12-08-2015 1:24 PM
In the news today are parents in court due to the absense of their children from school.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-33861985
I heard a man interviewed on the radio this morning saying he had taken his children out of school during term time because the time off he had requested at work during the holiday period had been refused. Rather than pay the resulting fine he took the matter to court and ended up having costs added to his expenses plus a conviction.
So he ends up moaning saying how unfair it is, so I ask; why didn't he just stick two fingers up two his employer rather than the school and have the time off work during the school holidays!?
Any thoughts?
12-08-2015 1:45 PM
I guess he was probably worried about losing his job. I wouldn't want to be a judge on any of these cases, as I can see both sides of the argument. The problem never applied to me as I couldn't afford holidays when my kids were young.
12-08-2015 1:46 PM
Because times are hard and it would have cost him his job? A more pertinent question might be why he didn't just pay the fine? Or forego a foreign holiday this year...
12-08-2015 1:49 PM
Yeah, probably been cheaper.
12-08-2015 8:44 PM
Many employers make it difficult for staff to take holidays at times that suit school hols, why should parents be penalised? My view is that the summer break was designed to meet the UKs unpredictable climate, we have moved on and foreign Holidays are more attractive with almost guaranteed Sun, kids and parents need to relax so why not accept that and offer parents a greater window in which to take their hols?
12-08-2015 9:09 PM
The obvious way of 'widening the window' would be to stagger term times across different parts of the country - the problem with that is that in the secondary schools national exams, GCSE and A levels have to be held at the same time.
The alternative to that is to stagger school holidays between primary and secondary schools - that however would impact on parents who have children in both sectors.
Taking a child out of school for a week or two during term time is not fair on the other children in the class as the teachers have to spend additional time with absentees on their return to make sure thay catch up on the lessons they have missed - especially in 'progressive' subjects where each lesson is based on knowledge gained in previous ones.
12-08-2015 9:33 PM
Schools could apply a two week break during term time and have four weeks or less as the summer Hols. This would enable families to have one holiday without being penalised by the tour operators.
12-08-2015 10:18 PM
If there was the same number of weeks holidays, with the same number of potential customers then wouldn't there still be the same problem of supply and demand attracting a premium charge during those weeks?
13-08-2015 9:33 AM - edited 13-08-2015 9:36 AM
Speaking from experience, when I was teaching parents used to sometimes take a child out for a week's holiday. Personally, I was fine with that. These were children who wouldn't get a break away otherwise and at primary level they can catch up pretty easily. It worked better if the absence was in June/July than in Sept. One child came in for the 1st two days of the Sept term and then was off for a fortnight. That's trickier, as you are establishing groups and settling a new class into routines at that point in the school yr.
To be honest, the net is catching those that aren't the problem. I had other children who would be absent for a day most weeks, off for birthdays, late every day they did deign to attend (40 mins or so being failry "normal"). That is more disruptive, to both the child and the class. One family with 4 children brought them in 40 mins late every single day of the school yr. That's 4 classes disrupted daily and each child losing over half a day's edcuation a week. (Their mum then complained to me that her daughter was not being taught her times tables. So, did she imagine we did nothing for the first 40 mins of every day, just waiting for her child to arrive!?)
Some schools now put all 5 inset days together and tack these on to the June half-term. That helps those particular parents, provided they do not have other children doing exams at secondary level. (If all schools have all inset days at the same time, the advantage is then lost. Plus, it can be tricky to get experts in to disseminate info if they are all being booked for the same week.)
I don't think fines are the answer to all cases. Each request to take a child out should be reviewed on its own merits by the head.
13-08-2015 10:26 AM
On the very rare occasions I took my kids out of school, we organised it with the teacher, who gave us the lessons she would be doing while they were out and they did them during the time they were away, so they kept up. Both were for family events abroad which we extended into a more cultural visit. No sitting by a pool. If I want to sit about, I can do that at home for free.
My eldest had a complicated primary school life the first 3 years with one school between February and November, and a different school 200 miles away the rest of the year, because by then, we lived in 2 places according to the time of year.
At the 'summer' school, there were lots of days i could not get him there because we lived on a small island and the school was on the mainland. We could get storm bound. However, I always knew what he should be doing, so we had the lessons at home, with a few extras thrown in, because the schools did not teach till later stuff I had had to learn.
The methods they used to try and teach reading were appalling anyway, so even when he was at school, I had to give him tuition at home every evening. It was lucky I had noticed very quickly that he was memorising his reading books rather than reading them.
I agree missing the early part of the new school year is far more disruptive than missing some days in the later terms
13-08-2015 11:07 AM
Staggering holidays across different parts of the country could work, as long as exam dates and 2 weeks before were excluded.
That would scupper the greedy holiday companies that hike their prices (5 fold in some cases)
13-08-2015 12:29 PM
13-08-2015 2:42 PM
Do children have to go on holiday?
Why not devote several weekends to days out instead?
13-08-2015 7:43 PM - edited 13-08-2015 7:44 PM
That's what we did. We only went away to family weddings abroad...even in the proper holidays. Self employed...could not take time off usually with cows to milk and no wages if the trawler did not go to sea. Lost enough time in the winter with the weather.
13-08-2015 7:46 PM
13-08-2015 11:07 PM
@******lynda****** wrote:
I don't think anyone NEEDS to go on holiday.
Appears most do, Lynda. Nine out of ten contestants who win sums of money on TV shows or similar, when asked what they intend doing with their windfall, their reply invariably is a holiday. Never anything tangible like home improvements, a new car, new furniture, or the like.
They return with a tan that fades in a fortnight, a souvenir ashtray, a straw donkey for the hall table, and a batch of out-of-focus photographs that end up in the bottom of a drawer.
Well whoopsy-do !
14-08-2015 8:15 AM
@fallen-archie wrote:Many employers make it difficult for staff to take holidays at times that suit school hols, why should parents be penalised?
They should be penalised for unauthorised absense of their children because they have a responsibility towards their kids and the wider society.
14-08-2015 8:41 AM
14-08-2015 6:47 PM
We bring back far more than just souvenirs and ashtrays from the few holidays we do go on, (2 in the las 12 years) - memories are worth far more and last much longer than a new car and furniture.
14-08-2015 6:52 PM
One sunny Easter watching the boats going through a Thames lock, I asked my other half whether I should do the decorating or paint the boat.
No hesitation, "paint the boat".