The Virtual Pub
Come Inside... => Saloon Bar => Topic started by: Snoopy on August 23, 2007, 05:51:52 PM
-
OK Oh wise ones ~ explain this to me.
My two boys attend a local infant/junior school. The school insists that the children wear black shoes as part of their school uniform. BUT they have to have black plimsoles to change into on arrival as "outdoor" shoes are, it is claimed, a major source of dog sh*t entering the school. At break times they have to change from their plimsoles (daps to you northerners) into their school shoes and reverse the process at the end of break.
Both my boys, as do very many of their school chums, play football every break-time and wreck a pair of school shoes every term doing so.
They also have to have "Trainers" for sport and PE.
Now I say they should change from their plimsoles into trainers to kick footballs (which the school provides) around at break-time with a consequent saving on the black shoes. This is NO ALLOWED by the schools as they MUST wear school uniform during breaks. Trainers are only to be worn for sports .... BUT surely if you give boys a football then to all intent and purpose are you not telling them to play a sport?
I try so hard to support the school and the teaching staff and, as you are all aware, am an advocate of discipline and the use of having and enforcing rules but this makes no sense to me.
Anybody got any comments?
I was going to say "Is it me?" but that only invites one answer and I know I am not the only parent struggling to comprehend this apparent stupidity.
-
OK Oh wise ones ~ explain this to me.
I was going to say "Is it me?" but that only invites one answer and I know I am not the only parent struggling to comprehend this apparent stupidity.
I read what you have written, but I have difficulty in believing that they are taking that line. noooo: It makes no sense at all. I assume you have spoken to the head? Do you have a PTA, are you a member if not can you attend the meetings? Daft if you ask me... ::)
-
(daps to you northerners)
No. Pumps.
-
OK Oh wise ones ~ explain this to me.
I was going to say "Is it me?" but that only invites one answer and I know I am not the only parent struggling to comprehend this apparent stupidity.
I read what you have written, but I have difficulty in believing that they are taking that line. noooo: It makes no sense at all. I assume you have spoken to the head? Do you have a PTA, are you a member if not can you attend the meetings? Daft if you ask me... ::)
My sentiments exactly. PTA? Yes we have one ~ Do I belong? Wouldn't join if you paid me to (which they won't)
Spoken to Head? ~ Yes.... He is the Gimp that made the rule.
-
the original post was too long for my attention span, however we call plimsoles pumps, not paps or whatever it was.
-
South Wales is the home of 'Daps'. AFAIK
I would certainly challenge the ruling, it's daft. But I wouldn't know who to... Board of Governors or something? Too long since I had anything to do with schools.
However, we - as kids - used to quickly destroy shoes without any help from balls as I remember....... redface:
-
OK Oh wise ones ~ explain this to me.
My two boys attend a local infant/junior school. The school insists that the children wear black shoes as part of their school uniform. BUT they have to have black plimsoles to change into on arrival as "outdoor" shoes are, it is claimed, a major source of dog sh*t entering the school. At break times they have to change from their plimsoles (daps to you northerners) into their school shoes and reverse the process at the end of break.
Both my boys, as do very many of their school chums, play football every break-time and wreck a pair of school shoes every term doing so.
They also have to have "Trainers" for sport and PE.
Now I say they should change from their plimsoles into trainers to kick footballs (which the school provides) around at break-time with a consequent saving on the black shoes. This is NO ALLOWED by the schools as they MUST wear school uniform during breaks. Trainers are only to be worn for sports .... BUT surely if you give boys a football then to all intent and purpose are you not telling them to play a sport?
I try so hard to support the school and the teaching staff and, as you are all aware, am an advocate of discipline and the use of having and enforcing rules but this makes no sense to me.
Anybody got any comments?
I was going to say "Is it me?" but that only invites one answer and I know I am not the only parent struggling to comprehend this apparent stupidity.
To me it sounds like a completely stupid rule ? especially as they provide the footballs?
Probably some knee-jerk ruling after one kid brought shit into school on his shoes. I can?t imagine that the plimsoll rule is common in other schools yet they seem to manage without being overwhelmed with dog shite.
I?d challenge it on that basis.
