to be pissed off at school 'enrichment' trips

[AugustRose]

I know this has been done many times before but I have just received an email about a 4 day trip to Iceland, costing nearly £1000. During the summer there was a trip to South Africa (it happens every 2/3 years) costing £2500.

This is the second time they have done the Iceland trip and they also have an annual skiing trip which is about £700.

These trips are not inclusive and it's always the same children/families (and teachers) who can afford to go. It's a small secondary of about 600 students but 80% will never be able to go on any of these trips. In Y8 DD1 had a 6 day trip to France that cost us £425 (it was good value) however it took us 6 months to pay for it as I really wanted her to be able to go.

I just get frustrated at the lack of less expensive trips/activities which could include many more children.

Although these trips seem expensive, they are invariably excellent value for money; if you tried to purchase the same trip and excursions privately it would cost a lot more. So yes, it's a lot of money - but many DCs just wouldn't ever get the opportunity to travel to these countries otherwise.

At our state secondary, Pupil Premium pupils have the cost of their trips, music lessons etc. covered by the PP money, plus a trust fund which is constantly topped up by fundraising.

I am still smarting from being asked to stump up £300 to go for three nights to a local council hostel thing 20 miles up the road (primary) and £400 for three nights in Bath (secondary) by train from Herts. You can get a lot of Travelodge for that.

Yes, I agree that our family and DC look forward to the trips they are going on and give little thought to ones they aren't going on.
They love the idea of a day trip by coach to a museum or the camping overnight trip, as much as they would the bigger trip.

Schools today offer a fantastic range....in the same way the travel industry offers a fantastic range of options. None of us go on every holiday on offer.m some go on the luxury 5* holiday, some of us go camping and some get a day trip to the seaside. All are valid and enjoyable.

We all need to accept that none of us get to take up every single opportunity out there in life. Why don't we enjoy the fact that the range is so big and enjoy the things we can do and be glad of the opportunities?
Some people sound like they would prefer the kids to be chained to their desks and never leave the classroom. Education would be so much less a rich experience (and I do t mean rich in a monetary sense).

Some of these trips are extortionate and surely must only be for the richest few. I don't agree with those trips (£2500???)

I'm a secondary teacher and am currently planning a trip to CERN in Geneva. It's 2 nights, 3 days full of activities, flights and hostel accommodation. It's coming in around £300. Does that seem reasonable? I think it's ok for what they get. It's in 18 months time.

Agree that trips are so not a jolly! I have done many residentials over the years, come home and slept for 15 hours straight, then gone back to work on the Monday to face a huge pile of marking. Not to mention missing my own DH and DC for a week. It is worth it though!

Although it's been said on this thread that these expensive trips are not jollies for the teachers, it was my experience that they absolutely are. My DCs school used to run a trip to Africa every couple of years costing £2k; when I asked the head if they could consider something cheaper, but with similar activities (or maybe camping in Scotland and leaning to navigate), he replied with no hesitation that the costly trip was what the teachers wanted to do, and they wouldn't be likely to fancy anything in the UK!
I was so amazed by his reply that I didn't know how to respond...the costly trips have now been abandoned as not enough parents would pay, so only days out happen now :-/

Chinchilla, just because the teachers wanted to to run those trips rather than a trip to Scotland doesn't make it a jolly.
Seriously, think about what taking a group of teenagers involves.......there are hours and hours of paperwork before hand, with booking it, contacting parents, running meetings, handling passports, jabs, risk assessments....days worth of work, on top of the normal teaching. Then there's the being fully responsible for them, 24 hours a day in a country which you might not be famil at with......there's no going home for an evening off, you are on duty literally 24 hours a day, which is both physically bit especially mentally and emotionally a strain. On almost every trip, someone will be a bit or seriously ill....and because you can't take any chances at all with other people's kids, rightly, a member of staff will need to take them to hospital and sit up with them waiting hours for an appointment, leaving the other staff a bit short and having to manage on their own. And then this has all happened in half term, so as a PP said, they then return jet lagged to a big pile of marking and preparation for the next day when terms starts again and they haven't had a break.

So yes, those teachers are visiting places without paying, and perhaps they wouldn't go to those places otherwise......but I would say that what they have to do whilst being the responsible adults on the trip, plus all the work before and after is far in excess of what they gain in terms of a 'free' holiday. A trip with lots of teenagers really isn't a holiday...it's very very hard work and not at all like the experience they would have if they went on their own or with their families.

