to be annoyed ith the school - how many times can you penalise a child for poor attendance

[654321]

There are mixed opinions about taking your kids out of school, and we made a choice to take DS out of school for 5 days in total.....these were treated as unauthorised absence. Now bearing in mind that since reception DS's attendance has always been in the high 90's (around 98%) Im not typically a parent that takes non attendance lightly...and there were genuine non financial reasons for not taking holidays during the appropriate holidays - but I also accept that no one twisted my arm to go on holiday.

DS did not qualify for the xmas treat - day trip to the panto because of his attendance - which he accepted as he knew we had been away on holiday and got to do things whist other kids were in school - however now he has been told in addition to that he cannot attend the end of year christmas disco...

How many things can they disqualify him from - he is being punished for something that was technically my choice. It seems that the message is that anything nice coming up he wont be able to do because of his attendance - it just seems to be labouring the point at the expense of the child...DS is 12YO btw :)

Ah ok, tethers. That makes more sense.

lol do you know what is the Most ridiculous thing - DS has pointed out to me that in order to go and watch the panto...the chidren are taken out of school for the afternoon!!! OMG - hypocrites lol

654321, I'm reserving judgement here.

(Oooh get me, presiding over your case )

I suppose my only question over the justification for taking an unauthorised absence would be whether your need to be in work during school holidays trumps your DS's need to be in school.

Work would have had to cope if you'd been ill and your DS already has in the region of 13 weeks holiday per year. Then again, which would have the most negative impact...

That said, I think they need to draw a line under the issue now and stop the continued punishment for something over which your sone didn't have control.

654321 - exactly, this is what so annoys me about school absence policy. It is fine for them to take Baker days (shows age), time off for panto trips, non-educational trips (seen lots of those). If a parent has the temerity to take their child out of school for something of their choosing the full retribution of the school is levelled at them.

OP, I'm afraid that the school is probably picking on you precisely because you are a caring, concerned parent. They dont bother with the hard-faced ones whose kids dont hit 80% attendance because they are just too difficult. You and your DS are soft targets and make the powers that be feel like they are doing something.

Sorry! Is my cynicism showing?

Blimey, exclusion from activites based solely on attendance. Schools doing that are brave. It's a disability discrimination lawsuit in waiting.

Why are so many people ok with this when a couple of days ago there was almost unaminous condemnation of rewarding good attendance with crappy little certificates?!?!

If a tiny reward for attending is not ok then a huge punishment for not attending certainly isn't either.

I realise that in the OP's case we're talking about holiday but it seems that the policy in this and other posters' schools applies to any absence.

manic, it seems to me that the same people who were arguing against attendance awards are arguing against this- it's two sides of the same coin.

"If your children are 'shy' or cannot cope with crowds, don't take them to crowded places. There are plenty of quieter places about (especially in the UJ) but, if you like Benidorm or Magalluf, take yourself during term time and have a relative live in with your children so that they do not miss school."

DD1 goes to Special School, and the Head openly says that this is a justifiable reason for a term-time holiday. She get's hassle from the LA, but she simply tells them that the absence is justified by the child's needs. Are you saying that because a child hasn't been lucky enough to have their needs met by a specialist educational environment, which understands the impact of such things on their lives, that the whole family should miss out?? There is such a thing as 'reasonable adjustment'.

I don't see the problem with this at all. School is compulsory and shouldn't be missed for family holidays or outings.

Lougle - I saw that part of the post as well, but chalked it up to "person who doesn't live with it, so either doesn't understand or simply has no compassion at all." Apparently those with SNs should not be allowed reasonable adjustments - if they can't hack the crowds during term breaks, then they should be hidden away at home.

Must make a mental note to avoid AIBU when tired and slightly cranky.

OP, I would be furious if I were you.

Obviously, it isn't ideal to take kids out of school, but it's incredibly narrow-minded to say that it should never happen, under any circumstances. I am extremely supportive of the school in general, and absolutely believe in the importance of attending regularly, but last year, we did make the difficult decision to take dd out for 7 days, tagged on to half term. DH is from a very remote village in another country, and his elderly mother was seriously ill. It takes three days to travel to his village, and another three days back. Given the overall cost of the trip and our belief that it could be the last time for dd to see her grandmother, we felt justified in taking her out of school, and thankfully the headteacher agreed, and authorised the absence.

I am quite convinced that dd learned more in that visit than she would have learnt in school. We used some of our time overseas to focus on the topic that her classmates were studying at home, looking at it in the context of the culture that we were in. She wrote up a little project on the topic which she presented to the class on her return, enhancing her own learning and theirs. She also practised language skills, learnt about farming techniques by joining in with what the local people were doing, and absorbed loads about a different culture and way of life which is very much part of her heritage. And she spent precious time with her grandmother and her other relatives.

Holidays in term time are not always about avoiding the crowds or saving a few quid. There are very real reasons why we simply cannot travel to my DH's birthplace during the longer holiday periods, not least because it wouldn't be safe to do so.

I am simply not willing to sacrifice my daughter's relationship with her grandmother for the sake of a few extra days in school, and I would be furious if the school sought to punish my dd for decisions that my husband and I have made about what is right for our family.

Thankfully, our school seems a lot more enlightened than the OP's.

Your child isn't being punished for poor attendance - those with good and perfect attendance are being rewarded.

