A question about keeping children off school in term time: to take them on holiday.

onlyroz

mumps wrote: »

With my kids they would borrow books from friends to copy up what had been done and friends would collect an extra worksheet for them. It was no problem for the class or the teacher and their friends had minimal effort which would obviously be repaid. It was the same if they were off sick.

Might be fine for something like history or geography, but tricky maths concepts would probably require extra help from the teacher to explain. And if you're mad enough to take time out during the GCSE years (which the OP is talking about) then you'd have to catch up on coursework and possibly field trips as well.

onlyroz

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

At primary school age they go over the same material several times so in effect, don't have to "catch up."

At secondary school age the onus is clearly on the child. One of my children missed a day of school last week (for an Athletics competition with the school) and she has to cover the work that was missed - by asking her friends. An example of this was her frantically doing homework on DNA over breakfast today having been absent for when it was set (& hence it wasn't on radar until fairly last minute!) My two have only missed secondary school due to illness or school related activities, but I have never known a teacher to be involved in their catch up. And if they don't catch up, well they don't catch up!

Having a day or two off due to illness is not in the same league as taking a whole week or two off. As for your last sentence - kids who don't catch up will achieve poorer grades which will affect the school's OFSTED rating and league-table position.

mumps

coolcait wrote: »

I'm the child of someone who worked in one of those careers. A vital, but not terribly well-paid job.


My parent "got away from it all" simply by being on leave. We spent time together as a family without having to '"go away on holiday". We (the children) certainly didn't get taken out of school.


Not only did we (the children and the family) survive this, we thrived.


We had endless free days out at museums, parks, gardens and the odd castle. Plus the occasional visit to places where you had to pay a bit of money to get in. I still remember many of the things that I found out during those visits.


We mastered the quintessential British survival technique of being able to picnic anywhere, anytime, in any kind of weather.


On the days that we stayed at home, we played cards, board games, and listened to both parents tell stories of their childhood, their families, life, the universe and everything (which included history, geography, current affairs etc), and we told them our own stories.


Families don't need to go away on holiday to have those experiences. Some families who go away on holiday don't actually spend very much time together or talking to each other.


As an aside, it does seem that the Scottish posters are less likely to have encountered a culture of 'term-time holidays'. I'm not even sure that Scottish law has the equivalent of the law which has been quoted on both of the current threads about this issue.

Maybe you didn't need to get away to relax, some people do. For example if you are a police officer, linvolved in quite high profile investigations, you can regularly run into some of your "customers" which doesn't make for a relaxing day out at the local park,

Do you think it is reasonable that because one of your parents chose a certain career you would be unable to have holidays? I don't understand how you had all these days out if your parents couldn't have leave during your school holidays. Did you only go out at weekends?

mumps

onlyroz wrote: »

Of course not. But there's a difference between a family unable to book annual leave during the school holidays and a family who just want a cheap week in the sun.

So are you saying the difference isn't about the educational impact but about someone judging if it is "worthy" or not?

onlyroz

mumps wrote: »

So are you saying the difference isn't about the educational impact but about someone judging if it is "worthy" or not?

I'm not quite sure why you're finding this so hard to grasp. It's never ideal to take time out of school for holidays but if the circumstances are exceptional then it might be allowed. Exceptional circumstances vary between education authorities, but examples include:

- Parents are unable to take annual leave during school holidays (e.g. a parent is in the army or works on an oil rig)
- To attend a family funeral abroad
- Doctors advise a holiday on medical grounds

FBaby

How can they catch up on what they've missed without asking the teacher what was covered when they were away?

Surely just asking what topic was covered that week is only going to require a quick response only.

The teacher then has to either take time away from the rest of the class or give up their own time to fish out missed worksheets, root out text-books, and re-explain any difficult concepts. And then that child will require extra time and assistance to get to grips with whatever is being studied when they get back from their holiday because they missed coverage of the more basic concepts.

That's my point, they don't have to do that. More and more schools are only nowadays to. My kids have all their assignments and details of lessons on their on-line account. Even at primary school, they could access everything online. Everything that needs futher explanation can be done by parents, or if it is beyond their knowledge, it is there choice to pay for extra tutoring.

I don't understand why teachers who feel strongly that these children are disruptive to the rest of the class as a result of their parent's choice would actually go ahead and act in a way that tells these parents that indeed, they can take their kids out of school without consequences as the teachers will pick up the slack.

onlyroz

FBaby wrote: »

I don't understand why teachers who feel strongly that these children are disruptive to the rest of the class as a result of their parent's choice would actually go ahead and act in a way that tells these parents that indeed, they can take their kids out of school without consequences as the teachers will pick up the slack.

Is it just possible that the teachers actually care about the future of their students, even if they have !!!!less parents?

FBaby

Surely they should care first for those who do adhere to the rules, so their priority should be to the other pupils not the one who isn't (who still has other options to catch up).

ViolaLass

The senior leadership of their school may not be impressed at the teacher not doing all they can to help that child catch up. And there is the spectre of performance-related pay.

nwc389

mumps wrote: »

You might be amazed about people not seeing how one persons actions can affect others, I am amazed that it would be OK for me to be unable to have a family holiday for 34 years. Funny that.

I usually find that people who are happy to say stuff like that to others have utterly no concept of being in their position . All families need to have proper time together and I think most people try their best to get this to be in the school holidays but sometimes you just can't .