Bad news for some..don't think that particular dad will be ecstatic.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39504338" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The problem lies with the tour operators being able to have such a massive difference in their prices out of term time. Rowls would say it's the market that drives the prices and he is correct. Doesn't make it any more palatable though.

The good thing is if you choose the right time you can have a nice quiet, reasonably priced holiday without any screaming ankle biters disturbing your flight, jumping in and out of the pool soaking you through while you are enjoying the rays, making an unholy racket while you are dozing in the sun after a lunch time beer, if like me your are a grumpy old tw@t.

His argument was his daughter had 92.5% attendance record.

That's better then some adult workers I know.

The schools/education system didn't define what they meant by regular attendance, but from the looks of it they mean every single day, barring a death , illness or other family reasons.

The daylIght robbery by travel agents needs addressing and one way to do this is to spread school holidays about a bit if possible.
It then highlights even more how much holiday firms are bumping up prices.

Would I take my kids out of school for a one off holiday?
Damn right I would for the sake of a few thousand pound and I'd happily pay the £60 fine too, it would be totally worth it.

The problem is a child can have 8 single days of once a month with no questions asked.
Toothache
Tummy ache
Sick
Runs
Temperature
Etc
Not an issue.

Have 100% attendance up until July but book the last 8 days off to save 50% cost on a holiday to Florida and the school goes ape sh1t.

Exactly the same but different punishments.

And if truth be known they toss it off usually for the last 2 weeks with sports days, summer concerts/fairs, toy/film days etc.

If they get fined for dipping under 95% it should be done at the end of each year for every child, Whatever the absence is for IMO.

But shush don't mention the regular teacher strikes , teacher training days, or closures for weather as they obviously dont effect the childs education the same as a few days off for sickness/holiday....

I do have a little sympathy with this bloke........There's a massive lack of consistency with this ruling though, when my children went to school I had leave granted for a family holiday, mainly due to the fact that my wife works in a role where she wasn't able to choose the exact dates she could take time off, resulting in the only time we could take a family holiday was during term time.
I am aware of other parents who had requests declined and not overturned on appeal, whilst others at appeal claimed the request was to take a "cultural visit" when they were really going to visit relatives overseas, and due to this being a "Cultural visit" they were then granted permission. This then causes further issues with "one rule for one and another rule for others" mentality.
Rules should be rules with clarity around them, things like 95% attendance average over the previous 12 months as a minimum. Homework in on time 100% of the time, 0 late marks etc.

A lot of schools believe that education is not just the most important part of a child's upbringing (which it isn't), they think it's the only important part. If a child can't have a holiday in school holiday tim,e they think the child is better off with no holiday at all.

It was better when term times were non-standard. Eg. Colne-Nelson-Burnley schools used to finish in early July and have two weeks in September - ideal to pick up the cheaper holiday prices. But this was deemed inconvenient for teachers and for education authorities, so it was scrapped.

As a one off every now and again I think time away on a family holiday is as important as being in school for the week. If it's a regular occurrence then leaves the headteachers little option.

As pointed out above the real issue is the travel agents charging so much during the school holidays which leaves some with little option but to go in term time.

Do the kids get compensation when the Teachers don't turn up and are stuck with a sub who hasn't the foggiest what they are doing ? Do they ********, take your kids out whenever you want, it's amazing how many really smart people come out of the home schooling system too

Whatever happened to the School Board?

and further, can anyone explain to me how a fine is going to improve a child's education ? bullshite factor of 10

My youngest has an EHC plan (statemented) and should be taught on a 1:1 basis.

Twice in the past two weeks I have received a phone call within an hour of me taking him to school to say that they had no teacher available and could I keep him at home for the day.

I wonder what the Supreme Court would make of that?

So this bloke can afford to spend a fortune on a legal challenge, but he can't afford to take his children on holiday outside school time?

Tall Paul wrote:So this bloke can afford to spend a fortune on a legal challenge, but he can't afford to take his children on holiday outside school time?