-
OK Oh wise ones ~ explain this to me.
My two boys attend a local infant/junior school. The school insists that the children wear black shoes as part of their school uniform. BUT they have to have black plimsoles to change into on arrival as "outdoor" shoes are, it is claimed, a major source of dog sh*t entering the school. At break times they have to change from their plimsoles (daps to you northerners) into their school shoes and reverse the process at the end of break.
Both my boys, as do very many of their school chums, play football every break-time and wreck a pair of school shoes every term doing so.
They also have to have "Trainers" for sport and PE.
Now I say they should change from their plimsoles into trainers to kick footballs (which the school provides) around at break-time with a consequent saving on the black shoes. This is NO ALLOWED by the schools as they MUST wear school uniform during breaks. Trainers are only to be worn for sports .... BUT surely if you give boys a football then to all intent and purpose are you not telling them to play a sport?
I try so hard to support the school and the teaching staff and, as you are all aware, am an advocate of discipline and the use of having and enforcing rules but this makes no sense to me.
Anybody got any comments?
I was going to say "Is it me?" but that only invites one answer and I know I am not the only parent struggling to comprehend this apparent stupidity.
Sounds totally bonkers to me ::)
What a waste of the childrens and teachers time!!
Are you sure that the 'ed' doesn't have a cousin with shares in Free Hardy & Willis ?
-
What a load of panic over a bit of dog shite !! Teach the kids to look where they are walking Banghead Problem solved . God only knows what their houses must be like indoors . happy001
-
Kid walks to school, treads in shit.
Takes off shoes, gets shit on hands.
Puts on new shoes, gets shit on new shoes.
Puts hands near face, not nice.
Takes of pumps and puts on shoes, repeat.
And you allow the 'man' that made this rule oversee your childrens education?
-
Can the school just not put huge welcome mats outside the entrance and ensure all the kids wipe the feet as they enter the building?
Are the teachers having to change their shoes- in not, claim this is discrimination and having a profound impact on the psychological development of your children - ask if they have carried out Equality Impact Assessments on this procedure and that you will inform the local authority of the adverse effects of this ridiculous ruling.
In addition all this changing around must mean that more kids lose their stuff as even having a PE lesson a coupe of times a week normally guarantees my daughter has lost some part of her kit evil:
-
Yesterday, by coincidence, I was talking to the new (elected last term) Chair of School Governors. Top of her agenda, she tells me, is to "Discuss" this stupid rule with the Head. Since in real life she is a solicitor and her husband works for the "Dept of Justice" I suspect that "Sir" doesn't stand a chance. whistle:
-
Yesterday, by coincidence, I was talking to the new (elected last term) Chair of School Governors. Top of her agenda, she tells me, is to "Discuss" this stupid rule with the Head. Since in real life she is a solicitor and her husband works for the "Dept of Justice" I suspect that "Sir" doesn't stand a chance. whistle:
As long as one of them doesn?t have shite on their shoes when they go to the meeting? whistle:
-
Most heads are tossers. evil:
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Perhaps you should take one of the cleaners? rubschin:
-
No, we are taking a friend. It often helps to have a barrister present on these occasions evil:
-
No, we are taking a friend. It often helps to have a barrister present on these occasions evil:
Well, we live in hope that the poor chap doesn?t drop dead before the meeting? whistle:
-
But the Head may during it evil:
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Let me kow how it goes. I'm interested in this one!
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Let me kow how it goes. I'm interested in this one!
Would you like Nick to kill someone then? scared2:
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Let me kow how it goes. I'm interested in this one!
Would you like Nick to kill someone then? scared2:
Sooo many people soooo little time. ;)
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Let me kow how it goes. I'm interested in this one!
Would you like Nick to kill someone then? scared2:
Sooo many people soooo little time. ;)
I have been compiling a list all morning ready to hand over on my next visit to Nick Towers.
-
And we are taking one to the cleaners this afternoon. Wish us luck!
Let me kow how it goes. I'm interested in this one!
Would you like Nick to kill someone then? scared2:
Sooo many people soooo little time. ;)
I have been compiling a list all morning ready to hand over on my next visit to Nick Towers.
scared2: