School declined holidays and branded the kids truants

vikingaero

easy wrote: »

I think a number of us are still waiting for YOU to provide supporting evidence of your assertions that term-time holidays cause real damage to a child's education, actually Malkie.

Several poster here have pointed out that they/their children have taken time out of school during their childhoods, but still ended up with A levels/degrees/PhDs etc, myself included (and my 10 year old son, who has taken 3 holidays of 2 weeks or more in the last 6 years, is at SATS level 5 and working 2 years above his peer group in class).

So, there is our evidence, where is yours?

OK, deep breath, my view:

I think that taking children out shows lack of respect to the system, the school, the teachers, other pupils and most of all your child.

If you show your child that you can flout the rules for your own benefit then you're raising your child(ren) in an incorrect manner. If you want to take them out, then home educate them or place them with tutors where it won't disadvantage fellow pupils. Schools have enough on their plates without playing catch up for absent pupils. Not every pupil who takes a holiday is super bright, some will be only average or below average.

What happens when your son/daughter are parents, they probably do the same and think it's OK.

And the issue of qualifications. I sit on interview panels and a lot of qualifications are not worth the paper they are written on. You can have candidates with a fistful of qualifications and sweet FA when it comes to common sense.

[dons flamesuit]

Zazen999

malkie76 wrote: »

Can you provide some supporting evidence? I'm assuming you must have some to make such a strong statement.

Yes I can.

2 weeks out of ten years is calculated as such:

2 divided by [10x52] = 2/520 = 0.38%.

Which by anyone's standards is a tiny dint.

I calculated this all on my own; even though in between schools I wasn't officially taught fractions.

Zazen999

vikingaero wrote: »

You can have candidates with a fistful of qualifications and sweet FA when it comes to common sense.

[dons flamesuit]

Thereby proving that following the rules sometimes really means nothing!

malkie76

I think a number of us are still waiting for YOU to provide supporting evidence of your assertions that term-time holidays cause real damage to a child's education, actually Malkie.

I never made that claim - if you disagree then please highlight the post where I did.

Several posters here have pointed out that they/their children have taken time out of school during their childhoods, but still ended up with A levels/degrees/PhDs etc, myself included (and my 10 year old son, who has taken 3 holidays of 2 weeks or more in the last 6 years, is at SATS level 5 and working 2 years above his peer group in class).

I've already (at length) counter argued this point.

So, there is our evidence, where is yours?

Sorry, but anecdotes do not count as 'evidence'. What studies are your claimed based on?

Yes I can.

2 weeks out of ten years is calculated as such:

2 divided by [10x52] = 2/520 = 0.38%.

Which by anyone's standards is a tiny dint.

Great, now can you link that percentage to a difference in study performance? Where are the actual studies which support your claim that there is no loss in performance.

easy

malkie76 wrote: »

Where are the actual studies which support your claim that there is no loss in performance.

You keep ignoring my requests for your evidence, Malkie.

malkie76

I've already (repeatedly) addressed your point. Sorry you are unhappy with what is an exceptionally clear response to your question. You are asking me to provide evidence for a claim I didn't make, so I'm not sure exactly what you are concerned about.

sunshinetours

malkie76 wrote: »

How can my view be blinkered when there is no rational counter point of view?

In your opinion of course

Your view is blinkered because you haven't accepted that even in extenuating circumstances that it may actually be beneficial to the child and that family to take a term time holdaiy rather than no holiday at all. And no just for clarity again, I don't think the fact that the holiday is £1k cheaper just before the summer holidays is an extenuating circumstance.

However I do think that when a family's circumstances are such that a holiday is not realistically possible in holiday time then there can be some justification for it. You however do not appear to accept that

In these type of discussions people should remember that noone is categorically right or wrong, there are just differing opinions

Asking for results of studies where I would imagine its quite clear there are no such studies to prove/disprove claims is quite frankly ridiculous

I actually generally agree that holidays should be in holiday periods and I would not at this stage consider taking our kids out of school just for a holiday as our own circumstances are not such we need to. We just holiday less now that our oldest is at school due to the increased cost

jackieblack

malkie76 wrote: »

Which can just as easily be achieved during the summer holidays rather than during term time..

Not true.
There are many events/spectacles/festivals etc which only take part at a certain time of year.

malkie76 wrote: »

Children actually need education.

School is not the only place they get educated - it's a big world out there!

malkie76

There are many events/spectacles/festivals etc which only take part at a certain time of year.

Such as? (where there is no suitable alternative). Straws and clutching comes to mind.

School is not the only place they get educated - it's a big world out there!

Where did I claim that education only comes from school? Please highlight that post.

Zazen999

malkie76 wrote: »

Great, now can you link that percentage to a difference in study performance? Where are the actual studies which support your claim that there is no loss in performance.

Seriously, 2 weeks out of school just before the summer hols is not going to affect any performance. Just like the schools closing at the sniff of some snow doesn't seem to affect performance. Nor will they be affected by the early closing just because some men are kicking a ball around a field. Or if a child gets ill and spends 2 weeks in bed recovering. Or has a few bugs during the year and is off sick then.

If there were any studies that show 100% attendance over the full duration of a youngster's formal education is the only way of ensuring a decent paying fulfilling career then I'd be more than happy to agree with you.