Extra play time for ‘active travellers’

[microkneesya]

We lived 2.5 miles from school. Moved mid-school year a few years ago because of being deployed by work nearby. Council allocated places and there was nothing closer with the year groups we needed. We love the school. After drop off I then have to go onward in the car to park & ride as I can’t wfh so it’s about more than the school run.

They have started awarding active travellers (children who come to school on foot, bike or scooter) extra playtime on Fridays. My DC are so upset and beg to be allowed to walk but we just can’t. I feel like the school shouldn’t do such a demonstrable ‘reward’ when for some families it’s not so easy.

Do your schools do this? Worth approaching the school?

This all fucking day long!!

This is us too. We drop off on the way to work, we simply don't have time to walk/hybrid - in the evening we need to collect then rush off to evening activities (sports usually 🙄)

How stupid!
So many things wrong with this
Rewarding with extra play time for a start....tells kids play time is a privilege and school work is punishment!
Rewarding kids that already get more exercise from walking with more exercise and making non-active travellers stay inside? Weird!
And Rewarding/punishing kids at all for what is almost always going to be the adults choice!

Our LA/school used to do similar things one week a year which was frustrating as like you we didn't have the option but at least it was only one week.

This is what’s confusing me. What are the children who aren’t getting extra playtime doing? Presumably something active to make it make sense.

That's really unfair to penalise kids for decisions they have zero control over unless the catchment is tiny and everyone lives in the two streets either side of the school. I wonder how they work it for children who walk some days and are driven on others? Do they get the extra playtime or not?

ExDH and I live in different parts of the same town and share custody 50/50 so DD spends every other week with each of us. In primary my DD walked to school when she was with me because the school was 4 mins walk down the end of our street and round the corner but was driven by her dad (or caught the bus with him) on his weeks because he lives further away and would drop DD off on the way to work out of town.

Also surely they should be doing it the other way round? If they want to encourage exercise/healthy living (which I'm presuming is the reasoning behind rewarding the active travellers) then they should be giving the extra playtimes to the children who don't get the opportunity to exercise every day on the school run, rather than penalising them by reducing their opportunities to get outside and run around in the fresh air.

Ridiculous and unfair

The kids who don't get extra playtime - what are they doing while other kids are playing?

Our school has a similar thing, and even the last little bit of the journey on foot counts, they are just trying to get the kids moving a bit more, and thinking about the environment.

Could you do the last 5 minutes on foot?

My kids school allow them to get the reward if they park away from the school and walk the last bit and I’ve seen some people really stretching this to mean walking from across the road, Don’t think anyone checks how far they’ve walked!

How bizarre. Are the kids who aren't getting 'playtime' having to do extra PE or something? Are disabled kids who can't be 'active travellers' penalised?

Our LEA had a competition like this when my kids were in primary. There were prizes for children each school who walked/cycled most often in a month I think and then prizes for the schools who recorded most active journeys over the same period. Which I am sure is a great idea for the urban schools in the county where most of the pupils live within walking distance, but not exactly brilliant for our village school where a high percentage of the pupils live several miles away and plenty of those that live closer travelled on the LEA provided bus because there is not considered to be a safe walking route!
Some parents that brought their children by car did start parking on the edge of the village where the pavements begin but it was barely far enough to constitute exercise, annoyed the people who lived there and caused more traffic problems than parking on the road outside the school so I wouldn't do it.
Encouraging families to travel actively when possible is obviously a good idea but it's not always practical and I don't think rewards of this nature are fair. It's a bit like 100% attendance awards - any child with a long term health condition is disadvantaged and such systems potentially encourage ill children who really should be at home to come in. In the same way active travel prizes exclude children for whom it is not feasible. Plus parking a few hundred yards away, blocking a different road and walking for a few minutes doesn't really do anything for the environment or child health and moves rather than fixes congestion. Thought needs to be given to the geography and demographics of an area before trying to apply these schemes everywhere.

I hate this. They’ve done similar at my children’s school. It’s like the children whose parents don’t work or have time to do this get rewarded! I hate how my children are punished because I’m a teacher and they have to go to childcare.

Not fair, in the same way as 100% attendance awards are not fair for children with medical issues. It is not within their control.

The more I read these threads, he less I want to send my future children to school. Sounds terrible.

I definitely can’t cycle on my own with three children.

Not with that attitude!

My kids primary does this and it annoys the hell out of me. It is basically rewarding kids for living close to the school or having at least one parent who doesn't have to rush to work in the morning. Both are just down to individual situations that are totally outside the children's control, and often the parents too.

The other one is the rewarding 100% attendance. If you get ill, not only do you have to endure being ill, you've also lost your prize.

I don't believe either of the rewards have any affect on attendance or travel. The few families where the parents are genuinely driving the kids to school because they're lazy, and/or letting them stay off school because they can't be bothered taking them in, don't care about their kids getting the rewards anyway. Most parents are doing their best, juggling work, childcare and household stuff. And then their kids miss out on stuff purely because of their circumstances. It's blatantly unfair.

