Elementary school teachers

copperheron18 said:Good grief, the sheer volume of comments here is staggering. I can’t say I’m surprised that nobody wants to pursue a degree that leads to a career in education—whether you're aiming to be a teacher or a professor lately.🙄

From what I understand, kids generally enjoy going to the theater, the movies, field trips, or even hitting up McDonald's... personally, I loved those things when I was their age. But teachers often seem reluctant to lead these excursions. It makes sense, doesn't it? Nobody actually wants to shoulder the heavy responsibility of babysitting a massive group of someone else's children.

The costs for these trips aren't astronomical, and most families can swing them. For those who can't afford it but still want their child to participate, there are always options for funding through agencies or simply via small individual contributions.

If anyone truly believes that field trips are excessive, unnecessary, or lack educational value—and therefore feels absolutely no obligation to send their child—well, they shouldn't. No one is going to force them. However, one has to wonder how that child will feel. They'll likely end up miserable because Mom won't let them go see Harry Potter at the cinema while everyone else is heading out. At that point, it’s up to that parent to explain to their child why they consider such experiences "unproductive."

I honestly don't see the point in debating whether there are too many trips. If you feel that way, just don't send your kid. Simple as that; no one can compel you otherwise. As for those comments suggesting professors are just using these trips to line their own pockets, I won't even dignify them with a response. They radiate such a level of primitive cynicism that they aren't even worth the breath.

That's just how it works. We aren't packing up the whole school for a three-day trek. Instead, my husband and I will just drive up to a mountain town once a winter when it snows and we'll all enjoy it together.
Who would actually try to charge for all those big trips? Nobody makes a scene. If someone feels guilty about it, that's their own business.

feralmoose4 said:Protect him from what, exactly? From people noticing that a certain family can't afford McShit? Or from being teased by other kids?

If you ask me, her son is perfectly aware of their financial situation and the fact they don't have money for nonsense like Mc...

Why should she deny her child the trip just because she can't shell out about $20$10 for something that isn't even necessary (I mean, what kind of "experience" does a trip to McDonald's actually provide?)?

What kind of message are we sending the kid? Basically: "Every time you run short on cash, we’re going to isolate you just to make sure nobody hurts your feelings."

I completely agree with Luna!

This isn't even about the money—it's about the principle!

And Kimberly Robinson2, I'm with you on your last post too; I also don't see why a child needs to see and have everything.

Hold up, are you seriously saying it's okay to weigh a kid down with the family's financial stress and expect a little one to carry that burden?

That's exactly what I meant by protecting him. We aren't talking about a new iPhone, sneakers, or summer camp here, we're talking about $6.75.

Personally, I wouldn't let a rigid principle come before my kid; I'd try my best to make sure they feel just as included as everyone else in the group.

Kenneth Brown5 said:Hold up, are you seriously saying it's okay to weigh a kid down with the family's financial stress and expect a little one to carry that burden?

That's exactly what I meant by protecting him. We aren't talking about a new iPhone, sneakers, or summer camp here, we're talking about $6.75.

Personally, I wouldn't let a rigid principle come before my kid; I'd try my best to make sure they feel just as included as everyone else in the group.

Burdening them? That's just called reality.
I firmly believe a ten-year-old is more than capable of grasping the situation.

Maybe because of my job, I see too many kids who are clearly aware of their parents' finances, so perhaps I can't be entirely objective 🤷

Of course any decent mother wants the absolute best for her child and doesn't want them to suffer. Show me one sane mom who doesn't feel that way!

But what is a mother supposed to do when she can't even afford a greasy meal at McShit for her kid? Work herself to death? Listen to judgmental comments from outsiders about how she "should have planned better" (yeah, right, because life is a fairy tale) or how she could have magically found the cash?

What does "being equal with the group" even mean to you? What if you aren't even remotely close to that group's standard when it comes to what you can actually afford 😉?

Kenneth Brown5 said:Hold up, are you seriously saying it's okay to weigh a kid down with the family's financial stress and expect a little one to carry that burden?

That's exactly what I meant by protecting him. We aren't talking about a new iPhone, sneakers, or summer camp here, we're talking about $6.75.

Personally, I wouldn't let a rigid principle come before my kid; I'd try my best to make sure they feel just as included as everyone else in the group.

The truth is, kids feel the weight of their family's finances whether we want them to or not, simply because they see what their classmates can afford. The real question is: should we be teaching them that it's shameful not to have enough cash for everything (especially when this specific thing is totally useless)? Should a mom have to go into debt just so a teacher doesn't end up having to tell the class, "Hey, even sandwiches are a luxury"? Should parents have to fund every single school whim just so a kid doesn't feel the gap between those who have it easy and those who don't? Honestly, instead of hiding the struggle, isn't it better to teach a child that there's no shame in living honestly on what you've got?