No, I believe this guy has children at 2 different schools who chose to have 2 different school terms and specified holiday dates. So to have a family holiday, he had to take one of them out of school.

tybfc wrote:My youngest has an EHC plan (statemented) and should be taught on a 1:1 basis.

Twice in the past two weeks I have received a phone call within an hour of me taking him to school to say that they had no teacher available and could I keep him at home for the day.

I wonder what the Supreme Court would make of that?

exactly my point, it's a joke

btw I don't have any kids but I remember how shite some of my schooling was in terms of teachers not turning up etc

He won the original case. It was the education department that appealed the original decision that he didnt have a case to answer.

post 8... 'it's amazing how many really smart people come out of the home schooling system too..'

At a guess,.. you were taught in a school..?

92.5% attendance is a day off every three weeks or so.

We took our kids out (aged 9 and 11) to go skiing 2 weeks ago (along with 2 other families we went with). If we'd have gone during Easter it wouldv've cost us £1200 more. Both my kids have never had a day off this school year (apart from 5 days skiing) - they're always on time. Even with the week off they have a better attendance than most kids in the school. The whole thing drives me mad......

Are people who go on holiday in the school holidays subsidising the holidays of those who go in term time?

Don't worry too much, it's simply another rule of today's society where you need to weigh up the cost to benefit ratio. A bit like whether to park on a yellow line when you nip out to somewhere, £1.50 in a car park, £60 fine if you're caught or free if you get away with it.
Potentially late for work, get docked pay or put your foot down and risk getting caught speeding. You may not get caught and arrive at work in time, then again....
If a holiday is £500 or whatever cheaper in term time, what's £60? At the level of fine as it is, I don't know why more people aren't doing it!

Whilst the fine of £60 is a lot less than the saving on a holiday price, parents of primary school children shouldn't complain when they don't get their first choice of secondary school when the time comes.... it all stays on the record for a few years and is taken into consideration when secondary school places are allocated.

RMutt wrote:Are people who go on holiday in the school holidays subsidising the holidays of those who go in term time?

No, they are simply boosting the profits of the holiday companies.

What really gets my goat on this is not the holiday prices etc etc. It's as usual with Britain it's the disorganisation. We have two children 12 and 8. They go to different schools who see fit to operate different holiday callenders. Factor in work commitments etc and it becomes impossible to find compatible dates.

Why doesn't every school follow the same calender and have the same holiday dates in the uk. That would be a good start.

He should've been banged up for subjecting his kids to Disneyland

I have just put a holiday request form in for one of my sons who has different holidays to my other son. I will give the head teacher the chance to look after son number two if they refuse permission. See how that goes down.

The headteacher at my daughter's school asked for time off in term time, which was rejected by the governers.

He then went off sick, saying he was stressed. He went away in that time. He was suspended, and later resigned (I suspect before he was dismissed).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -time.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

d1sc0 wrote:What really gets my goat on this is not the holiday prices etc etc. It's as usual with Britain it's the disorganisation. We have two children 12 and 8. They go to different schools who see fit to operate different holiday callenders. Factor in work commitments etc and it becomes impossible to find compatible dates.

Why doesn't every school follow the same calender and have the same holiday dates in the uk. That would be a good start.

It would certainly restrict school holidays to 12 weeks of maximum prices, and make the other 40 weeks very much cheaper and child-free for the rest of us. I suspect most parents wouldn't see that as a good thing.

If travel companies tried increasing prices at off-peak rates, that wouldn't help the parents. For example, a hotel charges lower rates in term time, which incidentally is also out of high season. They are forced to put the price upin May-June-September and reduce prices in July-August; so they get less income in July-August because prices are less, and they get less income in May-June-September because people won't pay high season prices; so they have to put the prices up again to peak summer prices, which takes July-August income back to the level it was before, but they still can't sell May-June-September. So they're still losing income, so prices go higher still. Practical communism, in fact - everyone gets poorer, but it's a more equal poverty.

