School declined holidays and branded the kids truants

thommy

sunshinetours wrote: »

Lets be honest - aside from some obvious exceptions on this thread, many parents aren't going to be looking at an educational historic family jaunt to Pompeii or Rome etc - its a week in a caravan at Havens or a week in Majorca in an all inclusive. Lets get real!

Ultimately this will come down to those who believe its ok to flout the rules in life when it suits their needs or wants (not suggesting that there aren't times when this is correct either) and those who believe generally that rules are there for a reason and try and work their lives best modelled around such rules

There are room for all sorts in society. What i can't stand are those who moan about the consequences of their known actions

yes, agree with you on some points but i was responding to malkie's absolute that it is never a rationale. i'd still stand by the assertion tho that even if a family want to sit in a field together and stare at the cows, maybe that week of watching dvds, playing games in school is the week to do it, even on a cost basis. maybe that's the only time they can have together, they'll be together as a family unit - dysfunctionally, or not, lol. not everyone wants to flout the rules, just for the sake of it. one size doesn't fit all; thank goodness that 'discretion' is still allowed.

PolishBigSpender

malkie76 wrote: »

Sorry, but you are argueing apples and oranges. I merely stated that cost was no rationale for risking a child's education. Obviously the danger of infecting other children with a disease and hence impacting on their education is a huge risk.

Either two weeks out of school is going to harm a child or it isn't - which is it to be?

I find it amazing that people think that being stuck in school and getting to go nowhere is better than getting to have a nice family holiday in terms of the welfare of the child.

A happy child is priceless!

sunshinetours

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Either two weeks out of school is going to harm a child or it isn't - which is it to be?

I find it amazing that people think that being stuck in school and getting to go nowhere is better than getting to have a nice family holiday in terms of the welfare of the child.

A happy child is priceless!

They don't - they think the child should go on holiday in one of the 13 weeks holiday time they already get away from school

Indeed a happy child is all we all want I am sure

malkie76

what's the better choice - a week at the end of term watching dvds, playing games, watching it rain through the window, or a week exploring pompeii, athens etc?

School and family holidays are not mutually exclusive, and I don't understand why people struggle to grasp this. The only arguement appears to be that packagae holidays are priced lower during term time. If you cannot afford the cost of a holiday during the summer holidays then either (a) holiday somewhere within buget, (b) holiday every other year or (c) adjust budgets elsewhere to accomodate a year holiday in the summer.

I wholeheartedly agree that travel will broaden the mind of a child and grant them experiences which no book or documentary will ever give them. I just completely disagree that those experiences need ever be at the expense of traditional education - why do you believe they are mutually exclusive.

On your final sentence - if your school advocates a lack of teaching during the final weeks of term them raise that with the school, and if you are not satisfied then elevate your complaint. That's an entirely seperate debate.

Either two weeks out of school is going to harm a child or it isn't - which is it to be?

It obviously is going to harm a child, yet you continue to argue apples and oranges. My point is purely about cost being used as an excuse to take children out of schooling. If you wish to debate the merits of taking children out of school to prevent outbreaks of disease then please start a thread on the subject - I'd be happy to share my opinions. However, it has absolutely no relevance in the debate on taking children out of school to save a few quid.

thommy

malkie76 wrote: »

School and family holidays are not mutually exclusive, and I don't understand why people struggle to grasp this. The only arguement appears to be that packagae holidays are priced lower during term time. If you cannot afford the cost of a holiday during the summer holidays then either (a) holiday somewhere within buget, (b) holiday every other year or (c) adjust budgets elsewhere to accomodate a year holiday in the summer.

I wholeheartedly agree that travel will broaden the mind of a child and grant them experiences which no book or documentary will ever give them. I just completely disagree that those experiences need ever be at the expense of traditional education - why do you believe they are mutually exclusive.

On your final sentence - if your school advocates a lack of teaching during the final weeks of term them raise that with the school, and if you are not satisfied then elevate your complaint. That's an entirely seperate debate.



