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?

but then everyone will have to start paying tax
Or those that already pay tax can pay a bit more.

We all benefit when kids are educated, that's why education is compulsory and (mostly) paid for by tax.

And I can absolutely tell you that a bunch of people, who can well afford it, will not pay it as a contribution to the school. So seeing where it's going doesn't seem to make people certain to pay it.

YABU. Of course you can see expense. At primary school here in the UK I've not been asked to provide much at all. It is quite usual in my home country to buy school books, writing books, stationery. Even at secondary school I am surprised to have not had a book list yet as daughter is in year 7. I suppose you're used to so much free stuff that you don't acknowledge it at all.

Our school doesn't charge anything for swimming lessons and they have to go on a coach to get there.

They do charge for things like a castle-related learning day with someone coming in from outside the school even though that was just part of their daily Year 1 work.

I wonder if our kids are at the same school OP? We had a letter first day of term about the £25 towards coach costs for swimming lessons. DS had his first session on Wednesday. It is really annoying, especially as it was sprung on us the first week back at school. We just forked out for new uniform. DS is a confident swimmer so although it's fun for him to get out of class for a bit of exercise in the pool, it's not really essential. It seems like every other week the school is demanding money for this that and the other. I know there's only so much in the schools budget but it would have been nice to get a bit more notice at least!

When I was a school governor, this came up a lot. We had to be really careful about how the letter was worded as it is part of the curriculum so school are not supposed to cgharge for it. The letter was very honest along the lines of, we have to provide swimming, the costs are high, particularly cost of coach so we are inviting you to contribute x amount to wards the cost. There were always some parents who opted out,some unable to afford and some just on principle but kids still went. I thought it great value as my kids had not ever had swimming lessons. The loudest complainers were parents already paying for weely lessons outside of school hours. I get that that would be irritating!

If people can't afford it that is one thing. Parents who refuse to pay on a matter of principle are selfish, self entitled twats who spoil it for everyone else.

In the republuc of ireland your free education is just free teaching you have to pay for books stationary etc like alot of countires so in fact people in the uk are doing well only having to sometimes contrubte to things like swimming?

Maybe we should scrap swimming so some children grow up not being able to swim at all.....

Swimming lessons in schools were brought in for a very good reason (a massive surge of young people drowning because they couldn't swim)

Hey ho lets go back to the time when young adults cannot swim.

Instead of talking about taxes and pay cuts and governments, why not think a little more immediately. If the school had a minibus, costs would be vastly reduced for everyone. No more astronomical coach fees. Far more trips and outings. Win/win.

Took two years of fundraising events here but it was worth it many times over.

I've sometimes wondered if it might make more sense for the local council to provide free places on their swimming lessons for local school children. On an x number of lessons or till stage 4 or whatever. A lot of kids will end up continuing on and paying for more lessons. Parents get options of after school/ weekend. It's under £40 for a block of ten lessons where we are, rather the money went to upkeep of pool/ staff than a coach company.

Personally I think if England charged for books etc. it would cause a great deal of hardship for some families, and I have no idea what really happens to the real poor in Ireland (my mother would have sacrificed food to pay for my school books if she had to).
With swimming - I wouldn't mind so much is schools actually fulfilled their legal obligation, but none of my children could actually swim the 25 meters by the time their lessons stopped (1 or 2 years worth). They learnt because I paid.

But I think we have got a lot wrong in the changes we have made since the 70s - when I learnt to swim and kept having lessons until I passed the requirement, totally free paid for by my Socialist local council.
Even my Tory leaning husband thinks some of the privatisation was/is wrong. Nevermind the lack of Council housing.

"If the school had a minibus"

Don't you mean a fleet of minibuses? You'd need at least 2 per class (they seat 16 and you have to allow for accompanying teachers/TAs too)

My eldest will be having swimming lessons in term 3 this year.

She has been going to council swimming lessons for the last 3 years and is now a competent swimmer, soon she will be moving into lifesaving.

We will have to pay £4.30 a week towards the school lessons, plus the £6.50 a week for her current lessons, though that is set to rise as she moves group.

The £4.30 is essentially an expensive shower for all the time she will spend in the pool.

I will pay it, because I can afford to. But I'm not happy about it. If opting out was an option I would opt her out.

There is a two year waiting list for swimming lessons in our local council pool.

Don't you mean a fleet of minibuses? You'd need at least 2 per class (they seat 16 and you have to allow for accompanying teachers/TAs too)

Or you could split the classes in two, like some schools do. Group A and group B. Group A swim, group B stay at school and do say, maths. The following week, group B swim and group A stay in school. Not ideal, of course, but cheaper than paying for two/three minibuses and/or a coach every week.

