UKC

NEWS: Schools trips essential for education says HSE

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Jack Geldard 28 Mar 2008
Jon Garside of the BMC reports:

The Chair of the Health and Safety Commission has urged teachers to take a sensible approach to risk assessment, in order to ensure that school trips remain a part of every child's education.

Judith Hackitt said, "School trips are an essential part of every child's education and by not finding a way to make them happen we are failing in our duty to prepare them for life."

Read More: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=03&year=2008#n43329



Yrmenlaf 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

Was this not the same lady that took the very robust approach to Ripon Cathedral's decision not to do the Pancake Race on H & S grounds?

Her argument was that it was not dangerous (since it had passed off without incident since the year dot), and to use the spurious H & S argument undermined the very real H & S issues.

She seems to talk sense to me.

Y.

 eagleopus 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Yrmenlaf:

The impression I've always had, rightly or wrongly is that the H&S E themselves are sensible and pragmatic. It all falls down when company managers/ councils etc.. start interpreting H&S guidelines as black and white rules.
 gingerkate 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Yrmenlaf:
Kids at our school now banned from playing a really dangerous game.
Tig.
I kid you not.
Yrmenlaf 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/2008/pancake.htm

Unfortunately, Gingerkate, I can well believe that. Hopefully the HSE will start to defend common sense a bit more, as they appear to be doing.

Y.
 Ian McNeill 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

But will the management and LEA support school teachers if it all goes pearshaped and the proverbial hits the fan.

BUT thats where LEA centres come in with their tried and tested procedures and qualified and experienced staff.

But who checks out the bits in between and pays for supply teachers etc if its not year groups etc etc....
 Ozzrik 28 Mar 2008
In reply to eagleopus:
Absolutely right IMO. I work offshore fairly often and we are snowed under by people who slap "safety" into their job title and go insane. i.e we were repremanded for working at height without a harness, inertial reel etc because we were standing on a 12" wide beam running along the deck which was a good 8" tall - death trap apparently. HSEs view when the incident was raised during an audit was that it was just plain daft to apply working at height and that the Safety officer was in fact undermining safety by trivialising it.

Safety officers justification was that there is no "safe" height listed so anything off the deck is covered.... as you say, interpreting guidance as a black and white rule to be applied regardless of common sense.

good to hear the HSE speaking out against the kill joys, high time that anyone wanting to become responsible for 'elf and safety was trained in how to apply the guidelines intelligently and rationally rather than blindly and without thought. By someone outside of and independant to their organisation/company etc as well

interestingly offshore, the Dive and ROV vessels seem to have a much more common sense approach than installations despite being subject to the same, or in many cases more extreme safety regulations. I've found this to be true regarless of the operator or owner of the vessels too.

Stuart

 riquet 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:
Still, if they really want teachers to take kids out they will have to make things even simpler.
It needs to be reminded that teachers organize stuff on, mostly, a voluntary bases. It comes added to their workload and for most they don't think twice about it.
However, I have taken a wee trip down the links and it still took me 30 mn to scan the thing, just to come to the conclusion that I will have to spend about 2/3 days thinking about how some kid could slip and trip themselves at the crag.
I don't know about you but I can think of about a thousand ways to slip and trip yourself at a crag.
Then I'm told I need to list actions to be undertaken to avoid said trips.
Then I need to review said actions and see if effective (by then I still haven't had the satisfaction to see the kids out, yet I have given out days of my free time).

So dear Judith Hackitt if you want to see kids grow into balanced adults let them learn not to trip themselves on the obvious boulder. If they do let them learn from their mistakes... it's fecking sore not to look out for said boulder.
And finally, let me tell you: I am a teacher, but that come third in my life, after my family and my climbing and I would rather use my free time to go on climbing trips. THANK YOU VERY MUCH

Next time, they may save themselves the expenses of giving a big do and not come up with such patronizing sh*te aimed at making people feel guilty about how kids can't do all this things anymore.

Accept that common sense rules and yet shit happens do so!!!
Mille millions de mille sabord! Crenom d'une pipe!!
 JIMBO 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:
> "Health and safety is used by many as an excuse for not doing things"

I think other reasons come first; "I've got too much work to do", "I've got 100 exam papers to mark before next week", "I've got 300 books to mark", "I've got next weeks planning to do", "I've got parents evening, a meeting and detentions to do this week", "I don't get over time like many other professions", "After all the hard work I don't get thanked", "After all the hard work and giving up my free time, parents expect these trips to happen and depend on them as free child care", "I'm not paid to do this", "It can take more hours to prepare a trip than it does actually going on it".

Having said that I will still be running some outdoor climbing trips this summer because like a mug I actually like the few times I do get thanked and on occations feel appreciated (if the weather is good and the cliffs haven't been blown up and the rock sold to repair Westminster - see Portland thread about quarrying).
 gingerkate 28 Mar 2008
In reply to riquet:
That's a great post.
 Dee 28 Mar 2008
In reply to Judith Hackitt:
If we value school trips, perhaps we ought to show it by funding them properly - instead of relying on goodwill alone.
 blondel 28 Mar 2008
In reply to gingerkate:

> Kids at our school now banned from playing a really dangerous game.
> Tig.

I was asked by a headteacher not to blow bubbles when I was on playground duty because the children got too excited!

 gingerkate 29 Mar 2008
In reply to rock spider:
Oh FFS! How mad is that?!
Check out the weight loss thread... I didn't know this, but apparently (according to people who sound pretty expert to me) we're consuming less calories on average now than a few decades back. But activity/exercise levels have fallen so much more that obesity is increasing as a result. And yet they ban tig! And bubble blowing! FFS.

