted in Y11 (it wouldn't, because I would have sold everything to pay for it) so he said he didnt want to go.

I agree Meryl, I dont get this need to send teenagers on expensive and exotic trips. If you go to Fiji when you are 14 what the hell do you have to look forward to when you are a grown-up?

I would move heaven and earth to get my children the things they need to live a decent and happy life.

A trip to Fiji at age 13 does not fulfil that criteria, anyway you look at it.

It is simply over-indulgent.

I thought school was supposed to be the place where making one person look so much more privileged than another for the sake of it was off the agenda.

Uniform worn to keep the focus on schoolwork and not on who has the latest fashion etc, isn't that the thinking? And yet the sky's the limit with the holidays they offer.

It'd be a real shame if children from OK-ish off, but not loaded, and children from low-income families but with the means (grandparents, some extra hours at work, ability to put a few pounds aside a week) to afford a child one opportunity in a school career to do something different, missed out on these trips.

It's like the whole race to the bottom thing: my pension is shit, therefore so should the Armed Forces'.

How about extending opportunities as far as possible?

fwiw I never went on a Big Trip - there's no way we could have afforded it. Nor have I pulled myself up by the bootstraps or any such caca - I am a bit better off though than my own mother was, and hope to allow him to do a few of the things I couldn't.

Excellent post Jenai

I don't disagree Jenai. I thi

I am not suggesting no trips whatsoever is the answer to the problem. What about the school fundraising, as suggested upthread, to meet the costs of school trips, destinations which are chosen so as to be more affordable?

Everyone then gets a school trip.

I don't disagree Jenai. I think extending opportunities as far as possible is deffo the way to go.

I am not suggesting no trips whatsoever is the answer to the problem. What about the school fundraising, as suggested upthread, to meet the costs of school trips, destinations which are chosen so as to be more affordable?

Everyone then gets a school trip. Opportunity extended to all.

Whoops, must have posted first one in error. Sorry.

Who pays most of the money when schools fundraise though? It's generally the parents!

Fucks sake can't they just provide school trips that all can go on. Kids don't have to go on expensive foreign holidays to have fun and learn.

And if you're that arsed about your kid going skiing or whathaveyou put them into a club!