holiday fines

Jagraf

Guest101 wrote: »

As long as that is actually being taught. I know schools which didnt mention the magna carta this year, despite it being a centenary. The foundation for freedom, for democracy and it doesnt get a mention?! - that's absolutely disgusting.

And an example of the lowest common denominator i mentioend earlier. Get the curriculum done, dont bother with extras that might actually matter.

What I mean is that you don't have to take time away from school in order to learn other things. Parents can add to the educational experience with all kinds of things that are just as good as travelling. I agree with a lot of what you say, the school curriculum can be dull, but it can be spruced up without going abroad in term time,

richie67

My parents took me out of school once for a 2 week holiday when I was a kid -2nd year at secondary school. I came back and did better than I ever did in the regular tests/assessments that we had. It wasn't a mega cultural holiday either 2 weeks in magaluf to be precise.

In the scheme of things I don't think missing 2 weeks out of school once a year will do mega damage unless it's in the last 2 years of schooling or if it's complimented with an appalling attendance record.

I've seen a couple of posts along the lines of "so sick kids can't take the time off blah blah blah" ...unfortunately life isn't fair and ultimately those kids who do have a good attendance record aren't hindering those who don't i.e. their gain is not the sick kids loss. Sounds harsh but that's what life is like in the big wide world. Maybe that's an equally important lesson for the kids to learn....?

Vikipollard

But a 10 day holiday equates to a 5% drop in attendance so, even without any sickness, attendance has fallen to 95%. It matters.

Authorised absence is still absence and affects their attendance level. Stick another 5 days for incidental illness (authorised absence) on top of the 10 days holiday and you are down to 92%. Not looking so great.

Sorry, but I am firmly in the No to this camp. We keep throwing more and more money at education because standards are at best not improving and at worst dire and you want to allow parents to have a cheap break in Benidorm? The only educational value is in the improvement in swimming ability being in the pool all day.

Prices aren't inflated in the school holidays, apparently. They are reduced in term time as the demand is less. All that would happen (and will happen, if schools pursue the route of sticking 5 inset days on to one of the many holidays schools have) is that those prices will increase too.

If you feel it's twice as much for that essential 2 week All Inclusive educational bonanza if it's in the holidays, then go alternate years. Like I did.

Guest101

Vikipollard wrote: »

But a 10 day holiday equates to a 5% drop in attendance so, even without any sickness, attendance has fallen to 95%. It matters.

Authorised absence is still absence and affects their attendance level. Stick another 5 days for incidental illness (authorised absence) on top of the 10 days holiday and you are down to 92%. Not looking so great.

Sorry, but I am firmly in the No to this camp. We keep throwing more and more money at education because standards are at best not improving and at worst dire and you want to allow parents to have a cheap break in Benidorm? The only educational value is in the improvement in swimming ability being in the pool all day.

Prices aren't inflated in the school holidays, apparently. They are reduced in term time as the demand is less. All that would happen (and will happen, if schools pursue the route of sticking 5 inset days on to one of the many holidays schools have) is that those prices will increase too.

If you feel it's twice as much for that essential 2 week All Inclusive educational bonanza if it's in the holidays, then go alternate years. Like I did.

As far as prices go, it amounts to the same thing.

But you raise an interesting point. We throw money at it and education standards are dire, yet year on year results are higher and higher. The deterrent isn't working, patents see it as a holiday tax ( rightly so, it is).

But even if I take your point, and throwing money isn't working. What we're seeing is the peak before the collapse ( which is possible); throwing money hasn't worked, but you consider the answer is to carry on doing so, not look for alternative solutions?

Guest101

Jagraf wrote: »

What I mean is that you don't have to take time away from school in order to learn other things. Parents can add to the educational experience with all kinds of things that are just as good as travelling. I agree with a lot of what you say, the school curriculum can be dull, but it can be spruced up without going abroad in term time,

I agree for the most part. There is plenty to see locally, just mean that if parents want to teach about other cultures, being immersed in that is more effective than just seeing pictures.

I think parents overall should do more. It's difficult, financial, emotionally.

The UK is one of the hardest working nations ( for those lucky enough to work ), the economy is shot to hell, retirement is off the cards for this generation - I can't blame people for wanting to have some positivity in their lives, some time with their children, something away from the day to day.

Vikipollard

Guest101 wrote: »

As far as prices go, it amounts to the same thing.

But you raise an interesting point. We throw money at it and education standards are dire, yet year on year results are higher and higher. The deterrent isn't working, patents see it as a holiday tax ( rightly so, it is).

But even if I take your point, and throwing money isn't working. What we're seeing is the peak before the collapse ( which is possible); throwing money hasn't worked, but you consider the answer is to carry on doing so, not look for alternative solutions?

Reference your last paragraph, I don't think doing the same is the answer, no. There definitely needs to be an alternative - whether it's drastically improving the standard of teaching, or overhauling what is taught and changing that.

The point I was trying to make - and clearly not doing very well, so apologies for that - was simply that reduced attendance at school, whether authorised or not, impacts on a child's potential attainment. Able children may not be as adversely affected as less able or those prone to illness, but it is still a factor. To allow those deemed already ahead to have a term time break whilst denying the same to those struggling to keep up would be discrimination.

Attendance levels are also a consideration for future employment for those who go straight in to work.

There are enough opportunities in the existing holidays to take children away and changing it for financial reasons should not be considered, even if it means a big holiday only alternate years.

gregg1

stu20vt wrote: »

Teachers get enough time off as it is. I know teachers who have holiday pads abroad and head off for 5 or 6 weeks every summer. Nothing worse than moaning teachers.

You really didn't read this properly did you?!

Pollycat

gregg1 wrote: »

You really didn't read this properly did you?!

In fairness to stu20vt, he was replying directly to this post:

Alter_ego wrote: »

What about allowing my wife (a teacher) 2 weeks off so we can have a cheap holiday as well?

System

pinkshoes wrote: »

I agree (I'm a teacher) but only pupils with an excellent attendance and behaviour record should be permitted to miss term time for a family holiday.

Most our pupils who meet this criteria are given permission for time of in term.

What about the pupils who have medical issues ? Their attendance can be erratic through no fault of their own .

tomtontom

CHRISSYG wrote: »

What about the pupils who have medical issues ? Their attendance can be erratic through no fault of their own .

Then they don't need their attendance further disrupted by holidays in term time.