Do School Trip Fees subsidise non-payers?

lynzpik

Schools varies with how they fund school trip. My school use to reduce the cost for everyone and the 'Friends of ' fundraising subsidised this. Since it realised the financial state the country is in. However, we still had non-payers and if the level was too high we would of had to cancel. Unfortunately because we had reduced the price of the trip to start with, we never had to cancel.

I have also worked in a school that increased the price slightly to allow for a small percentage of non-payer.

If you really want to know, why not ask?

Kennyboy66

princessdon wrote: »

Our school leaves then behind at times (dependant on the trip), but they don't pay for them. My DD has a friend on a low income who was excluded and I offered to pay, school said no without the parents permission and they wouldn't take it if they knew I paid.

I see both sides, CB and CTC are very high so they should be able to support and its also often parents who can't pay who do, Fsm entitlement doesn't mean unable to pay.

If its an educational trip during school hours and a school is leaving pupils behind because they can't or won't pay then they are breaking the law (1996 Education Act). It really is simple.

Note that there is an exception for music lessons, so children normally have to pay for these, unless the school funds it at their discretion.

If its a "jolly" - lets say Alton Towers, this would not be an educational trip and pupils may be excluded.

Most non-payers really can't afford it but the minority of people who 'game' the system make me just as angry as those worrying about whether 50p of their £8 is subsidising someone else.

Janepig

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Me, my husband and my son were all delighted never to be picked for the sports teams I think you'll find that those who are no good at sport are not the slightest bit interested in it. It would be like someone who is hopeless at Maths being made to attempt advanced Maths in front of an audience, how humiliating when they fail miserably.

Where did I say that children should be forced to be picked for sports teams against their will? I hated sport at school - I had a permanent period for six years in comp rather than take part in PE!!

It just seems strange to me that in a school of nearly 500 kids, it's the same kids who get picked for all the different sports teams. And the teacher who is in charge of sporty things is well known for having his pets.

Dunroamin wrote: »

I'm not sure about actually training them but what are they doing in PE lessons if they're not leaning to play the various sports? Obviously schools will pick the best players but involvement outside doesn't sound as if it's the problem here; quality of teaching does.

They seem to do stuff like benchball (DD has tried to explain this to me, to no avail), some gymnastics, and who knows what else. Of course it's not a problem that children do activities outside school, but the teaching of sport, imo, could be better to help those who are interested in sport but aren't lucky enough, for whatever reason, to take part outside of school.

It's my understanding that in New Zealand, for instance, their childhood rugby training takes place in schools, rather than in clubs like they do here. And we know how good they are at rugby!

jellyhead wrote: »

Do they run any free sports clubs in school?

Ours has a football club at lunchtime once a week. I see older children playing netball, etc. after school with another teacher. This is the school teachers giving up their time to organise a free club though. There's a free dance club that's just started, and there are usually homework clubs, computer clubs, knitting, cooking, forest school (where they are allowed to climb trees!) for various year groups.

If they are oversubscribed they take different children each term to make sure everyone has a go

I love our school, they do so much interesting stuff for the children Mine goes to the school allotment now, they are allowed to dig in soil, pick up worms, harvest the crops, plant, etc. and it's excellent fun.

They've got free after school sports club for an hour on a Tuesday. DD does netball - she did start attempting to join in rugby after she had joined a rugby team outside of school. However, the male teacher was less than welcoming, there was always an excuse for her not to do it, and she soon gave up.

They do an Urdd club for a few weeks each year too, that costs about 50p each time I think. Not sure what they do there either, my memory is terrible!

They do gardening in the early years classes, planting, harvesting, etc.... One of their visits is to a local garden centre where they get plants, seeds, etc....

It's a fab school, I've got no big moans really.

Jx

princessdon

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

If its an educational trip during school hours and a school is leaving pupils behind because they can't or won't pay then they are breaking the law (1996 Education Act). It really is simple.

Note that there is an exception for music lessons, so children normally have to pay for these, unless the school funds it at their discretion.

