School won’t teach non-swimmers!

[Platypuslover]

I don’t think I’m unreasonable just considering how far I may need to take this. Year 6 now lost out on swimming lessons because school is useless head was suspended last year and never returned and this has been a pattern for her from previous school. Not sure why other than incompetence but the grapevine said possibly to do with money. So kids didn’t get swimming lesson as no one thought to arrange them once lock down was relaxed the pools reopened.

They waited until end of year to do 2 session to asses swimming. Told we’d get an email if she can’t swim and will have further session.

No email arrived and I called today. So then was told they don’t take non-swimmers only the children that are confident and can almost swim independently and we have to pay for our own swimming lesson.

So I am expected to pay for someone else’s kids to learn to swim with my very hard earned taxes amidst a cost of living crisis and us barely being able to afford basics and we can not afford the extortionate private lessons.

Bet the letter they said they’d send us to give details to book those lessons are with the same company they use to take them swimming now. This reeks of an extortion ring to me why else would you not take the children that need it most!

It's a legal requirement for schools to teach swimming as part of the National Curriculum. We tried to opt out and were told it's not allowed.

The school has a responsibility to the non-swimmers in Y6 over swimmers. Usually kids are taught in Y4 then any who still can't swim repeat in Y5 and then Y6. Mine learnt to swim in the summer before Y5 but still had to do the classes as they were down as a non-swimmer. Luckily the teacher was understanding and helped them improve rather than teaching them. But, as I said, we weren't allowed to opt out.

I'd be talking to the Local Authority and the Chair of Governors about the failure to meet the National Curriculum.

Yes op I agree it is ridiculous that non swimmers would be excluded from free school lessons when they are the ones who most need the lessons. Utterly ridiculous. I hope the school/LA are responsive when you raise the issue with them. I can understand that there may be some issue they are attempting to manage by not taking non-swimmers, but they’ve clearly not found the right approach if that means excluded the most needy.

I assuming it’s to do with staff - child ratio needed for non swimmers??

I took my daughter swimming as much as I could when she was younger, having confidence in water is half the battle.

I have friends whose first experience at riding a bike or swimming was in year 5 & 6 when they did it at school…. Other kids stayed off because they were scared as had never done it before.

My daughter has just done swimming at seniors and the ‘top’ group had to be able to swim a length of the 25m pool!… so the bar was set pretty low (IMO).. and there were only my daughter and 2 others in that group (so about 10%).. We live in a coastal area, which is also home to lots of wooded areas with ponds/streams etc, it’s also a very affluent area so fiancés can’t even be blamed… so I was shocked at how parents haven’t prioritised swimming lessons for their kids! I was saddened but not shocked when I heard kids had drowned on a beach locally, I’ve had to rescue someone from the sea in the past, the parents who weren’t watching their child exclaimed ‘she can swim, but isn’t a very strong swimmer!

It’s sad that these kids will spend their lives avoiding water because their parents failed to teach them how to swim. In the grand scheme of things it is money well spent! More important than the sky/Netflix/Disney channels or costa coffees/wine/cigarettes lots of parents who ‘can’t afford lessons for their kids’ probably spend their money on! and let’s be honest as judgemental as that may sound…. I bet the families who ‘can’t afford’ swimming lessons, have the latest phone, internet, the above channels, macdonals etc… I know of a few families who can’t afford food at the end of the month…. But have a £75 a month iPhone contract!!! Plus Disney prime, plus macdonalds etc weekly ..

and I know there will be some families who genuinely can’t afford any luxuries and struggle to find money for the basics… but that doesn’t account for the HUGE % of kids that can’t swim

See all the teachers are weighing in, lol.

I was saddened but not shocked when I heard kids had drowned on a beach locally

Highly unlikely to be because they couldn't swim.

I've already said it twice on here but I will repeat it: you need personal survival skills, not swimming skills. Not the same and anyone can get into trouble on a beach or indeed in any water.

@lieselotte indeed. Both my children are very good swimmers for their age and I think it makes them more risky at times, as they are over confident in their abilities. Staying alive in the sea (with temperature/currents etc) is very different to swimming in a pool.

They'd be fucked if they didn't have Internet access and a smartphone. They need it to claim universal credit, as that's managed online. And there are at least a couple of hundred thousand who wouldn't have been able to apply for school places for their children without it (London and all adjoining counties).

But this wasn't ever going to be more than a general dig rather than something vaguely useful, was it?

At risk of repeating myself the school are not taking swimmers....they are taking children that can "ALMOST" swimmers independently.
By defithey are non-swimmers but are likely to meet the criteria needed after a few more lessons.