Jason Ortiz5 said:The truth is, kids feel the weight of their family's finances whether we want them to or not, simply because they see what their classmates can afford. The real question is: should we be teaching them that it's shameful not to have enough cash for everything (especially when this specific thing is totally useless)? Should a mom have to go into debt just so a teacher doesn't end up having to tell the class, "Hey, even sandwiches are a luxury"? Should parents have to fund every single school whim just so a kid doesn't feel the gap between those who have it easy and those who don't? Honestly, instead of hiding the struggle, isn't it better to teach a child that there's no shame in living honestly on what you've got?

Personally, I think pretending to be a Rockefeller when you aren't is absurd. It's not a tragedy if you can't swing a McShit burger or a big trip to Disney World. What matters way more is our relationship with our kid and how they feel at home—love, connection, all that stuff. Money and McDonald's are secondary.
If we make a huge production out of it, our kids will too. If we don't make it a big deal, they won't see it as a tragedy either.
My little girl is modest and grateful; she doesn't care about the material stuff. Honestly, she's more mature than most kids her age because of it.
And then there are the stories of people maxing out credit cards just so their kid "doesn't feel left out," or being told they owe something because they weren't careful, or feeling forced into things after having a baby... my take is simple: a child cannot have everything. It’s actually good for them to realize that early on, before they grow up expecting everything to be handed to them on a silver platter.
And if you don't have the cash, there is zero shame in that.
One more thing... no amount of money can buy the love or that sense of security we provide through just five minutes of real conversation
when we explain why things are the way they are.

feralmoose4 said:Burdening them? That's just called reality.
I firmly believe a ten-year-old is more than capable of grasping the situation.

Maybe because of my job, I see too many kids who are clearly aware of their parents' finances, so perhaps I can't be entirely objective 🤷

Of course any decent mother wants the absolute best for her child and doesn't want them to suffer. Show me one sane mom who doesn't feel that way!

But what is a mother supposed to do when she can't even afford a greasy meal at McShit for her kid? Work herself to death? Listen to judgmental comments from outsiders about how she "should have planned better" (yeah, right, because life is a fairy tale) or how she could have magically found the cash?

What does "being equal with the group" even mean to you? What if you aren't even remotely close to that group's standard when it comes to what you can actually afford 😉?

I think you're blowing this out of proportion; the mom literally just said she felt awkward paying extra since her kitchen work was being covered.
To me, a kid deserves to just be a kid, not a little accountant worrying about whether there's enough money in the family bank account.

If I were in those shoes, I'd either borrow the $6.75 or just tell them they couldn't go.

I definitely wouldn't let some rigid personal principle get in the way if it meant watching my kid sit there while all their friends are munching on donuts.😁 Sure, maybe we should've thought ahead about how they'd feel once they actually got there,😢 but honestly, the bottom line is that the kid already understands the reality of the situation at home.👎

Jason Ortiz5 said:The truth is, kids feel the weight of their family's finances whether we want them to or not, simply because they see what their classmates can afford. The real question is: should we be teaching them that it's shameful not to have enough cash for everything (especially when this specific thing is totally useless)? Should a mom have to go into debt just so a teacher doesn't end up having to tell the class, "Hey, even sandwiches are a luxury"? Should parents have to fund every single school whim just so a kid doesn't feel the gap between those who have it easy and those who don't? Honestly, instead of hiding the struggle, isn't it better to teach a child that there's no shame in living honestly on what you've got?

I really feel like this could've been handled way differently if someone had just told the teacher the little guy would be bringing his own lunch; why do we all just assume she didn't care about the situation?

Like I mentioned before, if I ever felt like I couldn't swing those extra costs or simply didn't want to jump through those hoops just to keep up appearances, I'd never send my kid, or maybe I'd just borrow what was needed, but the whole mess happening here just wouldn't be something I'd entertain. If a family is struggling, the kids usually pick up on that vibe long before anyone makes a scene, so there was really no need to shine a spotlight on it like that.

Kenneth Brown5 said:I think you're blowing this out of proportion; the mom literally just said she felt awkward paying extra since her kitchen work was being covered.
To me, a kid deserves to just be a kid, not a little accountant worrying about whether there's enough money in the family bank account.

If I were in those shoes, I'd either borrow the $6.75 or just tell them they couldn't go.