Most teachers are on the side of the parents by the way and a lot of teachers who are parents get caught up in it, but get special dispensation.

RMutt wrote:92.5% attendance is a day off every three weeks or so.

Yes, but the 92.5% included the holiday in question. I think the child had 95-96% attendance not including that. Basically 2 weeks illness besides that incident.

I'm actually on holiday now having taken mine out of school for a single day. The difference would have been over £500 to go the day later. In fact, it was almost that much more to go the same say, but later that night rather than an AM flight, knowing the schools finish. It's not even officially Easter yet, but a lot of schools are taking these two weeks, and the travel companies know this. No brainier to take our child out. Attendance is at close to 99%, but that £500 was seriously the difference between going and not going.

What have we gained by going? My little one has spend every day with both working parents in the sunshine, hours upon hours in the pool and learned to swim properly and confidently. We've seen sights and had tours, learning about animals at an animal park, plus different countries an bits of languages by meeting friends from Germany, France and Yorkshire ( ). What has been missed? This has been confirmed by a class friend, but all they did that day at school was played games all day. I'll repeat for clarity, they had a bloody "toy day". How is that benefitting my child over this holiday?

The £60-120 fine (for each parent!!!) is a money maker, and no more. Head teachers should be able to make a judgement on the time of year, the overall attendance record and level the child is at, amongst other things, and decide whether to grant permission. The government also need to take ownership of the problem with holiday companies. It's an absolute joke, and is one of the main reasons parents do it.

All this will lead to is more parents teaching their children to lie about being sick. It's not what we've done by the way, but I've learned my lesson there.

Maybe people should take the issue up with their MP's and local councillors given that's who decided to start forcing headteachers and governors to implement fines.

Can people not simply stick to fairly simple rules, school term time is for learning then when they have a holiday have a family holiday. If the guy has put his kids in 2 different schools that's the consequences.
Don't see why society these days has to argue and find problems with every single thing.

Shore claret wrote:Can people not simply stick to fairly simple rules, school term time is for learning then when they have a holiday have a family holiday. If the guy has put his kids in 2 different schools that's the consequences.
Don't see why society these days has to argue and find problems with every single thing.

Rank the following in order of importance to a child's upbringing:
A - Education.
B - Family life.

If you put A before B, you're wrong. But if you put A first and only, and B totally irrelevant, you're wronger.

Most children can expect to have about 560 weeks of school in their childhood. They can also expect perhaps 40 weeks family holiday in the same period, if they're from a fairly well-off family. But what if the family can't afford the full 40 weeks, especially at school hliday prices - what would be a fairer balance? 560 school, 20 holiday? What if it's only 10? Does there ever come a point where it's worth missing some school to get some more holiday, or would you go right down to 560 weeks at school and never have a family holiday at all? Because in some cases it would come down to that, eg. people who work in the UK tourist industry and can never be off work in school holidays.

I had three and a half weeks of school when I was 10, because we had the chance of 6 weeks in a cottage in Denmark. I have loads of happy memories of that holiday, even 40+ years later, including memories of my Dad who is no longer with us and the family we stayed with, also no longer with us. If I had gone to school for three more weeks, would I (a) have been happier? (b ) got better exam results? Answer - No and No. My parents made the correct decision for me, as you would expect parents to do, because they knew me better than the local council does.

It's the same argument as with the 11 year olds trying to go to the toilet at Turf Moor - who knows the child best - the parents, or the officials? (And if the parents will make wrong decisions and bring up the children to be little hooligans, no amount of official box-ticking would make that better anyway.)

Shore claret wrote:Can people not simply stick to fairly simple rules, school term time is for learning then when they have a holiday have a family holiday. If the guy has put his kids in 2 different schools that's the consequences.
Don't see why society these days has to argue and find problems with every single thing.

So you see only your own situation but not that of others. Fair enough. Before I was a parent I'd probably have a similar view.

We were at Drayton Manor today because my little one is on schools hols but that area isn't so it would be quiet.

