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!!!

Silly illogical arguements again.

No one is saying you should have to go.
No one is saying unless everyone can go no one goes.
No one is saying there will be other reasons, apart from financial, that prevent some children from going.

The issue here is about children and parents who would like them to go but are prevented from doing so because of financial constraints.

"No one is saying unless everyone can go no one goes."

If you say a trip is not accessible to all it shouldn't be offered is the same statement, because school budgets are such that these holidays cannot be subsidised, therefore they shouldn't be offered therefore no one goes. That's what it amounts to.

No one is saying unless everyone can go no one goes

Yes they are! That's how the thread has got to 22 pages long!

The issue here is about children and parents who would like them to go but are prevented from doing so because of financial constraints

No, that is one of the issues. Those children are not the only children that deserve their needs to be considerd by their school. The school cannot and should not revolve around one group of children only.

This is just another one of those threads where people stamp feet and scream "because I can't do it/have it/afford it/care about it/agree with it then YOU can't have it either"

Communist Cuba tried that, the only way out ion an open rowing boat if you dared

well said robynridinghood.

We're on a limited income and there are trips organised by the school that DS can't go on. He understands that.

On the other hand, there are trips we can afford for him to join, but could never afford for the whole family. It's DS's chance to experience something he would otherwise miss out on.

as a family we could never afford to all go skiing together., this gives my child the opportunity to go with the tiny amounts of money i have put away every month for the last 12 years.

Er, actually Robyn I can afford it and I have a child in private school and we go on multiple foreign holidays a year. I'm hardly a communist, as you so cleverly suggest.

I just believe in the state school system all children should have equal educational opportunities regardless of parental income.

I'm frankly surprised that's such a radical idea.

In the private sector feel free to buy your children tutors, ponies, foreign exchanges, lovely gap years, specialist music/sport coaching, placeionic exclusive drama schools, or whatever you think will give them a headstart. You'll probably see me there.

Just not at school unless everyone who wants to partake can regardless of their parents income.

Proviso- there will some children who don't want to, which is fine, and some children who can't for other reasons which may/may not be fine depending on the myriad of reasons that could be- I hope that prevents an onslaught of any more examples of ridiculous scenarios that could follow if schools tried to ensure finances were nt a barrier to joining in.

We'd all be escaping the communists in boats dontcha know.

I find your position truly baffling OhSiena

It's perfectly ok to send your child to private school and pay for as much extra curricular stuff as you like but not ok to send your child to state school and pay for the odd extra curricular activity that might not be affordable to 1% of the students

I really dont get this idea that people need to have experienced exotic holidays by the time they are 15. That is truly daft.

It isnt Brigadoon. These places will all still exist when the child has grown up and can pay for their own travel. Also, they will probably appreciate these places far better when they do them under their own steam rather than chaperoned by teachers.

I do wonder if parents realise how lacking in content some of these trips are. My DD brought home detail for the A level French trip. The mornings would be spent in a language school, for the rest of the time the students would be free to get into trouble amuse themselves.

DS's army cadet trips pack in far more content making the trips worth every second.

We got 10 days notice to pay deposit on school trip of £200 ( that was just deposit )this was start of summer holidays along with it saying this will be very important to your child's gcse course .
The next £200 due week went back then another £200 November
apparently was very late as they was not sure if running the trip

Guess who ds could not go I called asked them if I could pay £50 or £100 deposit as it was si short answer was no

It's fine to pay for extra curricular stuff to advantage your child if you can afford it- to be against that would be bordering on socialism, if not communism, and I'm neither.

But within the state sector their should be a presumption of equal opportunities for all offered by the system- whether education or health- revardless of income- and if you want to buy yourself or your child some extras which give you an advantage and you can afford it you have the choice to do so within the private sector.

And I don't just mean private school, I mean all those additional little things like swimming and ballet lessons that some parents chose to pay for on top of activities offered by school.

Within the state sector the presumption should be equal opportrunity for all regardless of income.

not sure why that baffles you? I understand you may disagree with itbut I think it's quite a clear position.

Siena - so you can affoerd to buy enhanced opportunities for your child but think the rest of us should conform to one bottom feeding pit? Aspiration is only for the elite, eh? Bolinger socialism.