I definitely wouldn't let some rigid personal principle get in the way if it meant watching my kid sit there while all their friends are munching on donuts.😁 Sure, maybe we should've thought ahead about how they'd feel once they actually got there,😢 but honestly, the bottom line is that the kid already understands the reality of the situation at home.👎

Sure, that sounds lovely, assuming life isn't unpredictable and doesn't flip you from wealthy to broke overnight.

Especially when living in a world like this.

My take is that every child in the world deserves a normal childhood—not having to worry about when they'll eat or drink next, or if they'll even see their parents again.

Now, you'll probably say that has nothing to do with the topic. Maybe it doesn't, but I deal with this reality every single day, so perhaps that's why my perspective is so different.

I would have sent the kid on the field trip or to a museum, and simply explained why we aren't doing the McDonald's part. And frankly, I doubt the kid wouldn't get it.

If I didn't send them—what message am I sending? That they're isolated because they're poor? That it's something to be ashamed of?

How will they feel once they're actually there?
I truly believe it's better than the feeling of being completely left out.

Kenneth Brown5 said:I really feel like this could've been handled way differently if someone had just told the teacher the little guy would be bringing his own lunch; why do we all just assume she didn't care about the situation?

Like I mentioned before, if I ever felt like I couldn't swing those extra costs or simply didn't want to jump through those hoops just to keep up appearances, I'd never send my kid, or maybe I'd just borrow what was needed, but the whole mess happening here just wouldn't be something I'd entertain. If a family is struggling, the kids usually pick up on that vibe long before anyone makes a scene, so there was really no need to shine a spotlight on it like that.

Because it’s embarrassing?

Kenneth Brown5 said:I really feel like this could've been handled way differently if someone had just told the teacher the little guy would be bringing his own lunch; why do we all just assume she didn't care about the situation?

Like I mentioned before, if I ever felt like I couldn't swing those extra costs or simply didn't want to jump through those hoops just to keep up appearances, I'd never send my kid, or maybe I'd just borrow what was needed, but the whole mess happening here just wouldn't be something I'd entertain. If a family is struggling, the kids usually pick up on that vibe long before anyone makes a scene, so there was really no need to shine a spotlight on it like that.

But the author actually mentioned that the teacher already knew the little guy had his sandwiches.

I truly believe she cared, and I don't think there was any bad intention on her part at all.

It’s the whole system that really gets under my skin.

Regarding that infamous trip to McDonald's—look, sure, the mother didn't realize the teacher was taking the kids out. But honestly? It feels like she knew perfectly well that the cost would be roughly the same whether she bought the kid a $6.75 Happy Meal or packed up sandwiches, snacks, and juice at home. I mean, if a child is on a field trip lasting about eight hours, it’s a mathematical certainty they’re going to get hungry, right? When you weigh the price of a Happy Meal against the cost of prepping homemade food, we're looking at nearly the same ballpark. Maybe it's a few extra dollars here or there, but let's not start an endless debate over those negligible $1.75 differences... 🤷

In this day and age, when so many kids spend their entire lives glued to gaming screens, I think it would be way more educational—and honestly, much healthier—to just take them out to a local park and organize some kind of field day, like
and the best part? It wouldn't even cost a dime!

But no, apparently it’s more important to go sit in a theater and watch Harry Potter. I mean, what’s actually educational about that? Aside from the fact that the local bus company gets a nice little kickback because of the school's contract. ☕ It's the same story everywhere here; for years, the school has been using the same single local transit provider to drive kids on field trips, and they charge way more than any competitor would. But the administration just won't switch. My brother-in-law tried complaining about it, but nothing happened.

And just to be clear, I'm not blaming the teachers. In 99% of cases, these rigid ideas come "from the top down."

feralmoose4 said:Because it’s embarrassing?

It’s not even about embarrassment, it’s more like it’s just way harder for a little kid to deal with all that pressure when they're feeling singled out.🤷

copperheron18 said:Regarding that infamous trip to McDonald's—look, sure, the mother didn't realize the teacher was taking the kids out. But honestly? It feels like she knew perfectly well that the cost would be roughly the same whether she bought the kid a $6.75 Happy Meal or packed up sandwiches, snacks, and juice at home. I mean, if a child is on a field trip lasting about eight hours, it’s a mathematical certainty they’re going to get hungry, right? When you weigh the price of a Happy Meal against the cost of prepping homemade food, we're looking at nearly the same ballpark. Maybe it's a few extra dollars here or there, but let's not start an endless debate over those negligible $1.75 differences... 🤷

But like, it says right above that she had already bought everything for the sandwiches, so she just didn't want to shell out extra cash for McDonald's since the teacher hadn't given them enough notice about the stop.

redpilot37 said:That's just how it works. We aren't packing up the whole school for a three-day trek. Instead, my husband and I will just drive up to a mountain town once a winter when it snows and we'll all enjoy it together.
Who would actually try to charge for all those big trips? Nobody makes a scene. If someone feels guilty about it, that's their own business.