Sat down for 5 minutes and looked at this article on BBC News for a breather while the little 'un was taken on some spinning teacup or some such nightmarish ride.

What did I see while I was reading it......?

About 100 kids swarming in whilst in their school uniforms accompanied by teachers.

The thought occurred to me - what hypocrisy to ban well meaning parents from making decisions (which are often due to money, but aren't always) when schools take kids themselves during term time to the same places. We had the same whilst skiing last winter with kids there during term time. Tell me which bit of that day or week out is educational? That's before I get to inset days, strikes and days when the kid is left with a teaching assistant because the teacher is swanning off somewhere.

When in glass houses, never throw stones.

Shore claret wrote:Can people not simply stick to fairly simple rules, school term time is for learning then when they have a holiday have a family holiday. If the guy has put his kids in 2 different schools that's the consequences.
Don't see why society these days has to argue and find problems with every single thing.

In the case of ours one is 8 and one is 12. We have no choice but to use separate schools. Who in the same village choose to have different holiday dates.

Then let's add in those where parents are no longer together and with new partners who have kids from previous relationship who go to different schools. Etc etc

Sean Dyche's Watch wrote:Whilst the fine of £60 is a lot less than the saving on a holiday price, parents of primary school children shouldn't complain when they don't get their first choice of secondary school when the time comes.... it all stays on the record for a few years and is taken into consideration when secondary school places are allocated.

No it isn't

CrosspoolClarets wrote:We were at Drayton Manor today because my little one is on schools hols but that area isn't so it would be quiet.

Sat down for 5 minutes and looked at this article on BBC News for a breather while the little 'un was taken on some spinning teacup or some such nightmarish ride.

What did I see while I was reading it......?

About 100 kids swarming in whilst in their school uniforms accompanied by teachers.

The thought occurred to me - what hypocrisy to ban well meaning parents from making decisions (which are often due to money, but aren't always) when schools take kids themselves during term time to the same places. We had the same whilst skiing last winter with kids there during term time. Tell me which bit of that day or week out is educational? That's before I get to inset days, strikes and days when the kid is left with a teaching assistant because the teacher is swanning off somewhere.

When in glass houses, never throw stones.

So schools should ban any form of trips? Also most teaching assistants I know are more then capable of teaching a class while the teacher is 'swanning about' (or most probably away doing CPD or meetings).

I thought the old " holidays too expensive in term holidays" a bit of a well worn out red herring .Dont non Asian parents just get a bit fed up when many Asian kids just disappear to Pakistan for 2/3 months etc? Semmingly willy nilly without warning nor adherence to school holidays or indeed fines? Then get a bit p1ssed off when they go on hol themselves a few days early only to be fined and hauled over the coals ?

Why not make school pupils passports invalid during term time? In fact add kids under school age to that, then I can have a really enjoyable holiday.

yorkyclaret wrote:Why not make school pupils passports invalid during term time? In fact add kids under school age to that, then I can have a really enjoyable holiday.

Pathetic

One of the government's arguments is that the more time pupils have off school, the worse their GCSE results. Every extra day off relates to a measurable reduction in results.

The problem with this argument, is that the study is only able to show a relationship between the 2, and not a cause / effect.

There is a logical, and measurable, argument that students, who are more likely to receive good grades, are less likely to take days off school anyway, and conversely, students predicted to do worse in exams, are more likely to take days off.

Just as the government can argue that taking days off school makes your exam results worse, others can argue that both exam results and days taken off school are both dependent upon the student themselves, and not directly related to each other.

If this were the case, then taking a few days off school is very unlikely to affect exam results, and if it improves the family life for that individual, it might even improve them.

Surely you're not saying that taking days off school doesn't affect a child's education for the worse? How can it possibly not? The less education they're receiving, the less educated they are. It's pretty simple really.

As for whether children gain more from taking holidays than a school education, I'd imagine that would vary greatly based on a number of factors.

