School seem to think we have a money tree at the bottom of the garden!

euronorris

Birdy12 wrote: »

Oooh, I love a debate, however, feel it may detract from the real point of the thread so I'll leave it short.

If pupils all wear the same then there's no chance of competition, i.e, who has the latest Voi jeans, RL shirt, Hollister hoodie. If puplis could wear what they wanted it would create a real have/have not atmosphere. There's more to it than just that but it forms part of my opinion.

Thanks for responding. I'll try to keep it short too.

IME, that competition is still there. Always will be, no matter what. And is also a part of life that kids just have to accept, and get used to, as it will carry on into adult life also (for some). And I remember a few children whose parents couldn't afford the school uniform (or in some cases, only a cheaper version of it), and that made them stand out far, far more and be ridiculed and bullied for it. Most other countries don't have school uniforms, and it isn't a problem.

The other argument I used to hear was that it made a child easily recognisable if they were (god forbid) kidnapped, or had been causing trouble. Again, I don't agree with this as a) most uniforms are very, very similar to other schools, which makes it easy to mix up the schools and b) it isn't easy to identify or locate a child when they are all wearing the same thing.

OK, back on topic. Perhaps, if you want to debate it further we should start another thread about it? Otherwise, I can see us seriously derailing this thread.

Sorry OP!

blue_monkey_2

Wow, some of the replies on here - did you not realise children were not going to be 'free' forever? Your child benefit should cover most of these things anyway, I know mine does. This is what it is for, your children.

If you choose to give them money for tat for the school fair then this is your fault. Learn how to say no, if you do not now then you have a hard time coming.

After school clubs are just that - clubs run by teachers are usually free, if an outside club comes in it is not - they are running a business not a charity and offering children the chance to going to a club after school instead of you driving 5 miles in the evening to take them.

As a member of the PTFA we do organise loads of events - none of them are compulsory. If you do not want to put money in then don't. No-one will bat an eye lid. The money we raise goes back into the school and pays for things within the school - those school trips you complain about, the PTFA subsidises those, the library books bought home, the PTFA buys those. If YOU want to see where your 'donations' go then join the PTFA and find out instead of moaning about it.

School photos, milk, dinners, music lessons, clubs and trips are not compulsory so why complain about how much it costs? How odd. Do you expect your child to be looked after, for free, until they are 16?? Surely you understood when you had kids you would have to pay for them to be looked after if you was working?

Most of the things on offer, such as music and sports clubs, are there to supplement your child's learning and give them the chance to do something other than what they usually do. My daughter does violin (paid) and recorder (free) - if I paid for violin lessons privately I am looking at a minimum of £10 for half an hour, her lessons cost me £3 a week!! Plus they play in assembly every now and then. Gymnastics cost me £3.25 compared to £7 in the local gymnastics club. I think school clubs offer great value for money. Do you complain about the other after school clubs or just the 'school ones', because you expect them to be free as they are held at school?

blue_monkey_2

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Yes, I agree they are, but then so are many parents.

Everything costs more. The weekly shop, heating, fuel, etc etc and yet incomes are not rising. For some of us it just means cutting back on other things but for others on a limited income it may mean not being able to pay at all.

My bug bear and I have said this before on MSE is that basic education should not cost any extra and I feel it is wrong to charge for anything to do with the curriculum, and some children may lose out because parents cannot afford/do not want to pay etc.

IMO education should be a top priority.Money spent in this area is money saved in others long term.

But all of the things mentioned have not been basic education they have been extras. We just seem to be living in a 'I want it all for free' country at the moment.

My kids have come home from non-uniform day with their £1 in their bag still as they have forgotten to give it in. They were not punished, nor was I called in, it is just that, a contribution. At the same time I would like my children to understand that not everyone has the same opportunities as we do in the UK and the money is being sent to help them. It's £1 each several times a year. Iin fact, for Water Aid (I think it was WA, my children go to a church school) my daughter took £5 out of her own moneybox and took it in for the charity. It was her money and her choice, I am just pleased that she is thinking of others.

I will be thinking of you lot when I am stapling notes to plates this weekend asking for cake donations. Plus the Easter Egg hunt and raffle is coming next week. :rotfl:

Birdy12

blue_monkey wrote: »

My daughter does violin (paid) and recorder (free) - if I paid for violin lessons privately I am looking at a minimum of £10 for half an hour, her lessons cost me £3 a week!!

