Am i wrong to refuse to pay for my childs school swimming lesson.

[sep1712]

My DS is in yr3 and about to start swimming lessons.The school want £55! I already pay for lessons at our local pool and he meets the levels for key stage 2. They get a total of 20 mins in the pool with the school. I really dont feel like its value for money. The school say the cost is for travel but they could walk there in 10 mins max!
Should i just pay up and not say anything or stand up and say no?

Yeah, but they DO tell you on the letter that if you don't pay, then NO children can go, as they will be unable to cover the cost of the coach...

Talk about make you feel OBLIGED to pay it!!

Huynty,

Apologies if you have explained elsewhere - why do they take the coach? You mention that it is a short walk?

It would seem sensible to query the transport policy first (soft ball), then refuse to pay second (hard ball). Is the route not safe or something?

I think £55 seems ridiculously expensive, thats more expensive than my childs swimming lessons per term at our private gym. And for the school justifying that as transport costs, that ridiculous, we pay for state schools through our taxes , i think that it should be free, or if not then the children should walk if its a reasonable distance. I would refuse to pay.

WLSD,

I can absolutely see this one from both sides - as a parent and as a teacher.

From the 'teacher' point of view, the school "per capita budget which would include money to take children swimming" [there's no dedicated money] does not vary depending on whether you are a small rural school 10 miles from the nearest pool, who takes say 40 children at maximum because of the size of the school, or a large urban primary round the corner from the school, who take 60 children swimming at a time.

However the actual 'cost per child' of taking the children swimming is hugely different in the two cases. There will be a fixed cost to hire the pool and a fixed cost to hire any specific instructors - per capita cost much higher for the small school. The urban school will have no transport costs, the rural school much higher.

It is then a question of priorities for the rural school - who also have much higher costs for most trips etc as well. Is swimming offered to all for free? Or is a voluntary contribution invited so that there is some budget left for other items? The large urban school is in a very different position. The heads of each school will balance a whole host of different priorities and have to make a judgement about where voluntary contributions are requested and the consequences elsewhere if swimming is a huge drain on reseources.

Yes, your taxes pay - but they pay the same amount per capita to the two schools, while swimming is a much greater drain on the resources of one than the other. That is the dilemma schools face.

Voluntary contributions can be invited. Families on FSM should have it made absolutely clear that the provision is free to them. And all possible steps should be taken to reduce costs while delivering quality swimming lessons.

I think £55 is a bit much but think that parents should pay if requested. It only means the school paying instead and that money could go towards something else. We are a low income family and pay so it annoys me when better off parents moan about it. After all, the kids don't really go for that long. My dd y3 went for one term only, at a cost of £30.00

It's the OP with a short walk, teacher - the pool is more than 3 miles from MY Ds's school!

Well, I think most people can see both sides of the argument. I object to parents too self centred to think through the consequences of their failure to contribute, who only think about themselves and their children and their rights; but I also object to schools trying to break the rules on voluntary contributions, because it seems very distasteful to me for a school to lie about something, or to hide a truth, however beneficial it may be to the school to lie about it. Sometimes there are genuinely good reasons for parents being exempted from contributing towards something. Since it is hard, sometimes, to self-identify, the law has given a helping hand there...

DS's school has stopped taking the children swimming because the cost of doing so is more than the cost of private lessons (no swimming pool close by). The HT (not sure of the how he does it as we've not got there yet) provides money for private lessons instead - targetting those children who can't swim the 25m required. As transport costs get ever higher, I can see providing swimming at school is going to get harder and harder for schools.