It obviously is going to harm a child, yet you continue to argue apples and oranges. My point is purely about cost being used as an excuse to take children out of schooling. If you wish to debate the merits of taking children out of school to prevent outbreaks of disease then please start a thread on the subject - I'd be happy to share my opinions. However, it has absolutely no relevance in the debate on taking children out of school to save a few quid.

firstly, i am struggling to understand your use of ' mutually exclusive'. you say:
'School and family holidays are not mutually exclusive'
that means they can occur together. so, you're contradicting yourself there. call me a dunce, just a bit confused there.
secondly, that's your argument which you have narrowed down to package holidays and you've made your mind up that any holiday time away from school always has to be at the expense of the respective child's education. that's your opinion. i respect it, but i don't agree with it. no struggle there.
as to the final point for me: please, come on. it's not a separate debate and it is not particular to my child's school. schools wind down at the end of the year. always have done, always will. it's intrinsic to the argument that your child's education is not suffering if he or she is spending time with his or family, in whatever capacity, rather than having boredom imposed on him or her, because the syllabus has been completed or exams have been sat.

edit: with respect, you might want to have a look at the use of 'mutually exclusive' in your second paragraph. most people, myself included have been arguing that travel and education are NOT mutually exclusive.......

malkie76

Sorry for the lack of clarity in my posts - to try and be clear; I'm saying that education derived from travel does not need to be at the expense of education derived from being in school. You can complete entire terms, then go on a family holiday and experience what the world has to offer.

Some people seemed to suggesting that the only way to go on holiday was during term time; hence my choice of words.

which you have narrowed down to package holidays and you've made your mind up that any holiday time away from school always has to be at the expense of the respective child's education. that's your opinion. i respect it, but i don't agree with it. no struggle there.

I'm not narrowing to package holidays - other people are, hence some of the references I've made in my posts.

Sorry, but its rather obvious that if a child isn't in school then they are missing school work. I'm not sure how you can disagree with that. They can still easily be learning while outside of school, but you can have both a full school education, and a outside-of-school education. It's never a case of one or the other.

schools wind down at the end of the year. always have done, always will

That's perhaps your experience, but it's not mine. Again, I'd suggest you complain to the relevant authorities if you feel your school is not taking the education of your children seriously, and not using the entire length of the term to education. However, there are definite learning outcomes from non-maths, non-english activities which may be undertaken towards the end of term - for example maintaining a school garden.

thommy

malkie76 wrote: »

Sorry for the lack of clarity in my posts - to try and be clear; I'm saying that education derived from travel does not need to be at the expense of education derived from being in school. You can complete entire terms, then go on a family holiday and experience what the world has to offer.

Some people seemed to suggesting that the only way to go on holiday was during term time; hence my choice of words.



I'm not narrowing to package holidays - other people are, hence some of the references I've made in my posts.

Sorry, but its rather obvious that if a child isn't in school then they are missing school work. I'm not sure how you can disagree with that. They can still easily be learning while outside of school, but you can have both a full school education, and a outside-of-school education. It's never a case of one or the other.



That's perhaps your experience, but it's not mine. Again, I'd suggest you complain to the relevant authorities if you feel your school is not taking the education of your children seriously, and not using the entire length of the term to education. However, there are definite learning outcomes from non-maths, non-english activities which may be undertaken towards the end of term - for example maintaining a school garden.

appreciate your comments, thank you. i don't think and i'm not saying that you can only go on holiday in term time but, if you want to give your child a certain life experience, it may be the only choice, be it financially or not, at that stage of the child's life.(i'm not narrowing it down to package holidays!).
i'm sorry, but who is saying it is one case of one or the other? schooling works best when it is intertwined with out-of-school real life, i find...

of course it's obvious that a child might miss something while away. but, likewise, it is difficult to understand why you can not accept that a child might have gone beyond what is studied while he/she is away. or what is being studied is relatively easy to catch-up on. so, with that weighted against the value of a particular holiday, the school can use its discretion as whether or not to authorise that holiday.

i'm sorry, i had a small giggle at your last comment...maintaining a school garden? now that's not a particularly strong argument for not taking your child out for a holiday, is it? the poor little thing is not really being deprived of a school education by missing out on that one, is he?

poet123

malkie76 wrote: »

Sorry for the lack of clarity in my posts - to try and be clear; I'm saying that education derived from travel does not need to be at the expense of education derived from being in school. You can complete entire terms, then go on a family holiday and experience what the world has to offer.

