To think school shouldn’t be charging for this?

[Indella]

Our school has a habit of expecting parental contributions for everything possible but the latest 2 things we’ve had letters about I don’t think falls under what a school can charge for.

The first one is my child has now started the compulsory school swimming lessons. These are part of the curriculum and so can’t be charged for. However parents have to pay £3 per child, per week for the transport to the swimming lessons. Is this not the school’s responsibility to fund as the swimming lessons are compulsory?

The second one is an “art and crafts day”. Letter says children will be spending the day, still in school, doing Christmas themed arts and crafts. They have asked for £12 per child for the materials. This is being held at school, in school hours and is instead of the normal lessons. I legally have to send my child to school so it’s compulsory. Letter doesn’t say voluntary contribution so I assume again we have no choice but to pay but surely the school can do arts and crafts with the children that don’t cost so much. 28 children in the class so £336 of art supplies! Sounds like they are using parents to re-stock supplies for the year.

I know they are not huge amounts but add that to the fact we paid £3 each entry to the school Christmas fair (including having to pay for the accompanying parent) and £10 each for tickets to watch the Christmas performance. Plus the never ending non-uniform days it’s really starting to add up and it feels like the school are simply using parental contributions to fund what should be covered by the school.

AIBU to think these things shouldn’t be charged for?

The school is funded for 6 classes. Schools have never been able to say "yes we only have enough children for 6 classes but we'd like smaller classes so please give us enough money for 7". Obviously all schools would like smaller classes! This school has chosen to have 7 classes so they have to compromise elsewhere

I'm not saying schools couldn't do with more money. Of course they could. But schools having to make difficult decisions about how to spend their money isn't new. When my children were at primary school, entirely under a Labour government, they were in mixed year classes every year except for reception and year 6, and class sizes were up to 34 in some junior years.

I had to pay transport costs for all my kids swimming classes in primary school. That was 6 years ago for my eldest, so unrelated to Tory cuts.

I also (more recently) paid for a craft day, but it was £2 rather than £12.

Schools are really struggling for money at the moment. Don't vote Tory on Thurs if you don't want this to continue!

To be clear the financial regulations for school say that they cannot charge for swimming lessons as it part of the national curriculum. They can however ask voluntarily for a contribution to the cost of transport to the baths. They are only allowed to request a fee that equates to the full cost of the transport across all the pupils who are attending. So if parents do not pay the voluntary payment then the costs fall on the school and there is a point where the school if it was a trip would be saying sorry cannot afford this and it is cancelled. However swimming as part of the national curriculum has to happen so the school will have to fund the difference.
The same applies to the craft day. If the pupils are making things which will then be coming home, then the school are allowed to charge for the raw materials. The cost in this particular case is totally out of all proportion to the likely value of the products made and the school should be scrapping this idea.
As others have said the school is a small school but by opting to have 7 classes instead of the 6 that the numbers would indicate, they are incurring at a minimum £35000 of expenditure, possibly for an experienced teacher up to £45000. I would also be questioning whether the headteacher has any teaching commitment.
So for me the school are simply not recognising their own financial limitations and just expecting the parents to pay for anything and everything is not acceptable. Yes all schools are under some financial pressure but this seems to be largely self inflicted.
I would write to the Chair of Governors making an official complaint about the raft of extra expenditure that is being expected of parents. If you make it an official complaint then the CoG will have to response and they then may make the school think a bit more about saving their own money not just assuming the parents will pay.

I've never paid to watch the Xmas play though.

@NailsNeedDoing @reefedsail
I said reception and year 1 to be merged as the other year groups are full. It’s reception and year 1 that aren’t and that’s why they don’t get enough funding. There are only 12 children in the current reception year and 17 in year 1. My child is in year 3 in a class of 28. So I’m paying for other children to have more direct teacher time and better pupil : teacher ratios.

@Indella You may also underestimate how much resources cost. Having worked in a school, they cannot charge money and keep whatever they have not used for themselves to 'restock'.
The school play is different, as it may have covered the costumes/props etc and the rest used to buy stuff for future plays, it's normal for schools to charge this much. But the craft day can actually cost this much, believe me. The sum was not pulled out of thin air. And even if not, your child will be able to use the leftover materials in their art lessons in future, although I believe £300 these days does not go that far in the end.

The school cannot levy a charge for education.

This is the first paragraph of our school's policy...

"No charge can be made for education during school hours. The definition of ‘education’ includes materials, equipment and transport provided in school hours by the Local Education Authority or the school to carry pupils between the school and an activity. ‘School hours’ are those when the school is actually in session, and do not include the break in the middle of the day.
School trips, visits and practical activities enhance the pupils learning and broaden their knowledge and experience. These are undertaken with the voluntary contributions of parents. No pupil will be excluded from an activity because his or her parents cannot make a voluntary contribution."

