Poor children arrive at school feeling 'tired and hungry'

Teachers are reporting a rise in pupils entering the classroom feeling tired, hungry and dressed in worn-out clothes.

A study by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers found almost eight-in-10 staff had pupils living below the poverty line and a quarter believed numbers had increased since the start of the recession.

One teacher from Nottingham told of a sixth-former who had not eaten for three days as her “mother had no money at all until pay day”.

A teaching assistant from a West Midlands comprehensive told researchers that some pupils had “infected toes due to feet squashed into shoes way too small”, while another member from Halifax reported a boy who was ridiculed in the PE changing room because his family could not afford to buy him any underpants.

Some teachers told how pupils were consistently late for lessons as parents could not cover the bus fare to school. Other children from middle to lower income families have been forced to cut out school tips because money is so tight, it was claimed.

The disclosure follows the publication of figures showing a rise in the number of pupils eligible for free school meals as families struggle to stay above the breadline in the recession.

Almost 1.2 million five- to 16-year-olds claimed free lunches last year – a rise of more than 83,000 in just 12 months.

Mary Bousted, ATL general secretary, claimed that problems would escalate further because of Government funding cuts – putting the Coalition’s social mobility drive in jeopardy.

“It is appalling that in 2011 so many children in the UK are severely disadvantaged by their circumstances and fail to achieve their potential,” she said.

“What message does this government think it is sending young people when it is cutting funding for Sure Start centres, cutting the Education Maintenance Allowance, raising tuition fees and making it harder for local authorities to provide health and social services.

“The Government should forget empty rhetoric about social mobility and concentrate on tackling the causes of deprivation and barriers to attainment that lock so many young people into a cycle of poverty.”

The ATL, which represents 160,000 school staff, surveyed members ahead of its annual conference in Liverpool next week.

Some 86 per cent said poverty was having a negative impact on pupils’ ability to learn. Eight-in-10 said pupils from the very poorest families came to school tired, three-quarters claimed they arrived hungry and some 72 per cent suggested they were unable to complete homework.

Four-in-10 said poverty levels had increased over the last three years. The comments follow claims from Lesley Ward, former ATL president, that poverty levels in some parts of Britain now mirror "the times of Dickens".

Craig Macartney, a secondary school teacher from Suffolk, said: “More children from middle to lower income families are not going on school trips and these families find it difficult to meet the basic cost of living.

“A family with two or three teenage children who have one earner who loses hours, or their job, will struggle to reach the minimum income to pay for basics.

“This will get worse as the impact of the cuts affects families. The number of young people with mental health problems has been on the increase in the last three years.”

Anne Pegum, a further education college teacher from Herfordshire said: “We have students who miss classes because they cannot afford the bus fare or cost of other transport to get to college.

“We have students who miss out on meals because they do not have money to pay for them and in some cases then feel unwell and have to be helped by our first-aiders.”

A spokesman for the Department for Education said: “We’re overhauling the welfare and schools systems precisely to tackle entrenched worklessness, family breakdown, low educational achievement and financial insecurity.

“We’re targeting investment directly at the poorest families. The most disadvantaged two year olds will get 15 hours free child care.

“We’re focusing Sure Start at the poorest families, with 4200 extra health visitors. We’re opening academies in areas failed educationally for generations and bringing in the Pupil Premium to target an extra £2.5billion a year directly at students that need the most support”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8451547/Poor-children-arrive-at-school-feeling-tired-and-hungry.html

The reason that there are children are not arriving at school in the correct state of mind to benefit from the education system, it is indeed down to the word "poorest" It is because they are having the "poorest" upbringing by the "poorest" parents who are giving the poorest motivation to their kids. Children don't need oodles of cash to motivate them, they need love and nurturing, this can and is being done by millions of good parents on very modest incomes. The problem is NOT cash, or the lack of it, but down to the lack of good parenting

What message does this government think it is sending young people when it is cutting funding for Sure Start centres, cutting the Education Maintenance Allowance, raising tuition fees and making it harder for local authorities to provide health and social services.

That education and prosperity are the right of the few, not the many. Typical RW idiocy not to see that money spent on early education saves truckloads of money in the future.

fred bloggs wrote:The reason that there are hildren are not arriving at school in the correct state of mind to benefit from the education system, it is indeed down to the word "poorest" It is because they are having the "poorest" upbringing by the "poorest" parents who are giving the poorest motivation to their kids. Children don't need oodles of cash to motivate them, they need love and nurturing, this can and is being done by millions of good parents on very modest incomes. The problem is NOT cash, or the lack of it, but down to the lack of good parenting

Think you had better reread the article Fred, it has nothing to do the the state of their minds but the state of their stomachs and clothing etc

One teacher from Nottingham told of a sixth-former who had not eaten for three days as her “mother had no money at all until pay day”.


