Holiday in term time not authorised, will I be fined?

gregg1

poet123 wrote: »

No, I think what she is trying to say is that to make a blanket statement that "attendance affects attainment" is fine, but unless it can be individually isolated it cannot be shown to be universally true.

Further, it cannot be individually quantified, and for most parents (who know their own child) it is, like many other things in life a calculated risk. We take many such risks every day, both personally and on behalf of our children. I am obviously speaking within certain parameters.

So, whilst as educational professionals we may wish to state with vehemence that term time holidays are taboo, shake our heads with disgust and parrot the party line, the reality is we cannot be so sure that every child will be affected and certainly not even hazard a guess by how much.


Then it would be a fair assumption, following on from that comment, that we cannot be so sure that every child is NOT affected etc, etc. I personally would never take that risk with something as important as my child's education. I have never taken my kids out in term time as I do not think it is fair for the other kids in the class or the teaching staff and, more importantly, my own kids.

I do not expect everyone to agree with me, but that is my opinion.

Marisco

Why don't parents and teachers lobby the gov, to do something about the shocking difference in holiday prices, for term and out of term time!! The holiday companies should be the target of anger, not parents who take kids out of school to save quite a few quid! Anyway, it's worth paying the fine, as it's usually considerably less than the savings available from term time holidays!;)

Miss_Ratty

This really gets my goat. I think it's damn right wrong to charge more for peak periods (I was always taught that the supply and demand laws meant things were cheaper when in demand, but no, lets capitalise on parents!). My mum would never listen to "those fascists" as far as my leave was concerned, and used to suggest that the school pay the difference to go at peak times, they always then declined and were happy for my mum to take me out whenever! The fact is, the way the prices are structured is wrong, and one week off won;t do any harm if you are the kind of parent who provides stimulation for their children. I spent a number of weeks off during my school "career", more than I care to count, but still ended up with 13 GCSEs, 3 A Levels, a degree and a nice job. The government needs to get a grip. A week off in term time is neither here nor there, its continual truancy which is an issue. I'll bet those law makers never had any problems getting the cash together for a week away during peak times.

PS my school also made you report to check that your socks were still black enough to be acceptable (very strict/up itself school). My mum also asked for a contribution for new socks which was refused, and I was permitted to wear black socks which had been washed a few times but had gone a wee bit grey!

poet123

flimsier wrote: »

...except that's exactly what we're instructed not to do because parents often believe that "one day won't make a difference" or in this case "5 days won't".

And the point about not knowing which section of learning (sometimes in a variety of lessons) they're missing out on, which connector, and hence how many other lessons (other than the 5 days) are affected.

In actual fact, FBaby started by saying "5 days won't destroy their education". I replied that no-one suggested it would, but that it's complacent to think it will make no difference. She then went on about her kids being ok, and it making no difference, and I said there is no way to know that.

I agree with your point on risk though; that's a better way of putting my original point.

I know what the instruction is and most of us in the profession know those for whom the instruction needs to be rigidly applied or enforced and those for whom a little leeway is acceptable.

For example, last year I took my youngest son out of school for 4 days, I wrote a note to his head of year explaining my reasons. The absence was unauthorised of course, but she rang me and thanked me for letter and ended our conversation with "as you know I cannot offically endorse the holiday, but off the record I hope you have a great time"

gregg1 wrote: »

poet123 wrote: »

No, I think what she is trying to say is that to make a blanket statement that "attendance affects attainment" is fine, but unless it can be individually isolated it cannot be shown to be universally true.

Further, it cannot be individually quantified, and for most parents (who know their own child) it is, like many other things in life a calculated risk. We take many such risks every day, both personally and on behalf of our children. I am obviously speaking within certain parameters.

So, whilst as educational professionals we may wish to state with vehemence that term time holidays are taboo, shake our heads with disgust and parrot the party line, the reality is we cannot be so sure that every child will be affected and certainly not even hazard a guess by how much.


Then it would be a fair assumption, following on from that comment, that we cannot be so sure that every child is NOT affected etc, etc. I personally would never take that risk with something as important as my child's education. I have never taken my kids out in term time as I do not think it is fair for the other kids in the class or the teaching staff and, more importantly, my own kids.

I do not expect everyone to agree with me, but that is my opinion.