If its a "jolly" - lets say Alton Towers, this would not be an educational trip and pupils may be excluded.

Most non-payers really can't afford it but the minority of people who 'game' the system make me just as angry as those worrying about whether 50p of their £8 is subsidising someone else.

I'd say a trip to France or outward bounds is educational and its common policy to only go if you pay. They allow them swimming lessons etc, but not music, sport, and others, they just provide a sport activity in school as opposed to rock climbing.

Most none payers can afford the £5 trips etc, if they gave up their phone contracts.

Dunroamin

Janepig wrote: »

They seem to do stuff like benchball (DD has tried to explain this to me, to no avail), some gymnastics, and who knows what else. Of course it's not a problem that children do activities outside school, but the teaching of sport, imo, could be better to help those who are interested in sport but aren't lucky enough, for whatever reason, to take part outside of school.

It's my understanding that in New Zealand, for instance, their childhood rugby training takes place in schools, rather than in clubs like they do here. And we know how good they are at rugby!


Jx

What a shame that it's changed so much - I learnt to play tennis, hockey and netball when I was at school, as well as other sports/activities. I don't remember anybody doing these outside school as we had after school practices and matches as well as matches on a Saturday morning. Given 2/3 hours homework every night, nobody would've had the time!

princessdon

And before anyone says that some parents genuinely cannot afford it, then explain how the sane parents can afford every none uniform day, every after school disco, don't decline any party invitations etc.

2 months notice for a trip costing £8 is not affordable, yet an impromptu disco and none uniform costing £8 and money is easily found.

Janepig

Dunroamin wrote: »

What a shame that it's changed so much - I learnt to play tennis, hockey and netball when I was at school, as well as other sports/activities. I don't remember anybody doing these outside school as we had after school practices and matches as well as matches on a Saturday morning. Given 2/3 hours homework every night, nobody would've had the time!

My two do so much more out of school than I ever did. I did ballet when I was very small, and then I did Brownies, and I also had swimming lessons for a bit but that was it, and I seemed to be in the minority, although I remember one or two other children in school going to ballroom dancing lessons or gymnastics. Even rugby didn't really start until comp, but now DS has got team mates in his under 7's and 8's who are just 5. Just about all the sports "coaching" you got was at school. I don't know how DD's going to manage in a year's time when she goes to comp, with all the associated homework, to fit in gymnastics, netball, athletics, cheerleading, etc.... Hopefully she can be persuaded to drop something, and I won't miss the taxiing!!

Jx

jellyhead

Janepig I feel exhausted just reading your facebook page My kids are very lazy except for swimming and trampolining.

Well, we've just had the letter about the outward bound trip and it's costing £155 but school are paying the first £40 of that so that was a nice surprise FSM children are free but it asks for a voluntary contribution.

I hope they give a maximum amount of spending money.

Janepig

jellyhead wrote: »

Janepig I feel exhausted just reading your facebook page My kids are very lazy except for swimming and trampolining.

Well, we've just had the letter about the outward bound trip and it's costing £155 but school are paying the first £40 of that so that was a nice surprise FSM children are free but it asks for a voluntary contribution.

I hope they give a maximum amount of spending money.

I hope they've given you plenty of warning about the trip. We were told in July about the one DD's going on next month and the first £50 was payable last month. They couldn't give us a final figure in July as they needed to know how many are going to see how big a bus they need. About four from DD's class aren't going, but I think it's because they aren't "outdoorsy" rather than for reasons of cost, but I couldn't be 100%.

When they're allowed spending money the school always cap it. Even if it's just a museum trip and they allow £2 if there's a gift shop. When I went on the week long trip DD's doing next June when I was her age, you had to hand over all your cash to the "adults" and they would let you have it back so much a day. Just as well or I would have blown the whole lot on sweets in the first day!!

Jx

jellyhead

I really hope the tuck shop's not too bad - he's 'sensitive' to some artificial colours and if he goes bananas while he's there he will cry for hours on the come-down then wet the bed. I'll try to persuade him that he prefers crisps