Yeah, sure, but have you ever actually felt like an outsider? Like, everyone goes to a theme park in Orlando, and then for three days after, they're still talking about it. Then they move on to some trip to the Grand Canyon, and for two weeks, the whole group is rehashing every little thing that happened. Then there's that summer trip to the coast, and suddenly the entire class has this shared set of inside jokes and stories that define them for the next month, and you're just standing there with zero clue what's going on. You take your family trips to the Rockies, sure, but you tell those stories to your two best friends in one afternoon. The stuff that happens on a class trip to Yellowstone? That becomes the legend for the rest of the year. If you miss those big moments—the mountain trips, the beach trips, whatever—you end up being totally out of the loop half the time while the rest of the class is bonding over things you weren't even part of...👎

feralmoose4 said:Because it’s embarrassing?

I suppose it's because other kids might turn it into something shameful—teasing, mocking, that kind of thing.

Yeah, I’ll say it again: kids can be cruel.
Have we already forgotten that article about the little girl at an elementary school in Chicago who was bullied so relentlessly over being poor that she actually had to switch schools entirely?!

So why encourage paying for all these unnecessary field trips a million times a year? And dragging kids to random fast-food joints? And no, I'm sure a bologna sandwich won't spoil in the middle of December. I honestly don't know how we survived our intense field trips back in the day when there wasn't even a McDonald's around.

It's just unnecessary.
And it isn't even about the $6.75, it's really more about the sheer lack of necessity!!

Kenneth Brown5 said:I really feel like this could've been handled way differently if someone had just told the teacher the little guy would be bringing his own lunch; why do we all just assume she didn't care about the situation?

Like I mentioned before, if I ever felt like I couldn't swing those extra costs or simply didn't want to jump through those hoops just to keep up appearances, I'd never send my kid, or maybe I'd just borrow what was needed, but the whole mess happening here just wouldn't be something I'd entertain. If a family is struggling, the kids usually pick up on that vibe long before anyone makes a scene, so there was really no need to shine a spotlight on it like that.

I mean, you’d think it’s pretty obvious to any teacher that kids actually need to eat to function, right? It’s not like they can run on fumes all day. 😕 She totally blew the whole thing. Honestly, she could've had enough sense and tact to not mess it up so completely.

I’ve already said this, but if I ever felt like I couldn't—or just didn't want to—cover those extra costs for my kid, I wouldn't even send them. Or I'd just lend them the cash. Honestly, the whole situation we're dealing with here would never have been an option for me. If they're broke, kids usually pick up on that vibe pretty early anyway, so there really wasn't any need to make such a big deal out of it.

So, if a parent can't swing a trip to McDonald's, does that mean they shouldn't bother taking their kid to a museum either? Like, is a museum visit without a Happy Meal even considered "educational" or "cultured"? Does a trip to the museum basically require a stop at McDonald's just to count as part of the school curriculum or something?

Borrowing money just to buy something totally useless is actually a great parenting lesson, if you think about it. It sets such a clear example for kids. Not to mention all the snarky comments from adults that are bound to follow later: "Oh, look at that—can't even pay the electric bill on time, but suddenly there's cash to buy a kid a Happy Meal at McDonald's..." ☕ Honestly, we really are a wonderful bunch. If you don't have anything going for you, everyone just jumps at the chance to screw you over from every single angle. You can always count on someone finding something to pick at. ☕

Look, I don't think you even need to bring up the fact that money is tight. Honestly, does anyone even need to point out when they're doing well? In America, showing off your success isn't really seen as a bad thing—it’s actually pretty normal, maybe even encouraged. It's just part of the culture here. 🙄Why can't we just accept whether we have money or not as a plain old fact? It feels like everyone is constantly trying to force things, either obsessing over amassing more or desperately trying to manufacture wealth out of thin air. Why not just roll with whatever the bank balance says and stop stressing?

Jason Ortiz5 said:I mean, you’d think it’s pretty obvious to any teacher that kids actually need to eat to function, right? It’s not like they can run on fumes all day. 😕 She totally blew the whole thing. Honestly, she could've had enough sense and tact to not mess it up so completely.

I’ve already said this, but if I ever felt like I couldn't—or just didn't want to—cover those extra costs for my kid, I wouldn't even send them. Or I'd just lend them the cash. Honestly, the whole situation we're dealing with here would never have been an option for me. If they're broke, kids usually pick up on that vibe pretty early anyway, so there really wasn't any need to make such a big deal out of it.

