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

Buzzybee90

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I think exceptions should be made for people like mumps' husband who have no say over when they take their leave, otherwise I don't think it is necessary to take a child out in term time.

My husband was a teacher for many years in one of our city's top-performing schools (in fact his own subject normally had 100% pass rate at GCSE). His attitude was, if you want to take your child out of school so that you can sit on the beach at Benidorm cheaper than in the school holidays, fine. But don't expect me to take time away from the rest of the class to go over the missed work, or give up my own time to do extra marking. It's your responsibility to catch up on what has been missed.

As I have said before, we HAD to have school holidays, even when our son had left school (teachers don't get a choice either ). We went camping or stayed with friends.

It felt like playing wag when he finally retired and we went on holiday in June

I can't recall ever having a teacher help me 'catch up' after a holiday, the onus was completely on me and friends helped with copies of what was covered, then I returned the favour when they were on hols.

No one batted an eyelid. It wasn't a case of getting a cheaper hol, it was a summer hol in term time or not at all, I don't think anyone that has worked hard to be able to pay for one should be denied because of their job. There are so many jobs, lots of people that work at universities are restricted, farmers of course as well as those previously mentioned.

Jagraf

We could of course just have school you pop in and out of to suit every parents' whim. Hotdesking maybe. The money the government saves could be turned into holiday vouchers, redeemable at airports and beach ice cream stalls in Benidorm. Or, of course, at the foot of the pyramids depending on the learning experience.

onlyroz

Spendless wrote: »

I can't answer for sporting events, but having a DD who takes drama classes and some of her fellow students have appeared in films/tv shows/theatre work and a tutor 'for a few weeks' is unlikely. If we're talking a few months than someone would be provided. Eg I'm aware of a child who auditioned for a musical and one of the criteria is the kids have to live in the London/Greater London area or be home educated as for the first 3 months of rehearsals a tutor isn't provided, only once the show starts.

Even then it isn't completely straightforward, the child's school has to sign off the performance licence, which they tend not to do if the child's attendance is below a certain % as this recent story shows.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3128500/Mother-says-school-getting-way-13-year-old-girl-s-showbiz-career-not-letting-time-appear-TV.html

Perhaps home-schooling would be a better option for people who want their child to pursue a career in acting.

As for the girl in the article - perhaps it would be different if she'd landed a major part in Harry Potter, but 10 days off to be an extra in a CBBC show? I can understand why the school is reluctant if the girl is already struggling academically. If her acting career flounders she'd be left with nothing to fall back on if she fails all her GCSEs.

mumps

coolcait wrote: »

Yep, that was us. Poor but happy. Making the most of the time that we had together.


Making the most of what we had, rather than hankering for what we didn't have.


Dealing with the rough stuff as well as the smooth.


Finding the local gems for visitors, as well as the ones which were further afield.


As you say, each to their own, and we are obviously very different on a number of levels.


But we are the same in the sense that we have experienced situations where "it wasn't always possible" to have a traditional 'going away' holiday during the school summer holidays - due to parents not having leave at that time (leaving aside the financial aspects).


Where we differ is that my family - as a child and as a parent - adapted to make the most of parents' availability during school holidays. You take a different approach.


You say that "it wasn't always possible" to have family holidays during the school holidays. This suggests that it was sometimes (often?) possible for you to do so. This is good to hear, as it does mean that you weren't forced to endure three decades or more without having a family holiday during school holiday time..


Were you in the UK when you lived a 3 hour drive from the nearest beach? Or did you just have a terribly slow car?

Yes we were in the UK, 40 years ago the motorway network was smaller, some motorways were two lane and hold ups common. We do have another difference, not to do with holidays, but I will leave you to work that one out, if you can.

By the way I am surprised that you couldn't afford holidays if you had a parent who was a police officer. Never came across that problem.

mumps

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Have you considered that there are many families where having any holiday at all didn't happen? For example, due to lack of money, caring responsibilities, illness or disability?

I believe that, in approximately 50 years, there were two holidays taken in my immediate family. All five siblings, parents/step parents and grandparents. Possibly one day trip to the seaside a year.

I've always wondered why holidays away are seen by so many people as a fundamental human right, and cheaper ones are so important to people who can obviously afford an acceptable holiday (ie, one at all), they're prepared to lie, cheat and get angry if somebody doesn't agree that getting a fancier holiday just when they want, is so very important.

Well in that case shall we ban all holidays? After all if not everyone can afford tem why should anyone?

Just to make clear I didn't mention any fancy holidays, I was talking about camping. I also never cheated, lied or got angy about taking holidays, back in the day the head could authorise a two week family holiday. I never demanded a holiday just when I wanted it, just a summer holiday for the family, if not in school holidays then at a reasonable time agreed with the head e.g. not at exam time.

