to think that expensive school trips should be banned

[Nicola10]

Year 8 pupils have, today, left for a school trip to France. Very exciting for them, yes, considering that they will be going to a theme park, as well as educational stuff. But, for the rest of the kids, whose parents could not afford it, including my twins, they have to do normal lessons.

The cost for each child is £400 each!

Ah, but it was a comprehensive, anyone could do it!

But I was delighted he declined the St Lucia cricket tour 5K - I thought that was patronising as fuck, sending a load of privileged white kids to teach West Indians how to play cricket. Although, that was 2.5 weeks, and they had to man up and build a school for a week of it, I doubt few of them had been hod carrying and plastering in their spare time. That truly would be enlightenment

What an extraordinarily ignorant comment.

School-level cricketing in the WI is multiracial; my brothers state school had players of black, white, Indian, Chinese ethnicity.

We l

We l

Paris is fucking brilliant, Peachy

You'll have a blast. It's horribly expensive, but utterly ace. Plenty of tips here on MN :)

We loved hosting visitors from abroad, we were proud of our school, secure in our cricketing heritage, and would have been grateful and delighted for help building a school.

Please don't presume to speak on behalf of schoolchildren on the basis of their colour.

Kids are pretty colour blind. Shame so many adults on here are not.

imdemarion MrsDeVere will probably say that your experience is bollocks.

Why would that be, Bacon?

Because that appears to be what she says about people's experiences if it goes against her point of view

The op was a trip to France as expensive, all trips are expensive to someone how do you as a school community decide what is expensive, I remember someone saying within reach of the ordinary family should determine the cost and the another post about a parent struggling to find £12. As a parent I try to instal what is affordable to us and as a child whose father lost his job during the thatcher years that was what was installed in me.
School fundraising is great but when a school has a large demographic of families who are struggling then they will not be able to offer the same experiences as a more affluent school meaning a family who could send the child to France but does not have enough to change catchment would be complaining that schools are not treating children fairly and giving them the chance of different opportunities.
How can you ban expensive trips without banning anything with extra cost within schools?

I work in an Ofsted outstanding high achieving secondary school. I find the stories on these threads very interesting.

We never have trips like these on here. Our students come from a wealthy and in some cases very wealthy catchment area. The reason we don't have many trips is, it takes the students away from lessons for too long, and this impacts on their learning.

No trips to New YorK, no trips to Africa, no trips to anywhere for extended periods, except a 4 day trip to Barcelona in the holidays, and a 3 day trip to Paris in the holidays. We wouldn't be allowed to take the kids out for a long length of time.

Ofsted were happy with us....

Agree with MrsDeVere - the "life's not fair" argument doesn't work at all - especially when parents try to use it to claim that getting rid of expensive school trips would be unfair for the families who can afford them.

My children's primary was a state school, albeit a very affluent one. There was a residential in Y6 and it was a huge event in the lives of the children. Every year there were a handful of children whose parents couldn't pay. Were those children excluded; no of course they weren't. The shortfall was made up quietly via decisions taken by the governors and the PTA. If a single child had been excluded due to cost I would have argued against the trip.

It's different for optional overseas trips at secondary I think but for the educational ones at dd's briefly attended state secondary, I recall a statement saying no child would be excluded due to cost.

Both schools however were able to raise thousands via PTA and separate donations though.

School trips can only go ahead if there are enough kids interested.

And 'affordable' of course is relative. So if school plans a very 'ostentatious' trip to New York, fiji, wherever. Then if not enough parents can afford it then it simply doesn't go ahead.

The fact is that these sorts of trips are very rare anyway. At our school it's more Germany for £300 which can hardly be called ostentatious. But then if I were on a low income then I probably would think that.

The point is that someone will always say that they can't afford it. I have a note on my desk now asking for £15 for a day trip to some local museum. I'm sure there will be a parent at school who will claim they can't afford that. Should school cancel it for everyone?

If the only education we give our kids is based upon what 100% of people can do then we're holding back the education of the majority because of the situations of a few.

It's all about where that line is again.

I am a trustee of a charity attached to a local comprehensive. We administer the income from invested funds. We make grants with educational aims. This can be aiding particular students or providing equipment that will be used by all, like a 3D printer. In the past we have funded the whole cost of particular trips but found that those who went were not particularly in need of financial support but knew how to play the system.
We currently fund up to 50% of the cost of trips, PE kit or music tuition, for students whose parental income would entitle the student to receive free school meals, with a limit of £275 per annum. We are conscious that some students fall just outside the criteria but would consider a direct individual approach.
Our funding allows the college to offer a larger number of trips, visits and experiences knowing they will be open to most students.

Our students are lucky but the fact that there is a ceiling to our funding means that trips are assessed by staff for value for money. We have just refused to help fund a trip to Madagascar for 10 Biology A level students as it would take too large a chunk of our income.

I wonder whether posters who think that it's unacceptable to restrict expensive school trips because some families can't afford them, would find it more acceptable to work towards a more equal society, and reduce financial equality so that no child has to suffer from the outcomes of financial inequality in any situation.

After all, "the needs of the many, must outweigh the needs of the few."

Tiny bits of stealth bragging creeping in here.

I am shocked by a 4K trip to Kenya or whatever (that was a ways up). Is this what lies ahead for me? That is just breathtakingly expensive.

I'm slightly amused by the suggestions that life is also unfair for children of wealthy parents.

I don't know why they don't offer a cheaper alternative alongside it - eg a week camping in wales learning bush crafts - and highly subsidise that trip and subsidise less for the expensive trip.

'I'm slightly amused by the suggestions that life is also unfair for children of wealthy parents.'

Do poorer parents have a monopoly on divorce, physical and mental illness, crime and abuse then?

Having money doesn't mean that life is always fair. Sure it is nice to have but it is not the cure for all ills. An abusive parent is still an abusive parent regardless of the money the family have. How is that fair on any child? Does a new Playstation or a holiday really make up for an otherwise miserable life?

Well said BBB.