Some people seemed to suggesting that the only way to go on holiday was during term time; hence my choice of words.



I'm not narrowing to package holidays - other people are, hence some of the references I've made in my posts.

Sorry, but its rather obvious that if a child isn't in school then they are missing school work. I'm not sure how you can disagree with that. They can still easily be learning while outside of school, but you can have both a full school education, and a outside-of-school education. It's never a case of one or the other.



That's perhaps your experience, but it's not mine. Again, I'd suggest you complain to the relevant authorities if you feel your school is not taking the education of your children seriously, and not using the entire length of the term to education. However, there are definite learning outcomes from non-maths, non-english activities which may be undertaken towards the end of term - for example maintaining a school garden.

And you are of the opinion that such activity is of more benefit than the benefits derived from travel? such as currency calculation, geography, exposure to different cultures etc.

All schools wind down in the last two weeks of term, after all the testing has been done. They may do fun educational things, but I would bet that none are of greater educational value.

Murphy_The_Cat

sunshinetours wrote: »

They don't - they think the child should go on holiday in one of the 13 weeks holiday time they already get away from school

& if it fits in with my arrangements, then thats what I will do :beer: Thankfully, my sons school appreciates that perhaps the other 39 weeks are a much, much convienient & realistic option for me & my family. (Mrs Cat own the business between us and are both actively involved in it)

malkie76 wrote: »

Sorry, but its rather obvious that if a child isn't in school then they are missing school work. I'm not sure how you can disagree with that.

Even if it is of limited or very small academic value - and if the child in question is already well ahead of that level, whats your beef ?

malkie76

appreciate your comments, thank you.

No worries - I'm glad to clarify to ensure folks understand my points.

you want to give your child a certain life experience, it may be the only choice

I completely disagree on this point, which is the only reason I'm posting in this thread. I really can't agree that it's the only choice for many people to take their children on holiday during term time. For the majority it's a choice they make to save money. That's my major issue with the overall feeling in this thread.

i'm sorry, but who is saying it is one case of one or the other? schooling works best when it is intertwined with out-of-school real life, i find...

Many people are suggest it's one or the other in this thread (ie they can't go on holiday during the summer), which is nonsense in my opinion. I know you didn't state that, but my comments are referring to points raised in this thread.

I agree that education should be a combination of school and non-school learning, I just completely disagree that it's acceptable to take a child out of school during term time citing cost as the only reason.

i'm sorry, i had a small giggle at your last comment...maintaining a school garden? now that's not a particularly strong argument for not taking your child out for a holiday, is it? the poor little thing is not really being deprived of a school education by missing out on that one, is he?

It was a deliberately specific example of something which is not traditional learning, and is mostly restricted to the 'better weather' period immediately prior to the end of term. I'd genuinely argue the outside experience coupled with team-building and care required to maintain a garden are extremely valuable learning experiences.

And you are of the opinion that such activity is of more benefit than the benefits derived from travel? such as currency calculation, geography, exposure to different cultures etc.

oh, my, dear, lord. I do wish people would read all of the relevant posts rather than pluck a single sentence out and totally misrepresent the context.

Gardening at school is a valuable experience. Travel is a valuable experience. If you travel outside of term time then you can enjoy both experiences. If you travel during term time you will miss valubale school experiences.

It's pretty simple, yet I appear to need to repeat this point in every other post...........

edit

Even if it is of limited or very small academic value - and if the child in question is already well ahead of that level, whats your beef ?

Who is to judge what is "limited" or "very small", when participation in a certain activity may not have immediate measurable impact on learning or future abilities ? A child spends a couple of hours doing something different at the end of term and realises it's the perfect career for them - you need to think slightly beyond the immediate when it comes to learning.

If the child is already ahead of their average level then why risk excellence by holding them back? Just because they may be ahead of average learning does not mean they would not benefit from whatever educational activities are ongoing at different points of the academic year.

There are summer holidays for a reason, and people shouldn't ignore term dates purely to save a few quid.