But hey don't let me stop you making upvarious scenarios and being rude if it makes you happy. It takes all sorts.

mumps

duchy wrote: »

I don't
Plenty of people have "reasons" to take children away in school time - but choosing a career path that you know is going to impact hugely on your children isn't one of them.

I don't think something that is a choice should be given preference over say a low income family who can only afford a week in a caravan in term time.

That said I think the whole system of not allowing holidays is a bit ridiculous and it worked far better when up to 10 days could be taken with the head teacher's agreement and there was an expectation it would only be granted if the child's attendance the rest of the year was good enough that it wouldn't cause huge impact to their education.
I had less time off school even with an authorized week off after Whitsun each year than many of my classmates whose parents would keep them home at the first sign of a runny nose but wouldn't dream of taking them away on holiday in term time. As it was planned absence the good teachers would give me work to do when I was away- the lazy ones told me I'd just have to muddle through when I got back. Fortunately as a fairly able child academically the lazy ones didn't really impact on me too much.

With the current system it's one rule for those who can afford the fines and another for those who can't which frankly gives kids the message that if you can afford to pay you are allowed to break the rules. Is that really the message we want schools teaching our children ?

Funnily enough I agree with you. I dislike the "judging" who has a "valid" reason. After all we wouldn't want the refuse collectors to all go onholiday at the same time would we, my rubbish is only collected fortnightly so if they went on holiday I would have a months worth piled up. Sewage workers, yes I want them around. Supermarkets, don't want them to shut for a fortnight, judging by how people behave at Christmas if they are shut for a day or two I dread to think of the chaos. Family funerals well is my auntie worth more than your cousin, who should make that decision other than me about auntie and you about cousin?

I suppose where I differ is in relation to my husbands career choice, he was good at his job, it had benefits for wider society so I don't see why my children should bear the brunt and in my day they didn't need to.

I agree with you about the low income families, poor kids miss out on lots of things and I certainly wouldn't begrudge them a holiday, seems sad that some people do.

Is running in the Olympics more valid than family time, I guess that depends on your views on sport (pretty low priority for me) or family (pretty high in my case but obviously not everyone.)

I absolutely refuse to believe that a child missing school for two weeks is a catastrophe. Back in the day the head made the call, I knew people who would make sure kids didn't miss school so that they would get the permission slip for the holiday but if they weren't planning a term time holiday they would have days off for the slightest reasons, similar to your experience I think.

At the school where one of my kids teach they have a good scheme, they break up a week earlier than most schools as they save 5 inset days for end of year, the last week of term is activities week, school trips and fun stuff. If you want to you can go away for the two weeks in July when most schools are still running and kids don't miss anything educational. Another local school as a two week half term in October which is popular with alot of families.

There are ways of making holidays more possible and more affordable, I feel some people on here are quite spiteful (not you) and that is sad.

Jagraf

I still can't understand why some parents think our education system should be run around when some parents want their holidays.

Parents priorities seem to be all over the place. Family time comes below everything EXCEPT education, when family time all of a sudden becomes of utmost importance.

I also don't see why to acceptable to break this particular law, based on all kinds of excuses, yet if it were something else .....

As I said before I personally think the rules will become more strict, only time will tell. I'm pleased that our laws protect our children's education and their right to it.

FBaby

I think it comes to just one thing: you believe missing a week of school is going to have a detrimental impact on every child's education whereas many parents don't believe that is the case.

If I was given evidence that my children - not the average child- was to see their education irreversibly affected then if course I would insure they never missed a day. I expert that is the case for most caring parents.

ViolaLass

Some people believe vaccinations aren't necessary.

Guest101

The reality of the situation is thus.

Parents are responsible for the education & welfare of their child.

The government set up schools, which parents can use for free, to fulfil their obligation to educate their child. (you can of course home school and holiday whenever you like).

The law, as it is currently, is straight forward. You've opted to send them to school, make sure they go there. Or remove them from mainstream education.

The penalty is a joke. It's a holiday tax. A way for the state to prop up the treasury. If the effect on the child was so serious, the option of FPNs would be removed, and the parents would be brought before the court.

So it is safe to assume that there are lots of parents, teachers, councillors, and anybody else, who think that going on holidays during term time is ok. (as long as you pay the tax). But if it's ok, then the tax is pointless, and if its not ok, then the tax isnt putting people off!

The reality is that some children are fine to go on holiday, they are excelling academically and receive enough support at home to 'upskill' that a week away will do no harm. And there are children that are not.
- assessed on an individual basis would seem appropriate. Parents would put in extra work to help the kids achieve and do well. Kids would be exceling. And family gets a cheaper holiday.
- there will of course be an outcry, that not every child can excel. Which is true. And that's life. Not everyone is a premiership footballer, or a CEO, or an astronaut either.