I have first hand experience of this. One of my grandaughter's friends came round as white as a sheet. Her mum works to jobs, both of them monthly paid. The girl had not eaten since the day before and her mum was not due to be paid until the following day. By the time they had paid for their accommodation, rates, gas, electric, water and bus fares for them both to get to work/college they had £25 a week to live on. Unfortunately the girls shoes had fallen to bits so she had to have a new pair, which left no money for food. Her mother is a good mother who probably had not eaten for longer than the daughter in order for her to eat. The daughter goes to the same college as my grandaughter, which is a few miles away. To get there they both have to get a bus to the other side of town (£3.30 a day, used to be half that as they both have what is called a BYTE card as they are at college, but it no longer gives them half fare). They then have to pay £140 a term for the coach that takes them to the college. At the moment, in both their cases they save up and pay for this with their EMA. From June that is being taken away and the coach fare is going up to £170 a term. That means her mother and I have both got to find that money or they will not be able to complete their courses.

Its got nothing to do with bad parenting.

sassy1261 wrote:

Think you had better reread the article Fred, it has nothing to do the the state of their minds but the state of their stomachs and clothing etc

One teacher from Nottingham told of a sixth-former who had not eaten for three days as her “mother had no money at all until pay day”.


I have first hand experience of this. One of my grandaughter's friends came round as white as a sheet. Her mum works to jobs, both of them monthly paid. The girl had not eaten since the day before and her mum was not due to be paid until the following day. By the time they had paid for their accommodation, rates, gas, electric, water and bus fares for them both to get to work/college they had £25 a week to live on. Unfortunately the girls shoes had fallen to bits so she had to have a new pair, which left no money for food. Her mother is a good mother who probably had not eaten for longer than the daughter in order for her to eat. The daughter goes to the same college as my grandaughter, which is a few miles away. To get there they both have to get a bus to the other side of town (£3.30 a day, used to be half that as they both have what is called a BYTE card as they are at college, but it no longer gives them half fare). They then have to pay £140 a term for the coach that takes them to the college. At the moment, in both their cases they save up and pay for this with their EMA. From June that is being taken away and the coach fare is going up to £170 a term. That means her mother and I have both got to find that money or they will not be able to complete their courses.

Its got nothing to do with bad parenting.

Is that £25 a week food between them Sassy or each.

Whereabouts is the mother shopping?

Seren wrote:

Is that £25 a week food between them Sassy or each.

Whereabouts is the mother shopping?

Thats not £25 a week food, thats £25 a week for the two of them to live on, therefore when the shoes fell apart the new ones had to come out of that last £25. She hadn't been extravagant, think her new shoes were about £15, that left them £10 for the week. Thats less than £1 a day each, including things like washing powder etc, and Aldi's I think.

If the parents got rid of the SKy tv, the electronis games, the PC and sent the kids to bed at a reasonable hour they would not be tired in the morning. Also if the parents cooked proper meals and did not rely on carryouts or pre prepared microwave meals they could afford to nourish the kids. It's all down to the standard of parenting.

There are many parents who see children as a means of getting money of the state for them to spend on themselves.

A pal of mine owns a fish and chip shop and he sees alot ofparents bring their children in for a cone of chips whilst they themselves have carrier bags full of booze and Chinese meals.

This is a regular feature and he says its heartbreaking. There is no need for children to be hungry none whatsoever.

fred bloggs wrote:If the parents got rid of the SKT tv, the electronis games, the PC and sent the kids to bed at a reasonable hour they would not be tired in the morning. Also if the parents cooked proper meals and did not rely on carryouts or pre prepared microwave meals they could afford to nourish the kids. It's all down to the standard of parenting.

Well I have to disagree. This mum has no TV, let alone Sky, because she cannot afford the licence, they have a radio and the girl has a CD player that she has had for years, her friends always by her CDs for her birthday. I get a lot of books from the charity shops being a bookaholic and always pass them on to her mum. Her mother cooks or they would not eat, she certainly can't afford prepared meals! There are parents who don't look after their children properly of all incomes. There are also parents who cannot afford to look after their children properly and to pretend otherwise is to negate the struggle they have to do their best every single day.

fred bloggs wrote:The reason that there are hildren are not arriving at school in the correct state of mind to benefit from the education system, it is indeed down to the word "poorest" It is because they are having the "poorest" upbringing by the "poorest" parents who are giving the poorest motivation to their kids. Children don't need oodles of cash to motivate them, they need love and nurturing, this can and is being done by millions of good parents on very modest incomes. The problem is NOT cash, or the lack of it, but down to the lack of good parenting

Ahh...the answer of a good tory.....having turned ALL disabled into scroungers in the publics eye, and made ALL unemployed the victim of their own fault, You obviously consider ALL the poor to be deserving of their status, clearly a case of head in the sand-itis...your ancestors weren't workhouse owners were they ???

victorismyhero wrote:

Ahh...the answer of a good tory.....having turned ALL disabled into scroungers in the publics eye, and made ALL unemployed the victim of their own fault, You obviously consider ALL the poor to be deserving of their status, clearly a case of head in the sand-itis...your ancestors weren't workhouse owners were they ???