So, if a parent can't swing a trip to McDonald's, does that mean they shouldn't bother taking their kid to a museum either? Like, is a museum visit without a Happy Meal even considered "educational" or "cultured"? Does a trip to the museum basically require a stop at McDonald's just to count as part of the school curriculum or something?

Borrowing money just to buy something totally useless is actually a great parenting lesson, if you think about it. It sets such a clear example for kids. Not to mention all the snarky comments from adults that are bound to follow later: "Oh, look at that—can't even pay the electric bill on time, but suddenly there's cash to buy a kid a Happy Meal at McDonald's..." ☕ Honestly, we really are a wonderful bunch. If you don't have anything going for you, everyone just jumps at the chance to screw you over from every single angle. You can always count on someone finding something to pick at. ☕

Look, I don't think you even need to bring up the fact that money is tight. Honestly, does anyone even need to point out when they're doing well? In America, showing off your success isn't really seen as a bad thing—it’s actually pretty normal, maybe even encouraged. It's just part of the culture here. 🙄Why can't we just accept whether we have money or not as a plain old fact? It feels like everyone is constantly trying to force things, either obsessing over amassing more or desperately trying to manufacture wealth out of thin air. Why not just roll with whatever the bank balance says and stop stressing?

And who exactly in this scenario is bragging about having money? Is it the other parents who already paid for the bus and the McDonald's?

Yeah, clearly the most important thing is what the neighbors will think about the mom🙄, so she was probably terrified they'd judge her if she even paid for that. It’s not like anyone cares how he actually felt in the moment☕

Now everyone is acting like the McDonald's trip was some useless extra, but for me, it's not about the burgers. Would things have been different if they had gone to the Griffith Observatory later and had to pay an entrance fee $6.75?

If he was going to go, he should have just gone all in instead of doing it in a way that draws attention to himself and puts him in such an uncomfortable spot.

Kenneth Brown5 said:And who exactly in this scenario is bragging about having money? Is it the other parents who already paid for the bus and the McDonald's?

Yeah, clearly the most important thing is what the neighbors will think about the mom🙄, so she was probably terrified they'd judge her if she even paid for that. It’s not like anyone cares how he actually felt in the moment☕

Now everyone is acting like the McDonald's trip was some useless extra, but for me, it's not about the burgers. Would things have been different if they had gone to the Griffith Observatory later and had to pay an entrance fee $6.75?

If he was going to go, he should have just gone all in instead of doing it in a way that draws attention to himself and puts him in such an uncomfortable spot.

Seriously, what kind of world are you living in? What's its name?

feralmoose4 said:Seriously, what kind of world are you living in? What's its name?

It’s called the land of everyone being left out except for you, but hey,🙄

What's actually bothering you about how I see things?

Kenneth Brown5 said:And who exactly in this scenario is bragging about having money? Is it the other parents who already paid for the bus and the McDonald's?

Yeah, clearly the most important thing is what the neighbors will think about the mom🙄, so she was probably terrified they'd judge her if she even paid for that. It’s not like anyone cares how he actually felt in the moment☕

Now everyone is acting like the McDonald's trip was some useless extra, but for me, it's not about the burgers. Would things have been different if they had gone to the Griffith Observatory later and had to pay an entrance fee $6.75?

If he was going to go, he should have just gone all in instead of doing it in a way that draws attention to himself and puts him in such an uncomfortable spot.

I mean, was that snack really such a "must-have" educational tool? Like, would the whole field trip fail without it? Honestly, getting a last-minute notice just smells like someone being disorganized. Or, even worse, just plain lazy.

Yeah, the main thing is what the neighbors will think about Mom🙄, right? She was probably worried they'd cut off her credit line if she paid for that too—it's not like how he felt about it matters at all.☕

It’s honestly pretty sad. It's a real shame when someone prioritizes fulfilling someone else's whims over dealing with actual, real-life struggles. ☕

Now everyone's acting like the snack was unnecessary, but I don't think that's the point. Would things be any different if they had gone to the Griffith Observatory later and had to pay for that$6.75?

If they'd announced it late or out of the blue, it wouldn't matter. Besides, there should be some basic decency to coordinate with parents, instead of just dragging kids around without anyone knowing or agreeing to it first.

If he was going to go, he should have just gone all in instead of making it awkward and putting him on the spot like that.

I still haven't gotten an answer: would a museum or a gallery lose its educational value just because they didn't get snacks afterward? Is this snack part of the official school curriculum?

Educators really need to wake up to the world we live in. Some people just don't have money to throw around for extras. A little bit of empathy wouldn't hurt them.