Forest school only for 'select' children

[Eyelashesrgreat]

Ds in Y3 and his school have recently 'selected' children from his class to go to forest school. The children do this weekly whilst the other children have to stay at school and do work. The children (selected) get to wear their own clothes that day and have treats.

The school did the same thing last year and ds wasn't chosen then. Ds has had a really difficult time recently at school and would have loved to have been selected for this activity. I asked his teacher if all the children will eventually get their turn at the forest school but she has said only certain children can go. AIBU to think this is a bit unfair?

Also OP - please take note of the vote.
The silent majority agree with you even if the ones shouting the loudest don’t.

"Please ignore the usual virtue signalling idiots on here OP."

Many of those who have disagreed with the OP have a knowledge and experience including many with children with additional needs. What is your experience and knowledge I wonder.

All reception kids go? What about the older kids?

sockwomble

I have plenty but you don’t need experience or knowledge to understand why a parent is annoyed that some children get to go and do a fun activity while her child does not.

Pumperthepumper

The older kids don’t go but all have had the opportunity to go in reception.

Don’t go at all?

Your comment doesn't indicate any understanding of therapeutic interventions or curriculum.
And does she get annoyed about her child not having the disadvantages that other children have.

Yes, so many people who jump up and down at the thought of their child missing out. The ones disagreeing will be teachers, reasonable parents and parents of children who have benefitted from interventions not available to everyone.

Clearly a completely different set-up to op's school, where they have staffing and funding to provide Forest school as a small-group intervention.

It's not virtue signalling to point out the bleeding fucking obvious : children are chosen on need. Their needs are greater than op's child's needs. OP has no right to know what their needs are.

But most parents I would have the brains to work out that targeted interventions will be just that - targeted!

some of the posts on this thread remind me of the parent who complained it was unfair my son had 1-1 (through his ehcp) and her child didn’t. Believe me I would much rather it wasn’t needed!

Life is never equal, that is reality. To be fine with someone else winning or being lucky is something to adjust to and be okay with and actually be happy for that person. It's part of growing up. It's a bit like dipping into a hat (containing all children's names) every night to see who gets a scoop of icecream. Kids soon learn to not be jealous, accept luck is a reality and be happy when they win and gracious in loss.

Op I haven’t rtft just your posts but this set up sounds tough on those not chosen

The children at my school who have attended Forest school in recent months have vulnerabilities that nobody would ever know from looking at them or talking to their parents. I think they would all swap Forest school for not having those vulnerabilities.

At my son's special school each child gets provision according to need. You don't see me whinging because another child gets to do "fun stuff" ( interventions) that my son doesn't.

Annoyed that vulnerable children are being supported. I can't get my heat around a NT adult feeling that way. Breathtaking entitlement.

Explanations
www.diffen.com/difference/Equality-vs-Equity

It’s not entitlement to think your child shouldn’t be left out of a fun activity because of things beyond their control.

I know a lot of forest school teachers and when schools only have small groups it is usually just for children who get pupil premium funding. Our local park runs forest school for local schools too, and only the school who have over half children on pupil premium engage with forest school routinely.

What about all the non-reception kids at your school who are missing out? Or the ones who moved to the school after reception?

You make it sound like everyone is having a trip to the zoo and one child is being left out.

It is an intervention based on need. Most of the class will not take part.

I can see why a child might want to go, but would assume better of parents.

The fun activity is a mechanism by which needs and vulnerabilities can be addressed. Like other therapeutic interventions, such as art therapy. It's made exciting so children are proud, not embarrassed, to attend. If we called it 'anxious kids club' (or whatever you are addressing) would everyone still be jealous?

How about

'I saw my dad hit my mum' club?
'I'm about to find out I'm adopted' club?
'I've started cutting myself' club?

"It’s not entitlement to think your child shouldn’t be left out of a fun activity because of things beyond their control."

Do you think children (or adults) with additional needs should get no extra support that those without additional needs might like.

So all interventions should be made as boring as possible so nobody feels left out? Sod the impact on the children who need the intervention

Probably. From the same ilk who grumble about people who get free houses, free cars, too much money in DLA.