You're very lucky. DD did recorder for free but other musical instrument lessons at her school are provided by an outside contractor and their fees were the only school cost that made my eyes water! She did do piano for a year but then decided to give up. I'm all for my children trying anything they want but, in this instance, I didn't force the issue!

balletshoes

euronorris wrote: »

Thanks for responding. I'll try to keep it short too.

IME, that competition is still there. Always will be, no matter what. And is also a part of life that kids just have to accept, and get used to, as it will carry on into adult life also (for some). And I remember a few children whose parents couldn't afford the school uniform (or in some cases, only a cheaper version of it), and that made them stand out far, far more and be ridiculed and bullied for it. Most other countries don't have school uniforms, and it isn't a problem.

The other argument I used to hear was that it made a child easily recognisable if they were (god forbid) kidnapped, or had been causing trouble. Again, I don't agree with this as a) most uniforms are very, very similar to other schools, which makes it easy to mix up the schools and b) it isn't easy to identify or locate a child when they are all wearing the same thing.

OK, back on topic. Perhaps, if you want to debate it further we should start another thread about it? Otherwise, I can see us seriously derailing this thread.

Sorry OP!

I'll try and keep my replies short too -

I think that if uniform is compulsory and its reasonably priced, then its the best idea all around for the child, the school, and the parents. That way everyone is wearing the same thing, so less competition (yes there will still be some, but its not the same as someone coming to school in a £200 coat because they can, compared to loads of families who couldn't and wouldn't afford that). Also, my DD's high school uniform is very distinctive, it really doesn't look like any of the nearby schools, so they are easily identifiable as coming from that school.

I think where compulsory school uniform falls down is when its much more expensive than generic similar items of clothing, and where the compulsory rules detract from the education day (ie if you have a compulsory rule on the size of earrings for example, and if you wear earrings larger than the regulation size and are caught wearing them you get isolation for the remainder of the day). I think there needs to be a balance between strict adherence to the rules and optimum classroom education.

blue_monkey_2

Birdy12 wrote: »

You're very lucky. DD did recorder for free but other musical instrument lessons at her school are provided by an outside contractor and their fees were the only school cost that made my eyes water! She did do piano for a year but then decided to give up. I'm all for my children trying anything they want but, in this instance, I didn't force the issue!

We are lucky, there are loads they can choose from and the teacher is one that is supplied by the LEA and she goes to various schools in the area. She never practises but is doing really well and has been doing it for 3 years now.

euronorris

Oh yes. I got sent home once for wearing black tights, instead of white! I wore what my mother told me to, so I was quite upset about that (as was my Mother, as they had missed out a sheet in the welcome pack, which detailed things like colour of tights, hairbands etc). Especially as the Head of Year remarked 'Well it's a grey skirt! Isn't it obvious that black tights don't go with a grey skirt?'. I was so intimdated back then, but all I could think was 'Well, no. Black goes with grey, and it's what I wore during winter at primary school!'.

POPPYOSCAR

On the subject of uniform, I for one, am so glad that my daughter has to wear it, otherwise her bedroom floor would be covered with different outfits everyday after she had decided what to wear for that day, and she would no doubt be late for school having taking up so much time deciding!!!!!!!!!

POPPYOSCAR

balletshoes wrote: »

I'll try and keep my replies short too -

I think that if uniform is compulsory and its reasonably priced, then its the best idea all around for the child, the school, and the parents. That way everyone is wearing the same thing, so less competition (yes there will still be some, but its not the same as someone coming to school in a £200 coat because they can, compared to loads of families who couldn't and wouldn't afford that). Also, my DD's high school uniform is very distinctive, it really doesn't look like any of the nearby schools, so they are easily identifiable as coming from that school.

I think where compulsory school uniform falls down is when its much more expensive than generic similar items of clothing, and where the compulsory rules detract from the education day (ie if you have a compulsory rule on the size of earrings for example, and if you wear earrings larger than the regulation size and are caught wearing them you get isolation for the remainder of the day). I think there needs to be a balance between strict adherence to the rules and optimum classroom education.

I agree.

Something I will never understand at my daughter's school is that there is no summer uniform and it has to reach near boiling point in the classroom before they are allowed to take off their blazer.Even then they still have to wear the tie.

ilovecheese

What really gets to me is the cost of school trips! I mean £800 for one week's skiing, £600 for a 5 day trip to Germany and that's BEFORE giving the children any spending money, clothes etc - I mean, they say they are not putting pressure on the parents, but with trips at this kind of expense, don't know how they come to this conclusion!!

School trips are not compulsory!!! I never went on a school trip because my parents could not afford it - End of story.

So what is your suggestion, that all school trips are cancelled, or should everyone else pay for YOUR child to go???