Why are schools in the holiday business anyway??

I'd like them to start getting involved in organising a scheme where I could get my garden landscaped for a discount. It would benefit my DCs cos they spend loads of time in the garden and I don't really care if others haven't got gardens or can't afford landscaping for a crochet lawn and organic veg patch cos I have and I can. Schools should consider those of us with big gardens and loads of dosh as much as the poor people.

I'd be happy for the teachers to organise this in their spare time, it would save me money and the hassle of organising it myself.

Read my posts Robyn.

Im not a socialist and I don't like champagne.

You're missing the fact that some people can only afford to pay for school led opportunities and not private. School trips/music lessons are normally cheaper than any comparable private offering.

The worst attitude on here seems to be - if you can afford private education you can afford the extras, but if you can't afford private education you use state and level down with no opportunities for extras because not everyone can afford it! That logic baffles me completely.
I chose my DCs state school mainly because of the extras. I don't want all opportunities denied because some can't afford it. Many people who use state education can afford private - they just prefer a good state school - one that offers the same things as a private school.
I was determined that mine would be able to go on trips if they wished and started saving from birth. Between them they have been to Canada, Russia, French exchange, Iceland, French battle fields, outdoor activity centres and more. We have equally turned down some, Peru was one. They can't do them all.

I agree RobynRH- the attitude stinks. Enhanced opportunities for the few and the rest of should know our place and stay there! (How dare we want our DC to go skiing from a state school - don't we know it is only for those that are privately educated).

Yes and some people cannot pay for the school ones even.

The argument you all seem to be making is that it's just tough luck if your parents can't afford the school trips cos you can and you want your kids to have the opportunity.

Well, the same argument applies if it's the private sector, it's tough luck for your child if you can't afford that.

When it comes to the private sector, I do agree with the tough luck argument, as to abolish the private sector and that choice would be radically socialist, which I'm don't agree with. I think we have to live with that unfairness.

I don't agree with the 'tough luck you can't go' argument in the state schools because there I believe that parental income should not be a factor to the opportunities you a given at school. The small lefty part of me that remains, believes that every child at the local comprehensive should be given the same opportunity to excell and reach their potential and succeed regardless of their parents income. IN SCHOOL. Radical eh??

Outside school some kids have wealthy parents, it's unfair and they can buy advanteg, but I'm don't propose doing away with it. I think we have to live with that.

And for those of you not reading my posts properly, I'll reiterate: I also have a child at a state comprehensive.

Siena - you may not be a socialist but you expect the rest of us to be? That appears to be the gist of your argument. Equality for all, no opportunities mind you, but total equality for all in the state sector but you can buy what you like outside of it. Robyn has it completely right, you are condemning everybody else to the lowest common denominator, i.e. if the poorest person can't afford it, the rest of us shouldn't have a crack at it either. Possibly the worst example of 'bugger you Jack' thinking I have seen in a long time!!

GnomedePlume, completely agree with your last post.

Having used state and private, I would choose state every time. No accountability in the private sector. At least with the state education, it is transparent. But I admit I have a very jaundiced opinion of private education due to personal experience.

Just so I know I have a handle on some opinions: lets assume a level playing field here. Class of 30 children, trip to (a) Alton Towers as an end of term reward. Mildreds parents don't like theme parks and think they are dangerous because they read far too many sensationalist news stories and refuse permission for Mildred to go.

Am I right in assuming there is a hard core opinion that the other 29 cannot go because of Mildreds parents beliefs?

Or (B) again a level playing field of affordability. Trip to London to see the Crown Jewels. Mildreds parens are hypothetically actively politically engaged in republicanism. Mildred cannot go. So the other 29 cannot go because Mildred will be left out?

Poor Mildred! She should divorce her parents

I choose to send mine to a state comprehensive but I am expecting them to have all the opportunities of the private sector - not to be told 'this is only on offer if you pay for the teaching and if you are state you are condemned to the lowest common denominator.'
I think there would be a revolution if 93% of the population were relegated to a school and not offered any extras 'because not everyone can afford it'.