How about the argument that those families which holiday together, bringing them closer, have more respect within the family unit and have less occurrence of skiving off, so get better grades? Maybe a bit more respect to their parents? Be interesting to see figures, if they existed, just for those families taking term time holidays.

tybfc wrote:Pathetic

Moronic

Rileybobs wrote:Surely you're not saying that taking days off school doesn't affect a child's education for the worse? How can it possibly not? The less education they're receiving, the less educated they are. It's pretty simple really.

As for whether children gain more from taking holidays than a school education, I'd imagine that would vary greatly based on a number of factors.

Lord street school in colne will be closed for an extra week at Easter because there is dry rot. No detriment to every child in the school because the county council closes it.

Double standards at best!!!!!

hampsteadclaret wrote:Bad news for some..don't think that particular dad will be ecstatic.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39504338" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Frankly getting a bit tired of the "I want" society, if you can't afford them don't have them and if there are accidents involved then please be a bit more careful in the future.

Rileybobs wrote:Surely you're not saying that taking days off school doesn't affect a child's education for the worse? How can it possibly not? The less education they're receiving, the less educated they are. It's pretty simple really.

As for whether children gain more from taking holidays than a school education, I'd imagine that would vary greatly based on a number of factors.

If you think back to school, did you learn something useful every single day? Probably not. And if you missed just one day, do you really think it would make a difference over 12 years of education before GCSEs? I think you would struggle to argue this case.

A good education at school is only part of a child's development. Being in school for 6 hours in a day doesn't necessarily mean they receive 6 hours of good education. Similarly, being in school every day doesn't necessarily mean you are well educated. The child has to be engaged and willing to learn. Of course, if you are off school regularly, you wouldn't expect to be well educated. But missing a bit of school here and there in a child who is conscientious and happy to catch up with a bit of extra homework later on, is unlikely to affect them when compared to a child who is not at all engaged with the education they receive.

I'm not an advocate for parents taking kids out of school for holidays willy-nilly, but if there is a good reason for it, and the pupil has a good attendance history, then I cannot see the long term harm. It should be left up to the headteacher.

Vince Fontaine wrote:Lord street school in colne will be closed for an extra week at Easter because there is dry rot. No detriment to every child in the school because the county council closes it.

Double standards at best!!!!!

How's that double standards? Seems like the school has been closed because it's not a fit/safe/healthy environment for children to be in. There's seems like there's very much an 'us vs them' attitude running through this thread and it comes across to me as both selfish and pathetic.

Roosterbooster wrote:If you think back to school, did you learn something useful every single day? Probably not. And if you missed just one day, do you really think it would make a difference over 12 years of education before GCSEs? I think you would struggle to argue this case.

A good education at school is only part of a child's development. Being in school for 6 hours in a day doesn't necessarily mean they receive 6 hours of good education. Similarly, being in school every day doesn't necessarily mean you are well educated. The child has to be engaged and willing to learn. Of course, if you are off school regularly, you wouldn't expect to be well educated. But missing a bit of school here and there in a child who is conscientious and happy to catch up with a bit of extra homework later on, is unlikely to affect them when compared to a child who is not at all engaged with the education they receive.

I'm not an advocate for parents taking kids out of school for holidays willy-nilly, but if there is a good reason for it, and the pupil has a good attendance history, then I cannot see the long term harm. It should be left up to the headteacher.

I agree that taking children out of school could be beneficial in some cases. There's a whole number of circumstances which can be considered. But rather like when we have debates on here about away ticketing policies, it's impossible to have a system that assesses each individuals circumstances fairly. It's selfish to assume otherwise.

Rileybobs wrote:I agree that taking children out of school could be beneficial in some cases. There's a whole number of circumstances which can be considered. But rather like when we have debates on here about away ticketing policies, it's impossible to have a system that assesses each individuals circumstances fairly. It's selfish to assume otherwise.

I'm not sure why that's selfish. But I think there are too many factors to consider to have a national blanket policy. Especially one based upon a theory which, as explained above, may well be incorrect.