Schools no longer allowed to authorise holidays

daisiegg

securityguy wrote: »

They could always do neither, of course. #justsaying

I don't understand why people do phrases with hash tags when they are not on twitter. Am I missing somthing?

Mojisola

securityguy wrote: »

They could always do neither, of course. #justsaying

Life is all about choices like this. Sometimes we do have to make decisions we'd rather not - whether that's taking a child out of school or not going away on holiday - but duchy's dilemma isn't the usual "It's cheaper in term time".

For years we went on holiday with one or the other parent because they were running a business and couldn't shut it down to go on holiday together.

pigpen

Mojisola wrote: »

I doubt the value of trips out to theme parks - my experience has either been of curriculum related visits or activity trips which give children a lot of experiences they may not get otherwise. You might take your children caving, climbing, etc, but the majority of parents wouldn't. Just going away without your parents is a valuable experience.

If you're not happy with what the school is doing, it's important to take it up with them. In particular, a parent having to fund a TA wouldn't have happened in the school where I was a governor. If an extra person was needed, the school fund would have paid for it.

My daughter going on the residential is starting a new school on Monday.

I actually think it is an experience of value in terms of the activity but also as she has cerebral palsy it is a huge challenge for her to do many of these things. She has been away without parents a few times so not new to her.

The school fund doesn't cover non-curriculum activities which is why we have to pay or he doesn't go..

pigpen

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

Are school trips compulsory? just curious as to if there are some parents unable or willing for that matter to pay for an expensive school trip? just wondered what happens if parents say no.

curriculum visits/educational trips.. they are not allowed to exclude children whose parents cannot afford to pay but extra stuff like residentials/fun activities if they can't pay they don't go!

securityguy

daisiegg wrote: »

I don't understand why people do phrases with hash tags when they are not on twitter. Am I missing somthing?

It's often used of phrases that are also memes.

In this case, http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/just-sayin

daisiegg

securityguy wrote: »

It's often used of phrases that are also memes.

In this case, http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/just-sayin

But......why?

Tiddlywinks

daisiegg wrote: »

But......why?

Does it matter in the context of this thread?

heartbreak_star

Another one on the "holidays are luxuries, not essentials" brigade here.

My parents believed in my education over pretty much all else, so we clubbed together with another family who thought the same and had a week somewhere cheap or went and stayed with family for a few days.

If you're that desperate for holidays, save up and have one every two years instead of every year.

HBS x

daisiegg

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Does it matter in the context of this thread?

No, not really. Just curious.

FBaby

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Where's the double standard?

The children will be in a managed group with managed activities shared with their classmates - those SHARED activities can then be the subject of follow up classwork.

Teachers will use the trip for practical learning and application - weaving in points of interest, pronunciation etc... relevant to the coursework.

Seems useful to me.

For one, only few kids will be going, so on the principle above, this would be a real issue in terms of disruption of the class.

Also, why couldn't the above apply if the holiday was taken with the parents? Most parents are not complete idiots incapable of linking a holiday with learning and they get one to one attention, so much more likely to get their questions answered than as part of a large group.