They may have 7 classes because redundancy is so expensive-it’s cheaper to pay the salary than the pension cost of staff are over 55.......

I’ve just bought resources for our Xmas craft activities, has worked out at under £1 per child! They are making pine cone Christmas trees, wool threading tree card, reindeer paper plates and decorating a brown paper bag to take it all home in! They are reception though!

I don't think the argument of not getting Pupil Premium adds up, though. If there were children getting Pupil Premium it would be spent on those children ie. funding their school trips or their craft day.

The amount of pp money a school receives does make a difference. The school can spend it on pretty much anything if they can prove that it benefits the children that receive it. It can pay for TAs, computer equipment, loads of things. It isn’t purely there to directly fund trips and the like for PP children, although schools can choose to use it in that way, as long as it benefits those children, it will often benefit the class as a whole.

'Am I being unreasonable for being cheesed off at being charged £X by my child's school for what should be core funded activities?' No. YANBU

'Am I being unreasonable in directing my annoyance at the underfunded school?' Yes. YABU.

So so cheeky! Especially at this time of year. Some parents have not got spare money at all throughout the year anyway! I would be cross with this as money is tight

YANBU OP and the school cannot legally insist you pay for the coaches to swimming or the art and craft supplies or provide your child with different activities because you refuse to pay (though they could make the fee a requirement if you want your children to bring home what they've made.) Similarly, state schools in England cannot insist parents pay for ingredients in cooking lessons or any other fees for anything your child is obliged to do in the school day.

They cannot push the costs of their decision to run 7 classes instead of 6 on to parents who do not wish to monetarily support that decision and you can just say no. We have a mechanism for enforcing others to support the cost of public education - it's a democratic system in which we vote for a government that set taxation and public spending budgets. We may not all agree with the decisions of the government we have but they are the only ones legally and morally entitled to enforce anyone to fund public services. A school can't override that democratic process by imposing their own fees on parents to increase their budget.

Fees for attending voluntary activities out of school hours or for parents or other non-students to attend performances are a different matter, though.

@MonaLisaDoesntSmile Have you read the letter I posted? The school openly state they are funding equipment for the school.

There is no money.
There is no money.
There is no money.

Getting the Tories out would probably be a start in helping with this obvious underfunding problem.

But in the meantime, schools still need to find the money somewhere!

I wouldn't mind the charge for the coach to the pool as I guess they don't have the money and the kids have to get there somehow.
The xmas materials seems a complete rip-off and I would resent paying it. Are you sure the cost of a 3 course meal isn't included?

Oh, and if you really think it's unfair, club together with the other parents and ask for mixed classes, 5 or 6 classes instead of 7, so staff can be let go and money saved.

I bet you don't want that to happen, though, really...

If they've only got 12 reception and 17 Year 1 children, you can expect the school to close altogether in the next year or so.

You'll probably find out with about a week to go before the end of the Summer Term if that's the case.

@Indella if you object to paying £12 for a craft day then don’t pay it. No one is forcing you, and I agree it’s too much just for crafts.

But honestly, merging Y1 and reception doesn’t work well. The eyfs and Y1 curriculum are just too different, so while it may feel like you’re paying for those classes, the reality is that it’s more likely the school would merge years 3/4 or 4/5 or both if they had to so that SATS years could still have their own teacher. The head has to do what’s best for the school as a whole. If you don’t think they’re making the right choices, then presumably you could move your child to a school whose choices you do agree with more.

Are you sure that this money is actually going to what's it's meant for?
Do you see any type of accounts for this money at the end of the Financial year?

For anyone unsure about how much their child's school has lost in recent years, all the information you need is on this website.

schoolcuts.org.uk/

£10 to watch the Christmas play! That’s outrageous and unfair on those that are feeling stretched, certainly at this time of year.
I’ve spent £25 on materials to make my DS his nativity costume - so I provided the costume, we’ve practised the million songs! and so I would be annoyed at having to pay to watch him perform on top. YANBU

*who are not ‘that are’

I haven't read all the replies, because I was fuming when I read you complaining about paying a paltry amount for your child to swim. But, then, the rest of your post, goodness your school asks a lot. £12 for art supplies is bonkers.
I would pay the swimming and say thank you, but query the rest.

OP I'm a bit shocked by the way your head implies in that letter that he thinks more pupil premium money would help fill a gap in general classroom resources. Do you know what the school claims it spends its PP money on? I can see why a school might resort to charging for things like parent attendance at plays, but I suspect they will end up hurting their poorer students if they continue on that path. Overall they seem poorly managed and possibly lacking in ethics.