Term Time Holidays???

onlyroz

[/URL]

johnnyl

daisiegg wrote: »

Points 3 and 4 certainly seem directed at all teachers. That's what it means when you say 'teachers....' without qualifying that by adding 'some' before it or 'who have posted on this thread' after it.

teachers is plural, meaning more than 1. That could mean 2, 20 or 20000.

What it doesnt mean, is all. That is a value that you have incorrectly put on it, so that you can be offended by something that was never directed at you in the first place.

johnnyl

shellsuit wrote: »

That graph shows unauthorised absences.

Not all time taken off for holidays is unauthorised, infact unauthorised ansences will mostly be kids who bunk off or have parents that don't give a crap so don't care whether the kids go in or not.

If that graph said unauhorised absences from children who take term time off for holidays, it would hold some weight.

there appears to be only roz (see how I did that) that can not grasp this simple concept that not all absences have an equal weighting in what "damage" they cause.

poet123

onlyroz wrote: »

[/URL]

Yes, that is a part of the PP presentation I referred to being delivered at each new parents evening at Secondary school.

However, stats rarely show the whole picture, and those figures clearly won't apply to all children. I work in education and I took my kids out of school, not regularly, not in critical years, and at periods of the year chosen very carefully and for short periods only. If I very roughly measured their results using the info I am sure it wouldn't work out correctly, or equate to the results they achieved.

johnnyl

onlyroz wrote: »

I have also provided links that show holidays can account for 30-40% of total absences.

thereby completing the loop of your simpleton style logic of

"accidents at work cause death"

"slips and trips make up the most accidents"

therefore "slips and trips cause the most death"

just like

"total absence cause lack of attainment"

"holidays are a big cause of absence"

therefore "holidays in term time cause lack of attainment"

I actually hope that you are on the wind up here, because if you arent I think it is quite tragic at the level of stupidity that is being shown.

onlyroz

johnnyl wrote: »

there appears to be only roz (see how I did that) that can not grasp this simple concept that not all absences have an equal weighting in what "damage" they cause.

Where have I claimed that is the case?

As with all decisions that could affect the well-being of your children (whether it's a decision to breastfeed, smoke in front of your kids, allow them unrestricted access to the internet, allow them to travel in a car without a booster seat, allow them out the house on their own in the evenings etc etc), people should weigh up the evidence and make a decision appropriate to their circumstances.

onlyroz

poet123 wrote: »

Yes, that is a part of the PP presentation I referred to being delivered at each new parents evening at Secondary school.

However, stats rarely show the whole picture, and those figures clearly won't apply to all children. I work in education and I took my kids out of school, not regularly, not in critical years, and at periods of the year chosen very carefully and for short periods only. If I very roughly measured their results using the info I am sure it wouldn't work out correctly, or equate to the results they achieved.

As above, parents need to weigh up the evidence and make a decision that is right for their circumstances.

poet123

onlyroz wrote: »

As above, parents need to weigh up the evidence and make a decision that is right for their circumstances.

To be fair I think that is what most people were advocating.

You, on the other hand seemed to be saying that you believed it was wrong and gave various points to bolster that view. You mentioned lying, I have never lied, or been fined or seen that my children have been detrimentally affected by the occasional, well considered, break from school. Most parents are reasonable people, and do think about their actions, and those that don't are going to do as they please regardless.

onlyroz

poet123 wrote: »

To be fair I think that is what most people were advocating.

You, on the other hand seemed to be saying that you believed it was wrong and gave various points to bolster that view. You mentioned lying, I have never lied, or been fined or seen that my children have been detrimentally affected by the occasional, well considered, break from school. Most parents are reasonable people, and do think about their actions, and those that don't are going to do as they please regardless.

I didn't intend to suggest that all parents lied, just that it wasn't uncommon. There are certainly circumstances where a term time holiday might be appropriate, e.g. to attend an overseas funeral, to participate in a major sporting event, if a holiday is won as a prize, etc etc. However, in most cases it is better for the child to be in school, and the law backs up this stance.

As for whether the specific sort of absence affects attainment, I'm not completely convinced. A lesson has still been missed regardless of whether the time was spent smoking behind the bike sheds or sitting on a beach.

SmallL

I have had two partially term time holidays, when i was about 12 and then about 16-17 to go to thailand (probably a week before xmas break). As my mum is from thailand it is both a holiday and a chance for her to visit her family.
It didn't affect me at all, i studied for any exams on the holiday (its too hot between 12-3 to go out anyway!!!) and the chance to experience suchna breathtaking country has really stuck with me.
The second time we took my OH (his parents did ask for permission, as did i, but they did not recieve it so they called in saying he was sick!!)