School trips which are only affordable to a minority of parents - just why?

[Mintyy]

Why do schools do this?

If someone can explain, I am all ears!

I am talking about non-leafy state comprehensive schools here.

" Again, the comprehensive system has to cater for everyone, not just those who qualify for PP or those just above the threshold. "

how many people could afford an American skiing trip at nearly 3 grand a pop, for two (twins_?
If schools are supposed to be 'comprehensive' then there should be similar opportunities offered to all, not just the financially elite.

Lisbeth,

It's difficult, isn't it - in one sense, comprehensive DOESN'T mean 'the same for everyone'. In the same cohort in the same school you may have some children having very very different experiences - from Further Maths GCSE to BTEC Childcare, and in general we accept that, because it is a matter of the school providing 'something for everyone' and each child following a 'best fit route for them'.

However, when the determiner is not anything intrinsic to the child - interest, aptitude - but the economic situation of their parents, I, like you, feel more uncomfortable.

I would prefer a model, as is much more common in primary schools, in which all trips work on the assumption that everyone goes (because they are necessary for the curriculum) and there is support available for those who cannot pay. Then, if they so desire, schools can also indicate to parents where they might find good suppliers of the 'enjoyable extras'.

(I think another tricky situation is when a school team or group - e.g. orchestra, rugby team - organises a tour of some kind. It isn't something that an individual can do 'by themselves'.)

At three grand for an American skiing trip, there will be plenty of families who couldn't afford it or who simply had no interest in it.

It's not like there will only be a handful of children in a school year not going on a trip like that, it's the ones that are going that will be in the small minority.

So where's the problem? Why prevent the children who can go from benefiting?

If schools aren't offering a wide range of trips then that can be a problem, but if it is then the solution is offering more trips, not fewer.

I just don't get these at all. I work in a leafy outstanding comprehensive. Most of the parents in catchment could easily afford to pay to send their children. Our school don't do them: the reason? We're not allowed to take kids out for longer than 3 days as it affects their learning.

I think they go skiing at Easter and that's about it. We get outstanding results

Osolea,

I think that, for all trips, a school has a responsibility to make any 'benefit' as widely available as is feasible.

So if they want to make the 'benefit' of a ski trip available, then I do feel that a comprehensive school has the responsibility to find ways to deliver that benefit in an affordable way as possible.

Yes, there will still be families who choose not to go - for reasons of money, other arrangements, that benefit not being an appropriate one for them - but it makes the circle of 'those who might be able to benefit' as large as possible.

If a school sad 'we believe that skiing is an enjoyable and valuable sport', and then offered, say, 3 levels of trip:

• Series of lessons at nearest dry ski slope
• Trip to the most economical decent quality European resort, maybe with fairly basic hostel accommodation
• Trip to a luxury, far-flung destination with high-quality accommodation

then parents and students could select the appropriate level for them, if they believed in that benefit. (Not all need be available every year - the school could easily manage a 3 year cycle, or a 2 year cycle of overseas trips but an annual version of the dry ski course)

Orange,

DC's school trips are either in the holidays or in a designated week at the very end of the summer term. Only curriculum trips - day or residential - ever happen in termtime.

We are very lucky and can comfortably afford for my dd to go on this ski-ing holiday. But it doesn't sit right with me.

There are other trips to Europe this year tied to her History and Art options. She wants to go on both of these and recognises that for us to shell out £2000 on school trips for her alone, in this academic year alone is a.bit.much.

I'm convinced it's so the poor kids cam be singled out and segregated from the rich.

Wee fuckin kleeks of them all in secret meetings and excused from class to discuss and plan the jaunt while the working class kids from the council estates who's parents drive banged up cars and rusted transit vans, who have to go work in the local chippy or Saturdays in the shop, pickin berries and shovelling shit every weekend to get a bit extra money can sit and know that they will never be part of the kleeks.

Remember when the rich ones from my school went to Belgium, caused such a stink it erupted a classroom fight.

Agree with Gnome...,.whats the point of school uniform so that everyone is the same when the schools make it clear that its not the case.

I went on the school trip to Switzerland in 1986. It was £165 for a week.

