To think primary schools shouldn't run residential trips?

[orangejuiced]

I dont see what purpose they serve. From reading threads on here, they dont seem popular with teachers (having to look after kids 24 hours a day, no extra pay), they are very expensive to parents (in hundreds of pounds) and potentially children feel left out or excluded if they aren't comfortable to go or parents cant afford it.

An a level geography course maybe requires a field trip, but primary children dont need to do expensive outdoor pursuits as part of their curriculum. I never went on one until age 13 and I'm perfectly independent as an adult . Aibu, am I missing something?

I would've totally agreed with you OP, until my Y3 lad went on residential recently. He loved it, and got so much confidence from being away from home and doing all the activities it was definitely worth spending the £200 that would've otherwise gone on a weekend away for him and his Dad in July.

My kid's primary does one trip with 2 nights away. It's always done at beginning of year 6 as a nice bonding, team building exercise for the children. Parents know for 7 years that it's coming up so can save accordingly and pay in instalments the previous year- although it is affordable, considering what they do and where they go.
I value it- as a right of passage, as a first trip away without family, as fun. I couldn't afford to take them myself to do all those outdoor activities somewhere so I'm grateful that school can.
They certainly don't go on any secondary school trips 700 quid for a week's watersports or skiing with random other pupils??? They are the trips that are not possible (or particularly desirable) for us.

I loved going on ours, I'm sure we went year 4,5,6. Year 5 we went to France.

She came back sunburnt and dirty from 1 shower in 3 days, when they were outside getting muddy all the time

OK the sunburn is bad but my goodness I feel sorry for any child whose parents reaction to them getting dirty is to stop them going on future trips, way to raise a snowflake.

I had one in year 6 which was a bit naff and v heavy on route march walking but v important as my mother had issues with babying me. I then had one in years 7,8 and 9 that I adored. I would be very happy to send primary aged kids on well organised trips. It’s all part of gaining independence. I’m can see looking back that there was a build-up of residentials with 2 uk and then 2 Europe.

We went to Belgium when I was 9 or 10. (1960's) We enjoyed it, but it was probably a bit of a waste; for instance, they took us to visit the site of the Battle of Waterloo, but all I remember was the playground!

My kids go in P7 too, all children are at least 10 and a half, most older.

It's not too expensive, teachers obviously don't mind too much and the kids love it. And it's not a big secret thing that teachers spring on you with 2 minutes notice, it's talked about throghout Primary so parents have time to prepare and save.

A school local to me does one in Y1!
I don't think Y6 is unreasonable.

My yr5 dd just went on one. Three days, two nights and loved it. Cost about £150 but we had from September to pay towards it bit by bit. I also went in yr5 and 6 as a child and they are some of my clearest school memories now so I think they are worth it.

My DC in year 6 has just come back from her residential trip and absolutely loved it. Agree with the posters describing it as a highlight of her primary school.

However I also agree with you OP - one girl didn’t go (I assume for financial reasons) and I feel so sorry for her. Also agree that year 3 is too young and there’s no point having one every year.

So basically I’m on the fence!

Where does that money come from?

The PTA usually!

Upper KS2 sounds reasomable to me but I can see why they'd be fun from Year 3.

Teachers generally enjoy staffing residential (I've enjoyed all my residential trips for ks3-5). The pointing out of responsibility and no extra pay is usually in response to people claiming we are only in it for the holiday. The trips are hard work and you're on the go all the time, but they are generally a lovely experience and the students learn more indpendence, learn soft skills beyond the classroom etc.

There's always lots of moaning in the run up - about whether it's necessary, the cost, the activities, the safety - but rarely any moaning afterwards; the kids who were worried have a great time, and the parents who were worried see how much their child enjoyed it.

It's fabulous to see the shy kid making friends, the risk-averse kid abseiling or kayaking, the kid who's never been away from his mum doing just that and realising that he's going to survive the experience.

In our school there are high numbers of children who've never had a holiday, or stayed away overnight anywhere at all.

So yes you're right, teachers give up their time and do the millions of risk assessments necessary to make them happen. We don't do that for the good of our health, we do it because despite the parents' inevitable concerns, we see first hand how incredibly valuable those experiences are. If you've got a school willing to do them, thank the staff.