So why do they do it? Because they see and feel the real benefit it brings to the children. Those trips build relationships between staff and children which don't happen in the classroom, and yes the staff feel it's worth it overall.....although when they return, you'll often hear them say, that although it was great, they can't ever do that again......until the next time!

What makes me a bit sad is that people do all this moaning about the activities on offer. So many parents never think to thank the staff who organise and run the trips. Yes it's the job of the staff to educate and teach the children and yes they are paid to do it. But these trips which take over whole school holidays and days and days of work before and after are rarely really acknowledged, just moaned about. Parents arrive late to collect kids after the coach returns them to school from the airport or ferry, pull up and don't even roll down their window to acknowledge what has just been provided, the kid gets into the car and they zoom away.....and then perhaps moan that Jonny has lost his socks whilst away.

It's this kind of thing or the moaning about how dare schools even offer such trips that gets to me. Would people really prefer that schools just didn't bother and stuck in the classroom? It would be a lot less work!

My sons got a 4 day trip to Paris in June, £300 and I can't even afford that.

Chocolate, I'm not saying there isn't great benefit in those costly trips for the kids who go, but the issue is that it is benefit only for the wealthier kids, and excludes the poorer pupils, which doesn't seem fair.
And while I understand that there's a lot of work organising the trips, and that the teachers may have to work a lot of the time on them, my point was that selecting a destination because it's where the teachers want to go, is not an appropriate way to choose! The choice should surely be based on the best benefit for the most pupils?

And Chinchilla, your cerne trip sounds great, and educational, and while not everyone can afford it, a lot more will be able to than the £2k+ trips :-)

But the aren't just the expensive trips are there. People are honing in on the three or four big expensive trips that a minority go on. What about the other trips that run too;

• the day trip to the History museum
• the day trip to the nearby river or coast for Geography
• the Biology fieldwork day trip

-the Biology fieldwork over night trip in a youth hostel

• the theatre visit for English
• the visit to hear of Maths lecture that takes 3 periods in the morning
• the visit to a PGL activity centre for 2 nights
• the French Exchange
• the Bikeability course run in school
• the visiting theatre company that comes in for a whole year group
• the local zoo visit

If you we to list all of the enrichment activities and trips that most schools offer, those big expensive ones would be a tiny percentage of the offer. In most schools, these will always be minority trips that few go on. Many many will go on the weekend away or the day trips. They are all enriching experiences.

if you think that to be fair, the only enrichment activities that should be offered will be those available to absolutely everyone......there will be zero offered. There will always be some people who cannot afford to pay for any activity...in some schools there are lots in that position, and because the school itself won't have the funds to cover it and can't expect a tiny minority to subsidise the rest who can't afford it......then there will be nothing. That is the natural extension of the argument that it's not fair to offer things that all can't afford.

The world isn't a fair place. Children from more affluent backgrounds have better equipment in their pencil cases at school, get to join more extra curricular clubs because their parents are willing and able to pay and also get to go on more trips and activities. Schools work really hard to make sure that there IS something for everyone and to ensure cheaper and free opportunities are there too, and where possible to fund children who can't pay...because they know those kids hugely benefit.

Some of those big expensive trips do fundraising, to make them more accessible. So some of those World Vision Trips which cost £2k involve 2 years of hard graft fund raising activities where the kids themselves put themselves out to get the funds.....and anyone can join in and raise the money. Often sports teams hold charity events which fund raise to part offset the cost of touring with the team, to make it more affordable.

In my experience, children don't actually feel that disappointed about not going on the big expensive ski trip.....because most people don't go anyway. They look forward to the cheap weekend away everyone is going on, because the crowd makes it fun. I think the issue is often more in parents heads. We forget that most people don't go and just feel a bit sad that we can't send our DC on that wonderful sounding visit......but then we can't always take them on the wonderful Cruise in the travel agents window either. I think it's a parental concern much more than a children's concern.

I think that even the trips where children are supposed to fundraise e.g. World Challenge only really benefit the wealthy as the amounts they are expected to raise are so high e.g.£4.5K.

Very sensible post as ever choc.

As I said up thread my DH positively encourages the DC to go on every trip going because he used to throw away the letters before he got home.