There will be lots of children earning rewards for various things. It’s a good way to incentivise change for certain behaviours. You don’t work at the school OP. You don’t know the ins and outs. There have most likely been loads of complaints about parents parking and residents are putting pressure on the school to act.
Let the school get on with it.

When ours did this they took into account those who were further afield and there was an option to park further away and walk the last bit to have it count.

I know you discount it as “the hybrid option” and say it would take too long, but presumably it would only be an extra 15 minutes or so, which is what they are trying to encourage.

I think if they were to allow this option then it would be fair.

What a stupid idea. Children can't help where they live or their parents' working patterns. The children who "actively travel" to school are getting some exercise, and logically the children who don't are the ones in need of the extra play time, not feeling like they're being penalised.

That's from someone who lives close enough that walking to primary school even in the foulest tempest or collecting an ill child still finds walking the most efficient option. For the secondary school I park half a mile away and make him walk for his fitness, and my convenience at not getting embroiled in congestion and a proper, free parking space.

When we had an active travel week, there were more points for bikes/ scooting than walking. In our case it resulted in taking longer messing with the shed to get the scooters and store them at school than it took to walk.

It's a stupid incentive for something that children have little influence over.

This. None of the schools business how the children get there as long as they arrive on time. I'd complain.

If they want to get the kids more active do an extra PE session each week with them.

I guess kids have to recognise not everything is aimed at everyone. This is aimed to the families who can change and overall benefits everyone

This. I really feel for schools, they have so much pressure put on them from all angles, they try to do something positive, and everyone moans that it's not fair.

If the policy gets just a few kids who would normally get driven to school to walk instead, and if they are explaining to kids that walking to school is good for you, then they've achieved something. It won't suit everyone - nothing ever does - but they're trying to do what they can.

Our DDs’ school does a travel tracker. They get badges for walking to school. They get points if they ‘park and stride’ as well though. I think it is supposed to be if they walk 5 minutes, so just park a couple of roads over.

It does seem weird to reward exercise with more exercise!

From the data our school collects you will be unsurprised to know that in older classes walk more, because they can walk on their own. We’re in Scotland so kids tend to walk on their own from P5.

Park a mile away and walk/cycle?

Your kids are disadvantaged by this initiative because you work and don't have the time to walk to school. However, there may be some things you find easier than other parents (eg maybe you have the money or creative ability to organise a Book Day costume,) or things you choose to do when other parents don't/can't which give your child an advantage over theirs (eg maybe you prioritise reading and homework or send them to an extra curricular club).
The school are trying to solve the traffic and parking problems near the school and encourage exercise. You won't always think they are handling things the right way, but teach your DC some resilience rather than complaining to the school. Sometimes other people get rewards or benefits we have no chance of getting. That's life. Maybe tell them to try being happy for the kids who get the extra playtime rather than being negative.
In my school when we ran various schemes which rewarded a small group of children (eg the house with the most Dojo points that term/month got popcorn and a 'movie' in the hall on Friday afternoon) the ones left in the classroom usually did something fun anyway, not extra maths or anything just not quite as good as the main reward.

Whilst I understand the idea of the scheme and agree that it is good to walk or scoot to school. I do feel that the active travel reward scheme is outdated and in its current form not compatible with life in 2024 and hasn't been compatible with real life for many years before 2024. It essentially punishes children for something out of their control. Children do not have the luxury of dictating their parents work hours, work location or how the parent chooses to transport their child to school.

The walk to school scheme was great in the era of a STAP to walk the child to school. When every village had a school. When nearly everyone went to the school down the road and there were no following Ofsted reports, league tables and feeder schools for secondary schools.

Nowadays many of small villages have had their schools closed due to falling pupil numbers. In some rural areas this can be a 15 or 20 minute (in some cases more) drive along national speed limit country roads. Children are not guaranteed a place at their nearest walkable school in some areas. In some areas, schools are merged into bigger academy chains who move the location of the school meaning those who were in walking distance are now further away.

Nowadays and for many years a SAHP is a luxury. Most parents need to work at least part time or compressed hours. This means many parents choose schools according to wrap around provision and how it fits with commutes to work. Our local walkable school runs a breakfast club 8.15 -9am and then after school wrap around finishes at 5.15. The school a 5 minute drive away (but 25 minutes walk) has a breakfast club that starts at 7.45 and wrap around finishes at 5.30. The second school is oversubscribed, the first school usually has places year around. For many parents across the country drop off and pick up timings are tight and the parent needs to drop off and then head straight for the office. Even in the era of WFH a finish at 5pm and wrap around closing at 5.15 is tight if there are any delays. You are fined for late pick up.

I think the active travel scheme does need a refresh. It disengages children if they have no chance to succeed. Parents rightly explain to their children well that's life, we can't participate due to my work. Maybe an active challenge at the weekend or after school or more active chances in school would be beneficial. So everyone gets a chance to participate and you don't get the just checking out approach.