Do not worry the republic of ireland has a system similar to pupil premium if ypu quailfy they fund the books (if you are generally poor so would qualfy for free school meals they would cover books etc but if you didnt have enough money because you suck at budgeting tough cut back etc)

Or you could split the classes in two, like some schools do. Group A and group B. Group A swim, group B stay at school and do say, maths. The following week, group B swim and group A stay in school. Not ideal, of course, but cheaper than paying for two/three minibuses and/or a coach every week.
But then you'd need to pay for double the staff...

I think in theory the OP is right. Because as she says, what next? £2 per maths lesson?

But the problem isn't with the schools, it's with the cut backs. We now have to send in paper, glue, tissues, pens, crayons etc and countless other things that used to be provided by the school. I could easily envisage a time when fees will be introduced by the government for all children. Not thousands of pounds but maybe £100 per year and it will be put to the public that it is unfair to the childless that they pay just as much towards education as families do. And people will be delighted because they don't have children of school age. And then the fees will go up...

If it's compulsory then of course you shouldn't have to pay!

Yabu
We don't live in an ideal world and the school are doing the best they can
That's all there is to it IMO

You can't get 30 children + staff in to a minibus (or even 2)
If you split them then you would be paying out for an extra teacher - so not saving, and you'd be wasting your 'slot' at the baths which assumes there will be a full class.

"But then you'd need to pay for double the staff..."

True. I don't think there's any solution that's going to please everyone, though. Schools simply don't have the money to pay for pool hire, teachers, transport, insurance for 30+ pupils each week. It's not their fault it's part of the curriculum - that's the government's fault.

I do think these days it's unrealistic to expect education to be completely free. We already get a good deal compared to most countries - schools pay for textbooks, notebooks, science equipment, paint, glue, worksheets. On top of that, lots of children qualify for free lunches (or can bring their own from home) and schools also provide cheap/reduced childcare before and after school to help working parents.

To expect them to subsidise all of those things, plus swimming pool hire, plus transport each week is unrealistic, sadly. It should be the school's job, but if they don't have they money, they don't have the money. They can't axe swimming from the curriculum so they do what they can with the budget they have.

I don't think you are being unreasonable and I'm sorry to see that lots of people think this is okay.

Would it be acceptable for schools to charge each set of parents £50/year so they could employ another teacher to reduce the size of maths classes? It's "only" £50 after all. And if they spend that money out of their own budget, they'd have to lose an English teacher...

Parents shouldn't be charged for compulsory activities that are part of the national curriculum. They should be paid for by schools who ought to be funded appropriately to do so through general taxation.

Would it be acceptable for schools to charge each set of parents £50/year

Of course, and we are getting there. Many religious school - state school, but RC or CofE schools, ask for a contribution of £100 or £200 at the beginning of the year. We are getting there for everybody, and I think it would be a good thing. Not purely on a financial point of view, but to force parents to take resonsibility, when they think that education is a due, and abuse the system "because it's free". They might be more involved, have more respect for the teachers and the work if they had to spend some money at the beginning of the year. Some kids would have more respect for school property if their parents were financially responsible for the damage for a start.

No one should be allowed to refuse to pay for the kids school (again, it doesn't mean you can't have emergencies funds for families who really cannot afford it).

when they think that education is a due, and abuse the system "because it's free"

What a bizarre attitude. Education is both a right and a responsibility. The government has a duty to provide it and parents have a duty to ensure their children engage with it. Are people having kids to get a bit of free education? You realise these children who are supposedly abusing the system are going to grow up and do the jobs that keep this country going don't you?

It doesn't mean parents who send their kids to state schools should be out of pocket

They are your children, they cost money!

You really have no idea how lucky you are in the UK, you pay almost nothing for school. Cheap uniforms, you don't buy the books or pay for all of their supplies. We have to even pay for photocopying and insurance, as well as every other thing you can think of.
Sending my child to secondary this year cost over a thousand euro. You really don't have a clue just how easy you have it, complaining about 25 quid for a bus for swimming lessons!

I used to get infuriated at the lack of organisation when I worked in schools when it came to swimming lessons.

They don't walk, even if it's close, because you need more adults and it takes too long, so they hire coaches.

Where I worked there were 4 schools in a small area using the pool one after the other. Two groups - one group who couldn't swim and one group with competant swimmers - two pools, two teachers, two coach companies. They could have cut the costs for everyone by doubling up - share the coach (2 classes of 20 or 22) and have a bigger competant group as most kids could swim.

It was suggested and apparently it was "too difficult" to deal with the budget of splitting the coach costs over two school budgets. Absolute nonsense - all they had to do was have the company bill school1 for half of the time and school2 for the rest of the time.