MaryNary, yes, but what about the rest of the trips that are offered, that make up the vast majority?
Those who don't actually go on the big trips can also sometimes benefit...they might be involved in the fundraising for them, in seeing slide shows and learning about the places and people, in gaining a wider appreciation of the world and desire to see it.
As I said, I don't think it's the children who have a huge sense that it's unfair, or they are missing out, or only the wealthy are going....it's the parents who get that feeling.

My DD has never been skiing before, because as a family it's too expensive for us to go. It's a few years off yet, but I'm planning to save up for her to go in Yr 11. I'm so glad the school are offering the trip, because we will be ablemtompay for her to go, without the cost of it for the whole family. We'd all like to do it, but because the school offers it, she probably will get the opportunity to have a try. She won't be going to America or to Russia, which are the big trips, but she will go to Ironbridge for a night in a youth hostel in the 2nd Form and she will go a lots of day trips. She's not bothered and neither are we......but we don't get our sense of self worth from what we can and can't afford.

they might be involved in the fundraising for them, in seeing slide shows and learning about the places and people, in gaining a wider appreciation of the world and desire to see it.

Oh yes I remember the 10 mile sponsored walk my year did to partially fund the trip to China (that still had to have a personal contribution of £500) and the thrilling lesson we had of all the "experiences" the people that went had

I'm not against enrichment holidays, only during the school holidays and not ones that overlap into term time. I am however against the trips away that are tied into a subject as pp mentioned the Iceland trip was for geography. So the children that do geography and can't afford to go are supposed to do what exactly?

Yes, agree that big expensive trips shouldn't be essential to the curriculum. No one should be excluded from accessing the curriculum because they haven't been on a trip they couldn't afford.

In my experience, these kinds of trips are not actually essential at all, and schools actually go to great pains to make that clear, because they know not every one will go. So these kind of trips might be described as desirable and beneficial, but there is nothing about them that will prevent the child getting full marks in a GCSE or A Level. I have never heard of a trip like this which the coursework for example was based on, where the school didn't find anyone who couldn't go....because this would prevent full access to the curriculum.

Again, it comes down to the question of whether things shouldn't be offered if not everyone can afford to attend, or doesn't choose to spend their money on that even if they could afford it. The result would be no enrichment or trips. I don't have a problem with the expensive trips as long as there are plenty of others too....and in my experience there always are.

There might be cheaper trips that lots of MNs could afford and would be happy to pay for, but there will always be some who can't afford even £2 for a basic trip, so following the argument that trips should only run if all can go, all the MN children who could afford it would miss out, because some couldn't afford it.

If you look at the bigger picture of trips, most schools offer a good range across the curriculum and extra curricular areas and price ranges. People seem to forget most of those and get overly interested in the others.

MaryNary, yes, but what about the rest of the trips that are offered, that make up the vast majority?

The day trips and the less expensive residentials are fine. It is the ones that cost thousands of pounds that are ridiculous and only benefit the wealthy.

Those who don't actually go on the big trips can also sometimes benefit...they might be involved in the fundraising for them, in seeing slide shows and learning about the places and people, in gaining a wider appreciation of the world and desire to see it.

I really don't think children benefit from seeing slide shows of other children enjoying trips they can't afford to go on.

*As I said, I don't think it's the children who have a huge sense that it's unfair, or they are missing out, or only the wealthy are going....it's the parents who get that feeling.

As I said, I don't think it's the children who have a huge sense that it's unfair, or they are missing out, or only the wealthy are going....it's the parents who get that feeling.

I don't agree. If a child's friends are going on a trip and they can't, I'm sure that they do feel they're missing out.

Yes 7000! Then the exchange come back to stay here for a month and we've got to take them round the countryside to all the sights = more $$$

chocolate it's not the minority in my experience, like I said above everyone in my dd's german class is going on the exchange. How the fuck to you think that makes my dd feel?! It makes the poor have even less opportunities.

I can't even afford a summer holiday this year ffs, yet my dd is going to have listen to her friends come back gloating about their fancy European holiday.

In a four day trip to Iceland they most certainly will learn a lot that is enriching, I've been three times now and the children talk about it so much and have learnt masses from it.

HearTheThunder, I can see that's very tough to be the only one not going.

Did you approach the school about help with the cost? In my experience, if a trip is a vital part of the curriculum and if only 1 or 2 children aren't booked on because of cost, schools will almost always pay or at least part pay.....but you do sometimes have to ask. Did you ask? It might not be too late, even now.

