Stupid amount of residential trips

[Eruni]

I live in the north west, my DD is in Y7 at a grammar school and I’ve realised the school is obsessed with residential trips.
In Y7 it’s a MFL trip to France in June
Y8 Ski Trip in January then Science trip in the summer, this year it’s to Cologne. Y9 Skiing again then Art trip, this year to Rome. Y10 Skiing again then either History to France and Belgium or Geography to Iceland.

It’s not a rich town, so while it’s a grammar school, most of the kids aren’t stupidly well off, how on earth are parents made to afford all these? Why run so many??
AIBU to think this is stupid.

You don’t have to go on all of them, and are very lucky to have the opportunity at all. My friends daughter is in year 10 and hasn’t had the option to do a single trip.

We are in a similar position to you and chose for our son to do the trips instead of a family holiday as we can’t afford for 4 people to go skiing but can afford one. The school also have some money set aside to help those who can’t afford it.

I would echo those posters who said education isn’t a race to the bottom, yes offer accessible trips but don’t stop doing them because some can’t afford them or don’t want to go on them.

The thing is that if they only ran trips that every single. family in the school could afford, then they wouldn't be able to run any trips at all, as some families can afford nothing at all.

The issue here is that you are finding yourself in the "can't afford it" group rather than in the "can afford it" group and that is making you jealous and cross. Sadly, it's just life that some families can afford more than others.

In my experience the vast majority of children will go on just one or two school trips during secondary. There may be a handful who do them all, but equally there will be a handful who don't do any due to finances. It's just the way life goes.

Grammars near me offer these kinds of trips.
Most of the families at the grammars (near me) are wealthy enough to tutor to get in or perhaps even pay for private schools.
The families I know go on one/two educational trips during their time there and maybe skiing if liked. Maybe trips run in the holidays or partly in the holidays so no problem for the many people who don't go.
I don't think it's always possible to offer everything to everyone but it's a shame to offer nothing to those who maybe can manage one trip over the course of five years.

So you expect teachers to work during their holidays?

Dd goes to a former grammar school and it sounds very similar. Apparently all the trips used to be oversubscribed so they used to offer each trip to only one or two year groups but now pretty much all trips are open to the whole school (as few can now afford them). When my dd was in year 7 there was a very ill timed email that went out about a world challenge trip costing about 5k. Not many went on that one!

This offering sounds similar to DD’s comprehensive. I’m glad such a wide range of things is offered. They’re not compulsory and the majority are targeted at particular subjects so only those studying those subjects will go. I’m glad skiing is offered - I hate the idea of skiing so would never take DD ourselves so it’s great she has the opportunity to go through school if she wants to. I do understand that it’s tough for families that can’t afford the trips but why should that mean that nobody gets the opportunity? Lots of things in life are unaffordable to the majority, doesn’t mean that those who can afford those things shouldn’t have them.

YABU for all the reasons already listed.

Back in the 70s, my school did various trips abroad which we just didn't go on. It was no big deal. You've even stated that many don't go on them at your dc's school, so they are hardly missing out. I've survived.

I think it's fantastic that schools offer these trips. Opportunity isn't a race to the bottom - just because some can't afford it, doesn't mean those who can should be denied the chance.

I love this.

By secondary age, if not before, dc are capable of understanding that "everyone else" doesn't get to go on the ski trip / wear the designer clothes or trainers / get driven about in a swanky car / has their own bedroom / goes on holidays abroad with their family each year / always has lots of spending cash for days out / goes to theme parks / whatever it is a friend might do and they might not. Families have different priorities even if they had the same budget, but in life, not everyone has the same budget.

I've not voted but this sounds very average- one ski trip each year (no idea when they became a state school thing!) and one academic trip per year.

Surely it would only apply if your child had chosen that subject, so if your child isn't taking Art, History or Geography they wouldn't go anywhere in Y9 or Y10.

I would only pay for a ski trip if my child was really passionate about sport.

Y9 they haven’t picked yet and anyone can go on the art trip even if they aren’t taking it in Y10.
You have to do a humanity so everyone does History or Geography.

Well why would you send a child on an art trip if they weren't interested enough in art to take it as a subject? I don't think you are being completely unreasonable because I think there is a lot of pressure to send your kids on expensive trips now but they are optional.

I think it is unreasonable of state schools to be running such trips in the current climate, whilst I appreciate some children may just not want to go it is extremely unfair to be creating a divide between the children and believe me there will be bullying between those that can afford to go and those that can’t. A pp said that those on fsm could go for half price but for most on fsm even half price is completely unrealistic. If a trip is necessary for a subject it should be free and if it is not necessary the school shouldn’t be providing it as children should be in school hence the draconian leave policies.

I agree with you OP, this is very hard on the families who can't afford any of the trips. The idea is that the trips are educational and socialising and if that is true, the kids who go have a big advantage in what is supposed to be a 'fair' system. Some families can barely afford proper meals at the moment let alone to go skiing.

My DC’s schools run trips in the school holidays, not term time. Mine went skiing in the February half term.

Term time trips are those where the whole class goes. Has to be as who would teach the others. So a visit to an art gallery with the whole art class.

My DP’s couldn't afford for me to go abroad with the school. My best friend went on every trip, hotel stats in Italy, Spain, Germany. My parents coukd only afford the school camping trip…the best holiday ever!

The ‘race to the bottom’ reminds me of the working parents who demanded that we didn't host open afternoons, where parents could come and work alongside their child. They wanted them at night or not at all. I had to remind them that it is pretty difficult to bring primary age children back in the evening, to continue their learning! ( we did host other events in the evening).

Working in communities we can't please everyone all of the time. Being in a community, we can't always have what we want, all of the time either. A little less selfishness and being able to compromise works wonders.

Absolute rubbish. I've been teaching secondary for nearly thirty years. "In the current climate" just means there's a different demographic of those who will and won't go. Usually trips are scheduled almost a year in advance with payment plans that are affordable for many and if its essential for, say geography coursework, then all kids DO go, funded if needed.
Most kids are actually pretty oblivious to the ins and outs of who is on the trip other than their immediate friends. It's certainly not a lever for bullying any more than being crap at sport is. Shall we ban PE so kids don't know who can't catch a ball?