I realised that i was one of the lucky ones. From what i can remember the school handled it well It was never discussed in class. It was mainly arranged by phone in fact a teacher phoned my parents at home when someone dropped out because DM wasnt sure she wanted me to go and by the time it was decided that i would go. (my dad thought i should have the experience) all the places had gone. A teacher phoned us at home and said someone had dropped out and so i got to go.

As i said there were no discussions taking place in the classroom at the time It sounds like thats not the case though.

It broke my heart that my best schoolfriend wasnt able to go. She was from a single parent family.

It sounds like thats not the case NOW though......is what i meant.

I really dislike expensive school trips.

It's unnecessary; Geography trips surely could be within UK, don't believe GCSE level kids need trips to faraway countries. The UK is fascinating geographically speaking!

Languages trips to country of language studied makes sense, for most MFL.

I hate how extravagant trips exclude so many kids.

It is all one-upmanship, "Oh, we went to Iceland in Y8", "well WE went to Hawaii". Such nonsense it actually really makes me cross.

It may be what kids (and parents? And school staff?) WANT, but it is not what they NEED.

Much better to learn that if you want ski-trips/fly to Hawaii/play cricket in SA, you have to WORK for it as an adult. Much better to go to less far-flung places first.

How blasé will this generation of kids be, who have been skiing, to NY, to the tropics, to Disneyland and Disneyworld...before they are even 16, and how sad those kids whose parents could not afford it.

STOP THE MADNESS! Please....

" I'm convinced it's so the poor kids cam be singled out and segregated from the rich. "

so am I, sadly

My DC’s school sends a group of kids to New York. WHY? I’m sure it’s a great place to visit but what possible educational advantage do they get. DS is a keen skier and is going skiing but I class that as sport. He has been to Paris as well but I can’t for the life of me see what New York offers for such a lot of money.

I got suspended for 'making death threats' to one of the kids who was going. Right nasty little shit she was, was always harping on about how she had been before and could speak the language and was taking her Polaroid and always managed to get in some jibe at those who couldn't afford it. Day before the trip we who couldn't afford it were in class as normal and that were making banners in the corridor. Bell rang and she's like 'see you tomorrow.. oh sorry you didn't pay for the trip did you?'

Told her I hoped it hit an iceberg. Apparently she had nightmares on the boat

The ironic thing is that many people have the spare cash and flexibility to travel cheaply in their twenties now that it is more common to have children later. (I know not all).

School trips are sometimes just a prequel to a decade of long hall 'travelling', hen parties abroad, short haul weekends away, group skiing holidays etc. I think it's difficult to argue that expensive school trips offer a unique opportunity for that section of society, fun though they may be.

of course they dont offer a unique opportunity - it is only the kids with loaded parents who would have travel opportunties anyway that can go!

But then the mystifying thing is why are teachers agreeing to organise them? I can't believe that they are much fun, even if all your expenses are paid.

Teacherwith2, I see what you're saying, but that's why I said the problem is likely to be that the school isn't offering enough trips rather than it being a problem that they offer this expensive one.

Washediris, I assumed that all the enrichment trips that were extra curricular took place in the school holidays and half terms. That's how it works at the schools my dc go to. Or the trips take place after the students have done their exams.

I don't think it's as much about number of trips as ensuring that those that are offered are inclusive, value for money and have some purpose.

The purpose could be going on holiday if the children wouldn't otherwise be able to go on holiday, but as schools are schools, not tour operators, it's difficult to understand why a school would be organising an expensive trip that is really just another holiday for children who aren't really short of holidays.

I'm not in favour of school trips that are holidays in disguise. I want school trips that provide DCs with an educational experience that complements the curriculum and/or offers something that is hard to replicate within the family. DSS2 did a fabulous exchange to Canada - a fort night each way - that he'll remember forever for the Canadian school he went to and the great group of friends. That was amazing.

I'm not there yet as my kids are a little young for school trips. Who makes the decision on school trips? Couldn't you join the PTA or some related body that has some communication with the teachers / head / governers and influence it? I think our old school had a parent discussion and decided to cut the amount of of site school residential trips from 3 in primary (y4, 5 and 6) to two (y5 and 6) due to cost and agreed to keep these to under a certain cost per child.

Byrdie at secondary school parents have far less opportunity to participate in decisions like this.