My experience with the particularly big expensive trips has always been that only the minority go, so being in the majority, whilst those who don't go might fancy the idea, not going isn't a big deal. Yes, if most of their friends are going, it might seem a bigger issue, but if we are talking about the 2k trips, few tend to go on those.

So, MaryNary do you think the school should only offer the trips you can afford? What about the kids who then watch your kids go on a trip they can't afford? How would it work in practice, unless you want to end up with zero trips, because zero is what some people can actually afford unfortunately. Where exactly would you draw the line? Genuine question.

I went to a normal state school and there was a term time skiiing trip I couldn't afford to go on. Most of the year went so there were no lessons running - I did an entire week of word searches and wasn't allowed to read a book instead or even do extra reading around our class work as that would be 'unfair' to those on the trip! As most of the kids could afford it I think running the trip was probably fair, but it did feel crap being left out, and everyone knew I couldn't go for money reasons so I got teased any time it was mentioned.

And I agree that a lid should be kept on the big expensive trips. They shouldn't become the majority of trips, real efforts should be made to ensure a good range of types and costs.....otherwise few people will get enriching experiences. However, in my experience schools do try pretty hard to get this balance....as I said before, if you list all the opportunities, although most have some cost attached to them (and some people won't be able to afford any, but will probably have the school pay for a number of them) many will be affordable to most.

I think that schools work hard to make access available to all. Pupil premium money is often used to fund things like music lessons for those who might not be able to have them otherwise, a real eye is kept on keeping costs down where possible (I think of a local primary school that asks parents to transport children to and from their residential which is just an hour away because it shaves almost £100 off the cost because they don't need the coaches).......but the reality is that all of this provision costs and schools cannot find it all from their reducing budgets. So what's to be done? Don't offer the stuff to anyone because some people may not be able to access it? Work hard to give a range of opportunities at different prices? Accept that not everyone will have equal access to everything, but make sure everyone gets access to some experiences? Isn't the last one what schools have always done and really the only thing they can continue to do?
I can see it makes Thunder feel angry and upset. I can see why. When you're in a position where you're strapped for cash and holidays are beyond your means, there will be lots of things in life that others are having and you and your kids aren't getting. It's not fair. I do believe that schools try to make things fairer, but they can only go so far in doing this - the problem isn't schools and their trips, but the wider issue of income inequality and the differing access this results in to all kinds of things. I think schools do try, but it isn't their job or responsibility to only provide what every single person can afford - even if that is very hard for some people. Do you think their job is to only provide what can fully be paid for by the school?

" Pupil premium money is often used to fund things like music lessons for those who might not be able to have them otherwise, "

not in our school it wasnt. IN fact my children did not see a penny of the PP money that they brought to the school.
Music lessons were only for those who were recommended from local schools. The only trips were massively expensive. I was never once offered any discount from any trip.

I find it hard to believe that all the trips offered were massively expensive. What about the day trips to a museum etc?
Did you ask for a discount? Don't those trip letters usually say that the trip will only run if enough people can pay, but ask for help if you need it - I'm talking about curriculum based trips, not ski holidays here.

Where did the Pupil Premium money go in your school? If your kids were bringing it in, if it wasn't obvious where it was going (and often it will say on the school website how it's been used) did you ask? Perhaps it's not always well-targeted, but if those who qualify to allow the school to claim it ask, the school might reassess its use. I think schools do want to help where possible...they point out that help is available, but you do then need to ask. I know that can be embarrassing, but in my experience, they try to engage over that topic sensitively and discreetly. Their funds for giving help are always very limited, so the approach is always to ask everyone for the money for trips, because the more who can pay at a given point, the less they need to give out from their funds and the more they might have later if need arises. Regarding people who are struggling financially, sometimes things are better for them and they can and will pay, but other times can't.

" . What about the day trips to a museum etc? "
there was nothing like that on offer.
they had enough meetings about what a shit parent I was, but no not a penny of help was offered discreetly or otherwise.

Well Choc, I've just googled pupil premium - shocked to read this: www.gov.uk/government/publications/pupil-premium-conditions-of-grant-2016-to-2017/pupil-premium-2016-to-2017-conditions-of-grant... they are not obliged to spend it on ensuring equality of opportunity - and it doesn't particularly have to be spent on the children who bring it to the school
It can even be spent on "•for the benefit of pupils registered at other maintained schools or academies" or for "community facilities"
WTAF