Yes schools are required provide swimming lessons and all children should be able to swim by Y6...but we all recognise that's not actually possible given covid, budgets. Staffing issues and a shortage of swimming teachers.
Schools are also supposed to publish how many children meet the benchmark....unfortunately performance measures like that drive practices that mean focus is on those kids where it's likely to make the most difference.
Of course OPs non-swimming child may benefit greatly but they aren't going to swim 25m....and if never been swimming let alone taught to swim are potentially going to be incredibly nervous and scared (hence comment about confidence)

If schools have limited lessons/resour it may make sense to wait to Y6 and try and get kids over the line.
If they had more resource they could start earlier and gradually drop the swimmers so they only take non-swimmers regardless of year group

Or consent to vaccines at school.
I tried by letter as the link wouldn’t work on my old phone. It wasn’t allowed, had to be online.

just to reiterate. Swimming lessons at my “local” council pool. £45 a month. And it’s 9 miles EACH way, not on a bus route.

i put money in recently to a food bank specifically on a campaign for McDonald’s after 50p lee moaned about poor people having McDonald’s. In the scheme of things it’s cheap, it makes a parent feel like a normal human “treating” their child. It allows them to charge their phone, keep warm (in the winter). The foods cheap, cheerful, the child WILL eat it and they haven’t had to turn the oven on to cook it. If for an hour, that person doesn’t have to think about paying bills and feels normal. I am absolutely in favour of it, fuck it. Have more McDonald’s. I cannot get upset about a fucking happy meal.

That's discrimination and unfair on children from poorer families who can't afford swimming lessons.

Sorry I am a tad confused swimming lessons are a life skill. There are places such as local sports clubs that do private lessons at the weekend that are not expensive so I am little confused why you are not considering paying for lessons.

However at the same time it would make sense the school priorities those that are struggling, however I would think many children will have had some private lessons just less confident.

Yes I thought that was an obligation on the school.

I’m not convinced that not being able to swim 50m is shocking and sad for 8 year olds. That’s double the national curriculum requirement, which over a quarter don’t meet at 11. My youngest is only 6 months younger than that, started lessons just before he turned 4 and other than Covid shutdowns (which have definitely had an impact on children currently of primary age learning to swim) has missed very few, but is still only just in stage 3 and can swim maybe 5m unaided. His older brothers both swim competitively at regional level, so it is certainly not that he hasn’t had lessons or exposure to swimming.

Everyone has forgotten covid happened and that there were two years of interrupted access to pools.

My ds had lessons from 5 but didn't get his 50m badge until he nearly 9. That said, they were very picky about the standard of stroke, whereas I just had to do two lengths without touching the bottom when I got mine!

And the fourth time - no swimming is not a life skill. Water safety is a life skill. Not the same.

That’s just your opinion. Swimming is needed for lots of things. It is a life skill.

Ffs there is no definitive list or definition of a life skill

All the swimming lessons my children have done included water safety as a basic (eg floating, practicing falling in with clothes on etc).

People say it's a life skill because they think it will save your life. In fact, it is useful to facilitate leisure pursuits.

I guess if you follow that argument, many MNers would say that ski-ing is a "life skill", too, to facilitate middle class advancement.

My point, which is not opinion but fact, is that water safety skills are what will save your life.

No need to get aggressive with FFS.

The point is everyone is saying the OP is a neglectful parent because she hasn't ensured her child(ren) can swim because it's a "life skill".

It is important, but I think things like driving and being able to ride a bike are probably more useful as "life skills".

And people say that you have to be able to swim because it will save your life. Which is highly unlikely. But it does facilitate things like eg kayaking or being able to get a job as a lifeguard. Lots of things facilitate other things though.

This just isn’t true. Lots of things are life skills that won’t save your life. Life isn’t just about survival unless you prescribe to MN race to the bottom theory. For example writing is a life skill but you don’t need it for survival.

You sound crackers, why do you think it’s the schools responsibility to teach your child to swim. Arrange & pay for your child to learn to swim, it’s a life skill & should begin before they start school. Lazy parenting.

Maybe because it's a statutory part of the national curriculum that schools should be extending to all pupils?

I haven't rtft but am a teacher and it is quite rare for children to be unable to swim by Year 3. In our cohort of 120 children, only four were non swimmers this year.

However, the swimming service said that a member of school staff needed to get into the water with them and we really struggled to find someone willing to do it, so I don't know what happens if school staff refuse.

We offer a course of 12 lessons but have never managed to get non-swimmers swimming independently in that time - more confident, using floats etc but not swimming and certainly not 20m. Parents really do have to take some responsibility if they want their children to be confident swimmers.