It's important you see the difference.

trois, I agree completely with that statement - the trip out of school (in school time) was set up as a reward for good attendance - and DS has also completely understood that...However the school disco is a school event, not a reward for good attendance and as such every child should be invited?

Actually school isn't compulsory leares, your legal obligation as a parent in the UK is to provide an education "according to need and ability".

I think rewards based on attendance are wrong, and discriminatory to those children with health/mental health issues. It sounds like the school doesn't have the guts to confront the parents directly so does it through the kids instead which I think is cowardly. It also just encourages families to lie next time which isn't the best example to set!

There is a trick to this, or so my attendance officer tells me.

Don't ever ask for holiday, simply put in writing you are intending to HE and are going to trial it for a week or fortnight. At end of said week/fortnight send child back to school with the pronouncement that it isn't suitable for your family.

Your holiday then becomes a geography field trip!

I agree with the school. Fines clearly don't work as a deterrent, and this way your son is more likely to protest in the future should you try and take him out of school in term time again.

I do think it's harsh that children are punished for having been ill, that is clearly unavoidable, but where the absence is "unauthorised" then yes, there should be measures in place to prevent it.

I strongly disgaree with taking kids out of school in term time for more than the odd day here and there. If you can't afford a holiday - you don't go. I haven't been anywhere for 2 years. It's just life. Education is important. Imagine what would happen if everyone did that - there would be no continuity.

Next year don't go on holiday in term time then.

Sorted.

I have to admit, OP, it does rather sound like you took your child out of school for a holiday simply because it was more convenient for you. There wasn't a health benefit, a death in the family, or some serious consideration. Just that (in your words) you needed a break after an extended work commitment. Unfortunately, quite a few of us as parents could use a break after extended work commitments, however, we avoid taking holidays (even though they may be badly needed) during term time because as a parent is our responsibility to make sure, within reason, that our children are present for school.

I also have to agree that you are far too flippant about paying the fee, which signals to me that it is simply not enough of a deterrent. If they let you off with a fee, which you would "happily pay", what's to stop you from doing this every year and simply paying the fee? The school may not have handled it in the best way possible, as they should have made clear prior to the holiday exactly what time period he would have been excluded from activities due to his absence, but they obviously realise that you are not willing to take responsibility for your actions, so they are enforcing it with your son in the hopes that HE at least will take it seriously.

OP, they do this to stop people like you doing what you did!!!

It's your fault your child is missing the end of term treats.

Yes, they do think that if the end of term treats is that important to you then you will abide by the law and send your child to school.

If you don't, then he doesn't get the treat. Yes they do think that he will be upset and that this will tug at your emotional heartstrings. They have no emotional heartstrings as far as your son is concerned. They are just interested in his education.

If you can't do the time... and all that.

HTH

But the OP is not 'doing the time'. Her son is.

The message being given to those children being rewarded for their 100% attendance is just as perverse; after all, those children did nothing to earn their reward.

I think it is a very sad that schools effectively punish children (and I particularly think excluding them from social events is harsh and detrimental, especially at Christmas) for lower attendance than the LEA consider appropriate.

Box ticking and centralised targets that bear little relevance to real life have been prioritised over the well-being of pupils.

Often absences are unavoidable, and the rules make no allowances for individual circumstances.

Besides which, if parents decide to take their children out of school for a few days, then the default response should be to assume that they have considered the options and feel this the best solution for THEIR children.

The (much lower than the Daily Mail would have us believe) number of parents who genuinely don't give a shit about their children going to school should be tackled about it - but for their children to be punished is cruel and unfair.

I'd set up an alternative visit to the pantomime and a separate disco for those 'not good enough' for the school events - I am a stubborn old bugger about things like this, and loathe the way the role/responsibilities of the parent is being eroded by the government.

tethers but the school know that a parent is going to be upset if their child misses out and hope that this will effect a change in the parental behaviour.

I think 100% is a bit much because it doesn't allow for any illness, but schools have a problem with parents taking kids out and if they can get at the parents through the children, they will do.

Not saying it's right, but I can see why they do it!

They assume parents will be upset if their child misses out. It's not always the case; see my earlier post about children from neglectful or abusive homes.

Even if it were the case, giving the message to children that they will reap the consequences of their parent's actions (be they good or bad) is abhorrent.

Perhaps if less parents took the option of taking their children out of school at the drop of a hat, the schools wouldn't need to resort to this type of thing.

You can't just generally say that if the parent says it's a good reason, then it's a good reason. Because some parents are not using good judgement in this. And this from me, whose own mother used to send notes into the school when we were absent saying "Triggles was absent because it was necessary." That's it. No further explanation, and we were instructed to tell the staff that if they had any questions or problems, to ask them to call my parents and discuss it with them. So I'm not necessarily one to be happy with allowing the school to dictate to me, however, some things are basic common sense. Missing school is really not in a child's best interests in most instances. There are exceptions, obviously, but they are few and far between.

I don't like the child missing things because of absences due to illness, as there is literally nothing the parent OR child can do about illness.

But even if the parent is keeping the child off school for the wrong reasons, the child should not be punished. The parent should.

To exclude the child from treats is quite often to compound the sense of exclusion they already feel from their peers due to their poor attendance. In many cases, it increases the child's disengagement from school.