To think school trips are too expensive?

[lucyhoward]

My son has just come home from school for half term with a letter about a school watersports trip in France next summer. Whilst I am sure it will be great fun I am not sure whether we can justify the £500 price tag. By the time we have sent spending money and paid for any kit they will need we will be lucky to have change from £600 I imagine.

Is this even something schools should be getting involved in? Surely holidays should be a family thing?

What purpose school uniform fills (if it fills any) is a whole different debate.

I didnt say that using school uniform to make sure that everyone looks the same whatever their wealth was its sole claimed purpose. Only that if a school uses that claim even amongst others and yet offers trips which are only affordable for some then it is being hypocritical.

I am so glad I live in my world and not the one frequented by some posters on here.

lifts drawbridge

Children attending schools with a large proportion of children from low income families should be permitted to go to the local industrial heritage museum (£5 tops).

I think that's the gist.

I didnt say that using school uniform to make sure that everyone looks the same whatever their wealth was its sole claimed purpose. Only that if a school uses that claim even amongst others and yet offers trips which are only affordable for some then it is being hypocritical

So if schools removed the uniform requirement then you would have no issue with them offering a week’s holiday to France or Japan or wherever?

I somehow don’t think the answer to that will be a yes, as IME even in schools with no uniform requirement you still have the same group of people saying school trips should be banned on the grounds of equality, or offered to all for free.

And no doubt, if they did scrap uniforms, your next gripe would be about allowing kids to wear branded clothing would make the kids with the non-branded clothing feel inferior, because that is exactly what happens here where there is no such thing as school uniforms.

Some people will always find something to moan about with schools making them feel their nose is being rubbed in their lack of money.

As an aside, uniform doesn't totally mask inequalities in wealth. There are a host of other ways that one could get an inkling from appearances that some children are from families that are seriously struggling, even though they're wearing a polo shirt, school sweatshirt and black shoes.

So if schools removed the uniform requirement then you would have no issue with them offering a week’s holiday to France or Japan or wherever?

No, they just wouldnt be being hypocritical.

I dont believe that schools should be operating as a travel agent offering holiday trips. I dont believe that schools should offer trips which leave students unable to attend because they cant afford them.

I dont think that it matters that the student cant afford the trip because of parental spending choices or that parents simply have no money. I dont believe that a school should be offering these trips.

If the trip is necessary for the curriculum then it should be available to all. If it isnt necessary then it shouldnt be offered.

We already have a two tier education system of state and private. I do not believe that state should be sub-divided on the basis of affords and afford nots.

This is my personal belief and I am happy to argue for it here and if the opportunity arises at my DCs' school.

clam, that is true. I also dont agree with school uniform but that is a whole other thread.

It's a difficult issue because there is a large 'grey area' middle ground.

At one end of the spectrum, there are day trips with clearly-defined curriculum goals - to a science museum, to a historical site, to a play that the class is studying, for example. In schools have worked in with many pupil premium children, 2 separate letters have been sent for these - PP children get the 'we are going on this trip, it is free' one, other children get the 'we are going on this trip, optional contribtion is x to cover transport and admission, if too many people don't contribute we can't go' one.

At the other end of the spectrum are holidays with no educational purpose and widely available elsewhere e.g. skiing trips.

In the middle, there are trips that have some curriculum relevance but the curriculum can be studied without them OR there are alternative ways of deluivering the same curriculum - e.g. PGL trips to cover 'outdoor and adventurous' parts of PE curriculum (although these can be done in / arund school or at outdoor education / scout centres at much lower cost); sports / concert tours (could be done in the UK or as a series of long day trips but are often abroad); trips to countries relevant to MFL (all language learning could be done in school...or what happened to the old-fashioned French exchange?).

I don't think that the 'middle ground' ones are 'wrong', but they should be arranged according to certain principles:

• Minimum cost for maximum EDUCATIONAL benefit
• Reason for choosing expensive options / destinations made clear, and if possible discussed with parents beforehand (a 'we could do x but would like to do y, what is your view?' meeting)
• No educational disbenefit, relative to a normal teaching day, to children who are left behind - so they do not get the benefit friom the trip, but they don't suffer doubly because of lack of key staff, for example.
• Long lead times
• Clear signposts to all sources of funding e.g. locally there is a trust that can be applied to in cases of hardship, but it is not widely known.
• Fundraising activities by those going on the trip to subsidise the cost for all (e.g. the sports team could play a benefit match or hold a coaching day for younger children, the concert party could give concerts locally to raise mone before going abroad)

OK, some of these require even more preparation and planning by teachers - but I do think if anyone planning the trip had to really work through e.g. fundrasing, alternatives, pre-meeting with parents etc then there would be fewer 'spurious' trips.