There are many people like my friend. I get so angry when people make out it is all their own fault when everday is a fight for them to try and do right by their children and keep their heads above water. It only takes one emergency for all their finances to be turned on their head and everything to come unglued.

The words of a bleeding heart Socialist I could respond in reply.

I repeat food or lack of it has more to do with a lack of priorities by the parents in many cases. The likes of Karen Matthews the woman who pretended her child was abducted is all too common because their children are perceived only in terms of the benefits which accrue from them.

Sassy and Victor are always only too pleased to find excuses for these people.

Indeed if this underclass to which I refer doesn't exist why does the likes of Frank Fields a well rtespected left wing MP say it does?

I agree H20. The "bleeding heart socialists" in this country have lost self respect, self reliance and indeed personal responsibility. They expect others to organise their lives and those of their children.

fred bloggs wrote:I agree H20. The "bleeding heart socialists" in this country have lost self respect, self reliance and indeed personal responsibility. They expect others to organise their lives and those of their children.

I'll let my friend know that by working two jobs and struggling to pay her bills and feed her child without relying on the state, she has lost all personal responsibility, wants someone else to organise her and her childs life and has no self respect or self reliance. The fact that she used to have a good job that paid all the bills until her husband became ill and she had to give it up to look after him until he died was her bad judgement obviously.

You both live in cloud cuckoo land, where the only people that are poor are chavs living of the state (and did I say they don't exist?). There are also people struggling very badly because of circumstances outside their control. If you are not, good for you, and I am sure you planned well. So did all the people who had their pensions go up the swanee when Robert Maxwell took their pension money and they ended up with nothing. There are many occasions in this life when no matter how well you plan something outside your control messes those plans up. You should be thankful that your plans materialised, not sitting in your ivory towers sniffing at people worse of than yourselves, many of whom could have had your circumstances if someone else had not put a spanner in the works.

H20 wrote:The words of a bleeding heart Socialist I could respond in reply.

I repeat food or lack of it has more to do with a lack of priorities by the parents in many cases. The likes of Karen Matthews the woman who pretended her child was abducted is all too common because their children are perceived only in terms of the benefits which accrue from them.

Sassy and Victor are always only too pleased to find excuses for these people.

Indeed if this underclass to which I refer doesn't exist why does the likes of Frank Fields a well rtespected left wing MP say it does?

So you would agree then...with the tory type RW......ALL disabled are scroungers...perhaps you think we should euthanise them.....and doubtless you agree that ALL people on jobseekers deserve to be there for being idle b'stards....perhaps we should do away with those too.....and of course...ALL those who dont have enough to make ends meet through whatever circumstances, deserve it soley for being poor???


and you call me a socialist???

by the sounds of it you would sit comfortably in the stalinist seat as any other extreme.....Although to be fair you do appear to be more of the Marie Antoinette persuasion....perhaps we SHOULD "let them eat cake".....

here we fall foul of the LW/RW debate.... interventionist fiscal policy or laissez faire ?

prescribing to interventionist policies DOES NOT make one a socialist of necessecity.

there are many reasons for not having "two h'aporth to rub together" some of which are no doubt self inflicted..but many are not, we hardly have a fair distribution or even a fair social security system.

If you conisder yourself RW please dont join the BNP...its got enough problems without your kind of politics, which appear to me...and i stress its only appear...I await corection....to be authoritarian & laizzes faire....the demonstrably worst kind of social structure possible and which generally is only seen in dictatorships these days, but was well represented in england in the victorian age...

I have a suggestion for you...Go read Henry Mayhew's "London Labour and the London Poor (1851-62)"

AND...more to the point...WHERE???? have i defended the likes of karen Matthews???? ever???

It is patent from your post that neither you H2O or you Fred...have ever been short of the necessaries....Well...if it comes to it neither have I, but unlike you...I dont walk around in LA LA land with my eyes wide shut.....Poverty exists....by our standards real poverty, where good honest hard working folks are having to count every penny then decide if they are going to buy half a pound of sausages this week or a bottle of bleach to keep the house hygenic, where new clothes come from the jumble sale, and the heating is off 20 hrs out of 24. the telly is 20 yrs old and from a charity shop.....And where they cant get a job because the only job is 30 miles away and there are 2 busses a day at 10 in the morning going one way and 4 in the evening going the other, they dont have a car.

Yes there are lazy idle scroungers about, and these days in somewhat uncomfortable numbers, but the REAL truth is that they are STILL out weighed thousands to one by the REAL needy...get your heads out of the sand/your arses......stop reading Mr camerons beat the poor speeches, stop reading the cretinous press, and OPEN your eyes