That if something is compulsory on the National Curriculum, parents should not be asked to pay?

[TattyDevine]

Our school is asking for £25 to cover the cost of the coach to take them to swimming lessons, which are compulsory under the national curriculum.

This is a state school btw.

I asked whether my child could opt out, as she is already a very competent swimmer who has private swimming lessons at great expense already. The answer was no, it's compulsory.

I get that education cuts put schools in a tricky position trying to balance the books and that coaches cost money but it's not like a school trip where if you can't pay you can not go..

What next, paying for maths class?
Child is in the first year of KS2.

AIBU?

If it's compulsory I can't see why parents should pay. If it was an optional extra you wanted for her then yes but not if you have no choice on it!

"It should either be free, voluntary or you should be able to opt out."

Yes it should, but schools just don't have the funds. Stalemate.

At my ds' school you went once and if you could already swim you didn't go again.

I would not have been happy to pay £25 when he was only going to get one lesson (effectively assessment).

But if they actually get to go all term and learn extra skills, I think that's ok.

I would want to find out if my dc was going to actually get anything out of it, or whether the ££ was just going to subsidise the kids who were going to learn something new.

Where I live we have to pay for sixth form transport too. Not as much as £1100 but well over £500.

What happens if you don't pay OP? Will your daughter spend these lessons in isolation with the uniform rebels?

I've always paid this, though my kid's school did allow us to pay weekly. The only thing I disagreed with was the fact they booked a coach when the swimming pool was less than a mile away from the school, a distance the kids could easily have walked there and back.
Swimming is compulsory, though I always saw it as a good opportunity for the children. They should have had more swimming, IMO, as I did when I was at school.

Pahahaha! Have you seen the state of school budgets? They hardly have enough money for exercise books!

Its all very well saying that parents should contribute but lots of parents can't.

To go to work every day it costs me £15 a day just for childcare. Then there are the last minute requests for trip money (one yesterday, due tomorrow, £9) and then the school residentials (next one £200, TWO months notice) and frankly it gets tricky.

I am a lone parent, good salary but the constant and ad hox demands make it really difficult for me to budget. My choice to have children, i know, but it isnt right that some families will have to go without to pay for school transport.

There are better ways to fund free swimming. Bloody hell, the council could just offer free sessions in local pools....

According to the head at one large secondary school I taught in, the cost of student vandalism over about a five year period would have covered the installation of a decent pool. This was not particularly rough school. We were not allowed to charge parents or carers when culprits were caught in the act. Just a thought about where a chunk of school budget goes each year. Additionally, we all know schools are strapped for cash so more parents fundraising would be really supportive and could perhaps cover costs like coach journeys. Also if all students turned up equipped to learn, budgets would stretch further. I have had overseas parents comment and laugh that none of this would be free in their home country, so they are pleased when anything is provided there. Here, we are apparently 'too generous' so kids don't respect what is provided and some parents expect more and more yet would complain if taxes were raised to fund it. I think you ABU in blaming the school when you can afford it.

I think quite a few people are questioning why they should pay to have their dcs' time wasted though. As others have said, it is often 1/2 a day out of school, for relatively little time in the water, often being taught by someone (the class teacher) who doesn't know anything about how to teach swimming (and I say that as a teacher - these things just aren't in teacher training). Maybe it would make a lot more sense for children to be able to opt in to a swimming lesson - although, as a teacher, I can see that could be an organisational nightmare.
If you are on a budget though, and then being asked for money for the school to do something, it hurts when it is something the dc don't need to do.

There are better ways to fund free swimming. Bloody hell, the council could just offer free sessions in local pools....

Council budgets are also fucked. You're doing well if there are still council-run local pools in your area, rather than having been taken over by charitable trusts or companies, or mothballed altogether.

I don't know if you are in a city centre but where I live the schools can use the public transport free. So for things like this they walk to a bus stop, get on a normal bus, then walk a bit the other end. It does require parent volunteers though to accompany them. I guess, at a practical level, this could be put to your council, if not on place,as they budget for schools and buses.

so you want the tax payer to foot the bill instead? Why did you even bother having children if you weren't planning on taking responsibility for them?

so you want the tax payer to foot the bill instead?

