Another what would you do...

pelirocco

bylromarha wrote: »

He has the change from it - he had to use it on the bus journey home as he'd only bought a single to school that day.

He didn't think he'd be in trouble - he just didn't class this as an emergency. He knows the money isn't for fun stuff, and in his head, a school trip is fun.

I'm sorry but he should have more common sense , it's a lesson learned

bylromarha

Person_one wrote: »

I don't really think that makes it a reasonable rule.

No phones in school makes sense, they disrupt lessons.

No phones on the way to and from school is needless. Using a phone isn't poor behaviour, warranting a 'spy' to report back.

Maybe it's a control thing? Photos on FB of kids in uniform being stupid on the bus? I don't know. Either way, we don't have a problem with it.

To top it all, I found out today that entry to the author's talk was only £5 pp - school were charging £7 plus train fare.

Wish we'd never bothered!

bylromarha

pelirocco wrote: »

I'm sorry but he should have more common sense , it's a lesson learned

I don't disagree.

Like I said before, he's black and white about these things. And having worked with 11 year olds for many years, it isn't uncommon in boys to be so compartmentalised at this age.

It's the fact he was allowed to walk away from a trip without anyone letting us know where he was which is the biggest bugbear.

Flyonthewall

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

It was an afterschool trip. In a secondary school.

Exactly, a school trip. When your kids are under the supervision of teachers. At least, they're supposed to be. Doesn't matter that it was outside of normal school hours, they are still responsible for every kid in their care.

Doesn't matter what school it is or what age he is. They are a school, he is a kid. There is no more to it than that, especially as the parent of the kid is not happy with the situation.

It's obvious the answer is going to be 'Go home, then'. Just like every other afternoon.

It's not though, he wasn't at school. He had to go home from another location.

It's not primary school anymore. And, tough though it seems, the more times there isn't the easy option of letting a grown up think for you, the sooner they learn to do the thinking for themselves. Proven by the fact the OP's son managed to get himself home

He did, but there are many dangers out there and he wasn't going his usual way home with the usual people, he was alone. What would you be saying if he'd been injured or worse?

You keep pointing out the school. So if he were at primary school their actions wouldn't have been acceptable?

Considering he was born in August if he'd been born a month later he'd still be in primary school. So you're saying because he was born a month earlier all of a sudden he's grown up enough to find his way home from a random location alone?

I'm not going to keep debating ages and all that. Even if he were 16 I'd be saying the same as he'd still be a kid.

So all I'm going to say is he is a kid and the teachers/school were responsible for him and his safety. They did nothing to ensure that safety.

There may have been numerous issues with paying or contact or whatever else, but in the end that is still down to them. They should be prepared, well organised and avoid such issues in the first place.

No excuses for the school. This situation should not have happened.

I completely understand the kid with the money and why the OP is annoyed.

pollypenny

skattykatty wrote: »

A former secondary school teacher here. I believe it IS a safeguarding issue. I don't care if the school was just a road away from the train station. When we take on the responsibility of accompanying people's children on trips, it is accepted that we will be with those children every step of the way up to the point at which as parent has said it is okay for that child to go on alone. This is not only for the child's safety and wellbeing, you understand, it is also to cover ourselves!

IF the child was on the list, had clearly paid the £7 to be on the list for the trip, why the teacher couldn't cough up £2 there and then and then sort it out later is beyond me. At the end of the day, however badly the letter was worded - you paid for the trip, he was on the teacher's list for the trip, the fact that the teacher didn't take him because of £2 oversight (as you'd clearly paid up for travel) is ridiculous.

Yes, by all means support your child to develop skills that will enable him to manage these situations, but at 11 he is still a child and it was the adult's responsibility to sort it out, whether the child was born on 31st August or 1st September makes no difference. If it was HIS teacher, how come she doesn't know him well enough to understand that the situation may be confusing for him? Am actually quite angry about this!!!

Edited to say: if a child says I have to go home or I can't go on the trip anymore, as a teacher, I would CHECK this out with the parent. You don't just let a child walk off like that. Phew...will now try and calm down.

Exactly!

I, too, was a teacher in a comprehensive school and I have taken many trips. I would never, ever have let a child go off like that.

She was responsible for him for the duration of that trip.

Edit to add: I've found myself standing outside school for up to half an hour on many occasions when parents, who have had proper notification of time of return, are late.

Legally, my responsibility ended when the bus arrived back at school, as the parents were informed. However, could you imagine leaving one kid, of what ever age, standing alone? And it was usually after a theatre visit, so it was late!

And good teachers are aware that pupils of all ages, but Y7 especially, can be disorganised.

You have two retired teachers mad on your behalf.

Buffythedebtslayer

I am a teacher and cannot believe he was allowed to go home!

ANY trip involves lots of checklists, who has paid what, when, do other teachers in the dept see any problems with the kids who are going, including the really important parental contact list which means you can contact individual parents if there are any problems. I would have phoned you OP, ESPECIALLY if I had never taught the child.

and he wouldn't have gone any where till I had spoken to you!

I feel bad that your son didn't feel he could ask. I really hope my years sevens could ask me.

XX

peachyprice

bylromarha wrote: »

Nope we aren't taking it too literally. The turnaround is too tight for him to collect his phone at the end of the day and not miss the school bus.

Taken from the 30 page newsletter which came home at the beginning of this term. He's already had 1 random bag check on this.

I really don't have a problem with no phone - he now knows what to do if he feels unable to solve a situation himself. And has a checklist in his bag of options to pursue if he feels he has no options.

Either way, a phone wouldn't have helped in this situation - we'd have told him to get on the bus home as he'd missed the train. If the teacher had wanted to speak to us, she could have asked DS if he had our phone numbers.

I'm shocked at that policy TBH, it's a secondary school in the 21st century, they seem to be blissfully unaware of that fact. It's petty a rule that needs to be challenged. It shows their utter lack of trust in their students, they are treating them like primary school children not responsible young adults.

Of course if he had a phone it would have helped, he could have phoned you and you could have told him to use the £5, you also would have known he was walking home alone and what time to expect him. If anything had happened to him on the way home you would have been ignorant until 6.15 when you went to pick him up only to be found he wasn't there.

pollypenny

Another point, for every school trip pupils in the county would complete a form which included contact details and permission to authorise emergency treatment.

The lead teacher would carry those.

It seems as if the whole event was badly organised.

Anatidaephobia

I don't think the letter sounds like it was ambiguous at all (based on the OP's posts).

It was asking for £7 for the trip plus £1.50-£2 for the train and then there was a reply slip that said "I enclose £9" which would be the aforementioned £7 trip plus £2 train.

If the trip was expected to paid for in two separate parts; £7 from the parents in advance and £1.50-£2 paid by the child on the day, then it should have made this very clear.

Why did the reply slip ask for £9 if they didn't actually want £9?!

bylromarha wrote: »

Honestly, the letter had the full attention of 2 adults for at least 10 minutes as we talked about how much money they wanted. It was unclear. £7 for the trip. £1.50-£2 for the train. We cannot give change. On the reply slip "I enclose £9..."

Loulou2010

Just a thought. Did your son definately hand the slip and money in? Not sat at the bottom of his bag? Lost it and too embarrassed to admit it? Although if he had been checked onto the trip I am guessing it must have been