Sorry about all the swearing, but really, what's this country coming to that kids can't get excited running around chasing bubbles without some litigation-fearful fool wetting their knickers?
 blondel 29 Mar 2008
In reply to gingerkate:

> And yet they ban tig! And bubble blowing! FFS.

And British Bulldog. And football. And winners and losers on sports day.

They like computers, though. And interactive whiteboards. And videos. Children sit quietly in front of those.
 sutty 29 Mar 2008
In reply to gingerkate:

This risk assessment thing, if they applied it to everything there would be no sports.
Fotball, banned as tackles are dangerous, cricket, might get hit by hard cricket ball or batsman swinging his bat at the wicket as he is about to be stumped. Lacrosse and hockey, all that waving sticks around is madness. Cross country run, have all the kids had a medical check that they are fit enough for it?

The one thing they do not do that should be done is the risk assessment for kids getting the school bus under three miles. That would involve the education authority having to provide a lot more buses as roads we could walk years ago are now dual carriageways with 70mph speed limits on and no crossings. Surely more dangerous than most outdoor pursuits?
 gingerkate 29 Mar 2008
In reply to sutty:
That's the irony of course, really dangerous things get ignored.
 gingerkate 29 Mar 2008
In reply to rock spider:
Yep, football also banned at our school. And British Bulldog. How did we ever survive British Bulldog, eh?

And the pond (the other side of the fence and about as big as a table for two, full of frogs that the kids liked to watch) got filled in to create a nice safe 'wildlife area'.... that's one with no flaming wildlife ... ha ha ha <bitter laughter>.
 Lemony 29 Mar 2008
In reply to rock spider: To be fair, I can understand the ban on british bulldog. From the times I played it I can remember three broken arms, two broken noses and many, many smashed pairs of spectacles.
 David Hooper 29 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

One of the reasons I left my last job in the voluntary youth sector was because it was turning into a desk job. I know other outdoor professionals who have resigned/retired as they were being hamstrung by ridiculous amounts of paperwork and legislation.

Kids here in Liverpool if left to their own devices may get invloved in hard drugs, underage sex, gangs and gun/knife crime, dog fighting, robbing cars and joyriding.

Getting young people involved in the outdoors at this risktaking and experiemental stage of their lives can have a massively positive and profound impact on them, potentially diverting them from risky criminal and antisocial behaviour. learning about risk and responsibility in the outdoors can be a wonderful thing.

Some H&S legislature is strangling outdoor adventure provision and turning it into bland "Adventure in a Bun"
Yrmenlaf 29 Mar 2008
In reply to Lemony:

But that is much of the point, isn't it? Bulldogs is dangerous - broken limbs fairly common. Rugby is less dangerous - broken limbs rare. Football is less dangerous again, and "tag" less dangerous still.

Somewhere there is a line - close to Rugby, IMHO, between acceptable risks and not acceptable risks. And I guess the line moves if the activity is closely supervised (I would be uneasy with kids playing rugby without an adult ref, for example).

Y.

 gingerkate 29 Mar 2008
In reply to David Hooper:
> Some H&S legislature is strangling outdoor adventure provision and turning it into bland "Adventure in a Bun"

That's a brilliant phrase.





Yrmenlaf 29 Mar 2008
In reply to gingerkate:

I seem to remeber the cheif scout (?Simon? Duncan) saying that the Scouts don't provide adventure any more. They provide the appearance of adventure.


Very sad.

Y.
 Greenbanks 29 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

School trips now are so sanitised because of fear of litigation. If I was still a teacher I'd not be prepared to jump through the H&S risk-assessment mullarkey. The topic is heaven-sent for 'the good old days' nostalgia: but in this case its well-deserved. I do recall taking groups of kids on a regular basis to N Wales, Scotland, The Dales, Lake District & over to the Alps and the Atlas mountains. We were a pretty competent bunch (with a smattering of badges and certificates between us). But what was really touching was the trust that parents/carers gave to us; there was no spectre of litigation. Their kids were allowed to breathe. The contrast today, suffocating teachers and kids amidst red-tape, a chavish pre-occupation with allocating blame for financial reasons, and an absolute failure to recognise that outdoor education is an integral part of the ECM agenda and that teachers, youth-leaders and others should be adequately resourced to undertake these vital activities.

Funny, isn't it? We all rememember school field-trips but not our GCSEs.

But then again, maybe not.
 sutty 29 Mar 2008
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

Cannot find what response she got at the conference, perhaps that is as far as she got before finding a disruptive class in front of her telling her she needed to do the assessments for a term before opening her mouth.

maggs 03 Apr 2008
In reply to sutty: Its all very well organising trips for the kids. but in my experience in the Peaks the kids were running riot, treading on ropes, walking under the ropes of people being belayed. Why not have tried and tested routes for the kids and not try and make all of the grit shiny by top roping? Above all why not try a bit of discipline out there. Teach them the rules of climbing etiquette before being let loose? !!!!
 marsbar 03 Apr 2008
In reply to David Hooper:

>
> Kids here in Liverpool if left to their own devices may get invloved in hard drugs, underage sex, gangs and gun/knife crime, dog fighting, robbing cars and joyriding.
>
Quite. All of which are more dangerous than outdoor activities. Perhaps I should risk assess that they are safer on an organised trip than at home doing who knows what.
 marsbar 03 Apr 2008
In reply to maggs: Speak to the group leader.
 timbers 03 Apr 2008
In reply to Lemony: Bulldog banned at my school. The kids I teach were climbing the walls in the classroom today so I took them for a game of Bulldog to run it off, (out of sight of prying eyes). One pair of ripped trousers, one slightly winded.....bit naughty but hey.....not half as dangerous as what some of the little darlings get up to outside school.

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...