school 'demanding' voluntary contribution, income sub £16,000

skintandsad

I empathise with you; I hate to see the letters piling in from the school, for trips, sponsored this & that, donations for cake stalls etc, raffle tickets etc.. it all adds up and can become ridiculous.

Personally, if I were in your position, I would pen a well worded letter (and judging by your posts, you are very articulate), to the effect of:

Dear Headteacher.

I have been advised by my childs teacher (x), that without payment, my child will be excluded from swimming lessons, however, they will be taken to the pool where they will be made to sit pool-side.

I would like to refer you to the law regarding such trips, and to your schools own policy on educational visits, which quotes:

"The law states very clearly that education during normal school hours is to be free of any compulsory charge to parents and the school warmly endorses that principle and is committed to uphold the legal requirements.

1. Day Visits
For visits occurring during school time the school may invite a voluntary contribution from parents to meet costs"

Taking the above statements into account, I fail to see how excluding my child from ANY lesson within school hours, whether this be within the school or at an alternative premises, can be seen as anything other than discrimination.

I await your reply earliest reply.

..........................................................................................................

And to those posters who think that the op is asking for her child to be allowed to swim at the expense of other parents, I would say that the law is there to stop discrimination.

The school is given a budget, and has a PTA to help with this; if the school cannot afford to pay for the trips without recourse to the parents, then perhaps they shouldn't be running the trips.

However, swimming is part of the curriculum, and is therefore paid for by the government in the budget given to the school. No parent should have to pay for this - education at state schools is free!!!

Spendless

skintandsad wrote: »

I empathise with you; I hate to see the letters piling in from the school, for trips, sponsored this & that, donations for cake stalls etc, raffle tickets etc.. it all adds up and can become ridiculous.

Personally, if I were in your position, I would pen a well worded letter (and judging by your posts, you are very articulate), to the effect of:

Dear Headteacher.

I have been advised by my childs teacher (x), that without payment, my child will be excluded from swimming lessons, however, they will be taken to the pool where they will be made to sit pool-side.

I would like to refer you to the law regarding such trips, and to your schools own policy on educational visits, which quotes:

"The law states very clearly that education during normal school hours is to be free of any compulsory charge to parents and the school warmly endorses that principle and is committed to uphold the legal requirements.

1. Day Visits
For visits occurring during school time the school may invite a voluntary contribution from parents to meet costs"

Taking the above statements into account, I fail to see how excluding my child from ANY lesson within school hours, whether this be within the school or at an alternative premises, can be seen as anything other than discrimination.

I await your reply earliest reply.

..........................................................................................................

And to those posters who think that the op is asking for her child to be allowed to swim at the expense of other parents, I would say that the law is there to stop discrimination.

The school is given a budget, and has a PTA to help with this; if the school cannot afford to pay for the trips without recourse to the parents, then perhaps they shouldn't be running the trips.

However, swimming is part of the curriculum, and is therefore paid for by the government in the budget given to the school. No parent should have to pay for this - education at state schools is free!!!

That was where I was coming from,b ut I've tried googling the 'rules' on this and can't find anything. All I have managed to find is this from Houses of Parliament questions in March 2010.
Schools: Swimming

Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what steps he is taking to ensure that all schoolchildren have access to swimming lessons within school hours. [321716]
Mr. Iain Wright: As part of the primary school national curriculum all school children receive lessons in swimming during school hours The Department's PE and Sport Strategy for Young People (PESSYP) also funds the top up school swimming programme through a grant that enables School Sports Partnership to deliver additional swimming, during the curriculum, to pupils in Key Stage 2 who are not yet able to swim unaided over a distance of 25 metres.

skintandsad

Try this link from the direct.gov website which mentions swimming specifically.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/SchoolLife/DG_179512

As swimming forms part of the curriculum for ks1 & ks2, the school have no choice but to include it, and cannot exclude a pupil who does not make a voluntary contribution.

The government funds the school curriculum; they have no argument as I see it!

only_mee

shellsuit wrote: »

I'd rather pay an amount than have to shop for the ingredients, I wish more schools would do it that way!

Son is going through this at the moment, we are buying ingredients that we will never use again.
I'm going to write to the Headmaster and put this suggestion to him.
Thank you

snugglepants

poppy-glos wrote: »

The law states very clearly that education during normal school hours is to be free of any compulsory charge to parents and the school warmly endorses that principle and is committed to uphold the legal requirements.

By law they cannot force you to pay. Also, the letter you received clearly states they're asking for a "voluntary contribution", therefore it is up to each parent to decide whether they will pay for the lessons, whether they can afford it or not. (Not that I'm suggesting people shouldn't pay if they can afford to, just stating fact here).

Don't let the school fool you into believing your daughter will be excluded from the activity - legally they cannot do that. Make sure the school is fully aware you know they cannot do this, and if they still cause problems for you then write to your LEA to complain.

Hope this helps in some way!

blabberwort

mrcow wrote: »

But since when have coach/minibus rides been part of the curriculum? The school aren't charging for the teachers' time or for organising it. They are asking for the extra costs to be covered. If they can't be covered, then no one can go.

In your argument, the school would be being penalised for not having a pool within walking distance.

In your argument (say there are 90 children per year group), the school would have to pay over £3000 out of their budgets just so 1/7 of the school could go swimming for 8 hours in order to tick a box on their offerings.

How can that be logical?

It's all very well for one parent to dig their heels in, but if everyone does it, who is losing out?

If it's the cost of the transport they want then how do you explain their reason for taking the child but making her sit and watch?
Surely if thats the case they should be offering alternative lessons for that time. They wont though because they know they cannot discriminate against children especially when it comes to the curriculum. By taking her they do not have to have the paperwork for why she was put in another class or given one on one tuition for those lessons. Kind of says it all to me, the school is being petty and it's not acceptable.

mrcow

blabberwort wrote: »

If it's the cost of the transport they want then how do you explain their reason for taking the child but making her sit and watch?
Surely if thats the case they should be offering alternative lessons for that time. They wont though because they know they cannot discriminate against children especially when it comes to the curriculum. By taking her they do not have to have the paperwork for why she was put in another class or given one on one tuition for those lessons. Kind of says it all to me, the school is being petty and it's not acceptable.

Maybe their thinking is that the money that would have been used to fund her swimming now has to be used to fund her coach ride her coach ride? So there's nothing left to pay for her swimming? I don't know and neither do you.

You keep using the word "discrimination" here. I don't see how you can call it that though. The parent is refusing to pay as a matter of principal. So what's the discrimination here?.........discrimination against people who want to dig their heels in?

blabberwort

It's the child being punished not the parent. What do you call it?

Again you still seem to be missing the point, the money is supposed to be voluntary. Why the hell should anyone be punished when it's down to the school to budget for the transport. You can claim it's unfair to the school all you like but the fact remains that yes they need to provide swimming lessons as part of the curriculum and as such it is up to the school to budget for it (transport and all) not the parents.

My son goes swimming and has to have transport to get there but not once have we been asked to provide money for it. I guess thats because it's a legal requirement whereas his farm visits are not hence we do get asked for voluntary sub for it.

mrcow

blabberwort wrote: »

It's the child being punished not the parent. What do you call it?

Again you still seem to be missing the point, the money is supposed to be voluntary. Why the hell should anyone be punished when it's down to the school to budget for the transport. You can claim it's unfair to the school all you like but the fact remains that yes they need to provide swimming lessons as part of the curriculum and as such it is up to the school to budget for it (transport and all) not the parents.

My son goes swimming and has to have transport to get there but not once have we been asked to provide money for it. I guess thats because it's a legal requirement whereas his farm visits are not hence we do get asked for voluntary sub for it.

You haven't answered the question.

What's the "discrimination" you've referred to?

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Doesn't matter whether it's discrimination - it's illegal to refuse to provide a child with part of the National Curriculum, it's illegal to charge for it and the school is in the wrong for threatening a form of exclusion as punishment for not paying something that they are not supposed to be charging for.

Having said that, I have paid everything at full price throughout my DDs' school life as the embarrassment of being singled out in class 'and WHY hasn't your mother paid like everyone else?' is very difficult to cope with; other than the forthcoming Year 6 Residential, as that was hundreds of pounds which I simply could not do, especially as the first payment of £85 had to be made within 3 days of the letter going out. This has included curriculum based education - visiting teachers/plays/workshops/trips in school time - all things that have the 'voluntary' tag but the threat of exclusion for non payment.

It's all very well thinking its only a couple of pound here and there, but it adds up very quickly and when it's for things that shouldn't be charged for, it makes people less likely to contribute willingly when the fundraising tins/funny hat/silly sock/funky shoes/mufti/wear red/blue/green/stripes/easter costumes/fancy dress/favourite book character days come round again.

Oooh, not to forget that schools receive extra money in respect of children that receive free schools meals specifically for the lack of parental contributions/advantages that poverty carries.