And that is your prerogative, as it is mine to calculate that for my children, at certain times a short absence will not (actually, did not )have a significant, measurable, detrimental affect on their education.

In fact the summer holiday "learning loss" is far more quantifiable than a controlled and considered absence of a few days. Strangely, parents hear very little about this, yet within education it is well known.

flimsier

Miss_Ratty wrote: »

This really gets my goat. I think it's damn right wrong to charge more for peak periods (I was always taught that the supply and demand laws meant things were cheaper when in demand, but no, lets capitalise on parents!). My mum would never listen to "those fascists" as far as my leave was concerned, and used to suggest that the school pay the difference to go at peak times, they always then declined and were happy for my mum to take me out whenever! The fact is, the way the prices are structured is wrong, and one week off won;t do any harm if you are the kind of parent who provides stimulation for their children. I spent a number of weeks off during my school "career", more than I care to count, but still ended up with 13 GCSEs, 3 A Levels, a degree and a nice job. The government needs to get a grip. A week off in term time is neither here nor there, its continual truancy which is an issue. I'll bet those law makers never had any problems getting the cash together for a week away during peak times.

Yes, it's definitely the school's fault they charge you more.

flimsier

And that is your prerogative, as it is mine to calculate that for my children, at certain times a short absence will not (actually, did not )have a significant, measurable, detrimental affect on their education.

You have no way of knowing that.

In fact the summer holiday "learning loss" is far more quantifiable than a controlled and considered absence of a few days. Strangely, parents hear very little about this, yet within education it is well known.

A sweeping statement if ever I heard one.

flimsier

Marisco wrote: »

Why don't parents and teachers lobby the gov, to do something about the shocking difference in holiday prices, for term and out of term time!! The holiday companies should be the target of anger, not parents who take kids out of school to save quite a few quid! Anyway, it's worth paying the fine, as it's usually considerably less than the savings available from term time holidays!;)

A recent government did promise this - I think it was Labour one of the times they were elected. It never happened.

poet123

flimsier wrote: »

You have no way of knowing that.

Let me put it another way. My older children are all Masters graduates in professional jobs (two lawyers, one teacher(!) so my parental and professional judgement is that their long term prospects were not irrevocably harmed by an extra five days in Florida.;) My fourteen year old is straight top sets with an eye on medicine, so my best guess is he will not buck the trend either.

flimsier wrote: »

A sweeping statement if ever I heard one.

Then refute it with evidence.

So, you could construct a cohesive case for arguing that a gap in learning of six weeks could/would be equivalent to a gap of say five days?

I would like to hear that one.;)

gregg1

poet123 wrote: »

Let me put it another way. My older children are all Masters graduates in professional jobs (two lawyers, one teacher(!) so my parental and professional judgement is that their long term prospects were not irrevocably harmed by an extra five days in Florida.;) My fourteen year old is straight top sets with an eye on medicine, so my best guess is he will not buck the trend either.




Then refute it with evidence.


So, you could construct a cohesive case for arguing that a gap in learning of six weeks could/would be equivalent to a gap of say five days?

I would like to hear that one.;)

With respect, I have yet to hear of a parent who has taken their kids out of school during term time who does NOT have super intelligent offspring. Obviously, your kids have done extremely well. However, I do think it is quite obvious that some parents come out with that line to try and justify their actions and I can tell you with certainty that some kids DO have a problem catching up when they have been taken out of school.

As for the holidays, most teachers will tell you that by the end of the summer term most kids are fit to drop with exhaustion and need a decent break to refresh their batteries. Certainly my children needed a good break by the end of July, but then they had very little time off during term time and turned up to every lesson, so maybe that explains why they were running on empty come July!

I suspect, on this particular point, we will have to agree to disagree.

jackieblack

Miss_Ratty wrote: »

This really gets my goat. I think it's damn right wrong to charge more for peak periods (I was always taught that the supply and demand laws meant things were cheaper when in demand, but no, lets capitalise on parents!).

Goods in demand are only cheaper where supply is plentiful enough to satisfy the demand.
For goods/services that are in limited supply, increased demand increases prices. Hence the higher holiday/flight prices at peak times. Holiday companies/airlines do not have an unlimited supply of their product and so prices are raised.