I do not believe that state should be sub-divided on the basis of affords and afford nots

Neither do I, for the basic things like standard education. That should be, and is, open and free to all. But the hundreds of thousands of kids who enjoy and benefit from school trips, would you really deny them that just because the education system can’t foot the bill for all? For me it’s no different than getting necessary surgeries on the NHS, yet having to pay for things like boob jobs.

Although I never got to go on any school trip further away than the local zoo, I am so grateful that I got to witness those types of opportunities and chances open to people with parents more responsible than mine. Seeing those kids go off on the coach to France made me realise that foreign travel wasn’t just the preserve of the rich, if my best pal’s builder dad could scrimp and save to send her, then I had a rough idea that I didn’t have to be a professor of physics to do it in the future either. I just needed a half decent education which would enable me to get a half decent job, which in turn would enable me to go all the way to France too.

I would have hated to grow up in a society that would have catered to “lowest common denominators” like I myself was then. I would also have felt patronized if our school had adopted a no trips policy, because I would have known it was the fault of those like me. And even if my parents had been genuinely poor, as opposed to just reckless and selfish, I still wouldn’t have wanted other kids to be deprived the chance of a once in a lifetime school trip, just because my parents couldn’t afford it.

Would the lesson of “not everyone can afford fancy holidays” been any easier to learn at 16 than at 12? And possibly, if not probably, if I had only learned that lesson at 16 it might have been way too late for me to work hard at my O & A levels.

I will be eternally grateful that I attended a fairly socially diverse school and got to see, in a compassionate and kind way, “how the other half lived” with a bit of hard work and frugal living. It broadened my horizons at a young age and gave me something to shoot for, and allowed me to see the vicious circle of self-induced poverty that my own family have been in for generations.

Don't pay for it, that's a crazy amount of money to do something if France which you could do in England cheaper

The problem is schools can't negotiate for bargains and I'm pretty sure IIRC a teacher telling me there were approved places they could stay. So I'm sure they get ripped off. Our school did a trip to Auschwitz for £900 for three days, dd really wanted to go but was happy with the compromise we made which was the whole family going (4 of us) renting an apartment, and it worked out cheaper. Also, I felt if she had got upset, it was better she was with us so she didnt have to put a brave face on it.

The problem is schools can't negotiate for bargains and I'm pretty sure IIRC a teacher telling me there were approved places they could stay. So I'm sure they get ripped off. Our school did a trip to Auschwitz for £900 for three days, dd really wanted to go but was happy with the compromise we made which was the whole family going (4 of us) renting an apartment, and it worked out cheaper. Also, I felt if she had got upset, it was better she was with us so she didnt have to put a brave face on it.

teacherwith2kids I think that what you are proposing is a good compromise. I do recognise that my stance on this is diametrically opposed to MeltedLolly's.

Some of the problem is that the genie is already out of the bottle. Somehow over the years regular trips have become the norm. It probably wouldnt be possible to stop trips (even though I would prefer that).

You could just gently explain that you may not have the means of going onto the trip which you shouldnot be embarassed about on some school websites they list the trips in advance so maybe you could ask about future school trips or talk with the teacher organising:)
Hope it helped:p

I have a teen daughter and a set of twins one boy and one girl and we are moving to the Upper East Side in 3 months, they are all gping to go to this private school&there will be lots of school trips. A child is individual, so maybe if your son does not really mind perhaps if you have a friend taking their son/daughter on holiday during 1/2 term or break (I can not get used to the american ways) maybe you could buy for your son to go on holiday with his friend?
All of my children are adopted though I love+cherish them as if they are my own, when I adopted the twins they were 2 years 2 weeks and 2 days old, my teen daughter was 10 and I could not go on holiday because of my job but I paid a couple of thousand for my daughter to go to America (ironic how 3 yeara later we are moving their!) With her friend and her parents. Obviously, I trusted them with her (they're her godparents), she came back so happy and excited!!! So maybe arranging a trip with some other parents and your children, could be a idea?

Hope this helped:)

Mine had 1 trip paid for, one we were prepared to go halves on. Two did both trips, two decided they didn't want to save their money to pay their half. My reply, if its not worth your money its not worth mine. One went on three trips, got a job and paid for 3rd herself.

I see this is an old thread bumped up - but have this dilemma at the moment. Dd has SEN and I don't feel the school are particularly understanding of her needs, so am really not keen on her going. That certainly doesn't make me feel that no one should go though! Ours is during term time, and the others get taken out on day trips apparently (presumably at the parents expense too) to adventure golf, pizza lunch, science museum etc. So she won't feel she is missing out.