The only residential trip my DC had at primary was In their final year. There were no residential trips in younger years. Only about half the class would go, though - for cultural reasons as well as financial reasons, I assume.

When you talk to kids is s1 and s2 (first two years of secondary) they usually reflect on their p7 residential as really important to them in terms of mixing outside their friendship group, overcoming doubts and worries and becoming more confident.

Y3 sounds young for some kids but is it age 7? That’s when brownies and cubs begin overnights so for some kids it’s great to go away at that age.

Our school does long and pretty expensive ones in year 5 and 6. Dd 1 refused to go on the second one as she got so homesick on the first and was shouted at by a teacher for crying and being unable to eat. She shouted at her that she missed her family too 😳.
Dd2 is year 3 and already looking forward to the year 5 one. Me not so much 😥

Mine loved their school trips, they came home shattered, so excited and filthy- they talked about it for weeks.

In year 6 they can be a good way of helping foster independence before secondary. Plus some kids would never have had the opportunity to do outward bounds type holidays (dd was amazed classmates had never seen a cow in person and were shocked how big they were). Costs should be kept low and local is fine, ours went to a site bizarrely next door to where dd now is in 6 form, just the next town along!

Dd went on school residential from year 3, with one to France in year 5
She loved them. She did activities she wouldn't have done with us, and adored being away with her friends.

Whilst it's hard work for the teachers - I've done residential satin secondary pupils - many teachers do see how beneficial they are for the children too, hence why they run them each year.

Most schools have funds to help those on lower incomes attend.

Mine did them every year from year 3.
Year 3 - a day of nature activities followed by a walk back to school, BBQ and sleep over in the school hall.
Year 4 - 2 nights camping about 10 miles away (actually closer to some pupils home than the school). Cheap because they had acquired the tents over the years and had a parental rota to bring/provide food and extra supervision.
Year 5 - 3 nights of PGL type activity.
Year 6 - 4 nights residential with History and Geography activities.

It got the children gradually get used to being away from home. The teachers tend to enjoy them (although some prefer one type more than others, some were camping fiends for example). the school also did the most it could to keep costs down, and had hardship funds available.
I do thing the year 5 and 6 trips were the most expensive - but I know over the time my DC were at the school they modified the activities towards cheaper ones (my eldest did power boating which was dropped due to cost).

Our school do them from yr3 onwards. The kids have a brilliant time. Not everyone goes, as some parents feel their children aren't ready, but those that do get loads out of it.
My DC's has their first trip away with Beavers when they were in yr2 so weren't worried about the school ones at all.
When I was at school in the 80's, we went from yr5. I still have brilliant memories of my first one.
YABU OP!

Y3 here. They go on PGL for three days. DC was 7 and only by 2 weeks. Being a late August baby. I thought it was too young, but they seemed ok. Still talk about it now. It was us parents who didn’t cope so well.

The cost iant an issue. In primary schools, they ask for a contribution and suggest the amount. All the schools here have a fund to plug the gaps. The school cant say 'if you dint pay you cant go'.

Ours got round it by knocking £20 off as a subsidised place so that the parent could now afford to give dc's the suggested £20 spending money, and a payment plan for the rest.
They then 'suggested' what weekly payment rate should be affordable and required proof of why not, for any needing to negotiate longer terms.

Huge pressure put on poorer parents to be financially irresponsible to not be shamed.

Yr 6 PGL was £600 and was simply cant pay, cant go.

Honestly? There was nothing that a residential trip taught my dcs that they hadn’t learn before.
BUT they’ve had an ‘unusual’ childhood in that they’ve been independent very young and had done many of the activities proposed already.

I do get that, for SOME children, it is a very good thing. It gives them the opportunity to get out of the town here they live. One of my dcs friends had never been to a (very well known) town about 45mins away from where we live. So clearly those trips have been an opportunity for him to ‘see the world’, one that he didn’t have at home. The problem is that, the ones who will benefit the most are often the ones who can’t afford said trips. And the schools who proposed the most residential and opportunities are the ines from more wealthy areas that don’t need as much as those from deprived areas.....

I had them every year from y3 as a child and LOVED them, makes me so sad my kids only have them in year 6.