What's the point of paying tax for the public sector if we just end up having to pay to top it up from our own pockets? Might as well skip the middleman and just privatise schools if that's the attitude. The 'take responsibility for your own kids' line works fine when it comes to feeding/clothing/housing them, most people pay for this by working, that includes paying all manner of tax for many public services. Paying a bit extra here and there, fair enough. However education is compulsory, we have to send children by law - the 'costs' for parents should always be minimal.

Well, my local area does fund free swimming for people on low incomes. Better to scrap the compulsory, pointless swimming in school and use the cash to fund free lessons for low income families instead. Meanwhile, schools can get on with teaching.

Ttbb I am a tax payer. I don't expect them to fund lessons for something I have already paid privately for and I don't particularly see the point of me funding transport to get my child there to learn something they already know. An opt out option would allow the funds taxpayers (including myself) have paid to give lessons to children who cannot swim.

I agree to an extent but if the parents don't make this smallish contribution then the school will probably have to lay out for the entire coach and something else will get cancelled.
Your daughter will probably enjoy the lessons though.

TBH I wouldn't pay. I'm a teacher at a school and we have never charged for a coach to take them to swimming lessons. Schools have a budget, they know it's part of the curriculum, they should budget accordingly. I'm not a one to be convinced of all the 'some schools get more money than others' crap. I know they do; but likewise with household budgets and business budgets, schools HAVE someone qualified and employed to balance to books and charging parents to access something on the curriculum is outrageous.

What would happen if you refused to pay? They can't force you.

1. Either the child would remain at school - which would fall into your hands perfectly.
2. They would have to foot the bill.

Just don't pay.

Let me explain. I am pe subject leader at my school.

So for example you have 30 children going swimming in year 3 and 4. By law the school has to provide lessons in order for the children to be able to swim 25m by the end of ks2. So what if 15 children can already swim 25m? What shall we do with them? Leave them behind? No, you take them too and ensure they are in a group that teaches distance swimming, diving, water safety etc. This still needs paying for though so instead of making those who can swim more than 25 m pay, add up all the costs and take a bit off everyone's charge so it's fair.

I know this because I'm taking 33 children swimming next week for 6 weeks. An hour lesson at a time. So it's £50 per lesson for the pool hire, then £22 per teacher each lesson and I'm having 3 teachers so we're already at £696 for just the pool and not even getting there. Then it's £640 for the bus for the 6 weeks. This works out approx £40.50 for each child but we're paying £10 towards each child. There for we are asking for £30 from parents. Which actually in the scheme of things is not too bad.

Our school has an exceptional way of dealing with this, in my opinion. They make it very clear that what they are asking for is a volunteer donation of £3.50 per swimming session. Honestly if you really can't pay it, either termly or weekly, they will find the funds for your child but not to the detriment of equipment for the school. And I've seen no change in their policy with the differing leading parties. I guess they have a good business model.

This is not a new problem. My older daughter is now 20. When she was 5 the swimming lessons arranged by her primary school were more expensive than the private swimming lessons I was paying for. Most parents refused to pay up so the following year all lessons were cancelled.

The new policy was that there was no swimming until year 5, when all the children were taken to the pool and assessed to see if they could swim the required 25m. Most could, so were never taken again. Those who couldn't had lessons.

As others have said, the problem was the cost of the coach. When my daughter went, the coach spent most of the time doing nothing. It was organised much better at in other areas. My sister has a child the same age and her lessons were much cheaper than mine because they shared the coach with other local schools. There was no down time because as soon as if had delivered the first set of children to the pool, it set off for another school, delivered them, then went to a 3rd school and delivered them, by which time the first lot had finished and could be taken back. to school. It sounded much more sensible and I suggested it to my school but they ignored it.

Coddi £25 is not fucking pennys.
My weekly food budget is sometimes less. It's not a small amount.

I'm a swimming teacher, I teach lots of school kids.
It's nonsense to say 'what's the point, my dc already know how to swim.' It's exercise, good for you. It's like saying I've already learnt to run, I don't need to do it any more.

I'm a good teacher, engaged, and I make damn sure every child benefits from my lesson, whether they're the strongest swimmer or the weakest.

Yes, arethereanyleftatall but not all children are taught by a swimming teacher. Usually at least one of the groups is taught by the teacher from school (in my authority anyway). Any of the coaches at my dcs classes could make 30mins of water time into 'exercise', but I've seen class after class of children standing at the side waiting 'their turn', and not really doing much other than getting wet.
If you have capable swimmer doing widths it doesn't really get their aerobic rates up either.