MP's to debate school holiday rules/fines on 24th February

[mummymeister]

Please can I ask anyone who feels as strongly as I do to write to their MP and ask for the changes in the rules regarding school holidays to be reversed. there is a back bench debate at 4.30pm on the 24th February and it is really important to bring this issue to the fore. There have been so many stories on MN of people wanting a day for funeral, to attend a family event, to visit family abroad that I know if all of us affected or who feel strongly write in at least we will have tried.

asking people to provide evidence from doctors of illness is completely and utterly bonkers and you should know that

Some schools are indeed being unreasonable. But how are schools going to stop parents taking their children out of school for fake illnesses without asking for evidence? By the way, they don't all ask for evidence from doctors.

You seem to want the government to tackle persistent absence yet you also seem to be against every measure that could be used to do so.

prh47bridge. I have a job, like lots of others, in an industry where I can only work when schools are on holiday. no discretion. that's it. I employ a number of people. all of them have in their contract that no time off will be given during school holidays because this is when I need them to work. as a reasonable employer there are of course exceptions and exemptions and providing I can get cover I grant leave. however, this does not apply to me as the business owner. I will not tell you my profession. it would out me in the same way that if you told me yours it would clearly out you and something you have been unwilling to do. but trust me. I cannot take time off with my kids during school holidays. my dh and I have to split the time so one of us runs the business whilst the other looks after the kids. I do not have 170 days to take a holiday in. clearly you don't work in an office/factory where there is the scrum for school holidays and some folk miss out. you aren't in the fire service, the police or hospitals either. the reality for many families isn't to do with cost. its to do with our employment. when I started my business and had my kids this rule was not in place. my head is adopting the blanket no for everything yet I have no right of appeal. I am absolutely sure how to solve this one. repeal the rule Gove put in place and give control back to the head teachers.

Telling people to go to the doctors does not prove they were sick. It proves they went to the doctors. Doctors can't identify every illness and won't write a note saying "so and so isn't actually ill". It doesn't provide proof and it doesn't help sick children. It provides hoops for parents to jump through so schools can produce paper work to cover their backs.

The obvious way to tackle sickness absence without being officious is to identify those with high absence rates and send a real person to talk to the parents and see what can be done to help the child with their education. So children that are off school with chronic illness, instead of getting rude and stressful letters asking them for proof of the illness would get someone who comes round and sees what education can be provided at home/in hospital etc.

Children who are frequently off for the odd day with a minor illness where the school actually suspects malingering would get a visit or a request for parents to come in and talk to the school about their child's education (a talk about education could be useful where the school thinks the minor illnesses are genuine as well if absence is common). Refusal to engage in this could trigger an investigation focused on why they aren't educating their child.

The theme that runs through this approach is that parents are assumed to be interested in their child's education (which is the general case and that assumption by itself provides pressure on parents to value education) and the emphasis is on providing education in all circumstances, not on ticking boxes to excuse the lack of education.

That is very sensible Emmeline

I wouldn't disclose my profession as I try to avoid personal details but it wouldn't out me. Thousands of people do what I do for a living. I do indeed work in an environment where it isn't always possible for everyone to take holidays in the school holidays. I have missed out myself for that reason.

Your head may be acting illegally and is certainly, in my view, being unreasonable. But there IS a right of appeal. Your school will have a complaints procedure. That is your appeal against the head's decision. The procedure will allow you to complain to the governors (although there may be one or two steps to go through before getting that far). If that doesn't get you anywhere you may be able to complain to the LA if it is a community school and you can definitely complain to the EFA if it is an academy. If all else fails you have the right to complain to Gove (although to be honest it is unlikely he would see your complaint - it would be handled by a civil servant in his department). You also have the option of taking the matter to judicial review if all else fails but I wouldn't recommend that.

I am always happy to help you or anyone else navigate the complaints process.

The obvious way to tackle sickness absence without being officious is to identify those with high absence rates and send a real person to talk to the parents and see what can be done to help the child with their education

I agree. That should be the role of the EWO. The way EWOs and schools work together (or fail to work together!) needs to improve.

Emmeline there are so many other things that could have been done that would have improved attendance and attainment. Goves rule is way down that list imo. your ideas are so sensible, they definitely wont be adopted by the Govt. I used to see education as a partnership. I don't any more. i just see a h/t who says no to something they had previously thought was Ok and who blames the law "its not me, i have no power to say yes, i have to refuse you" weak, lazy head leadership. i have lost respect.

It is a change in the law though, mummy Meister. Heads are caught in a difficult place; they want to be reasonable people but are then given targets if attendance to meet. If they aren't seen to be meeting them, they leave themselves wide open to criticism from Ofsted and potentially placed in a category with a possible loss of their job. The implications could be huge.

I don't think attendance should be under the remit of Ofsted-it should be looked at separately.

"phr" from what I'm reading on MN part of the problem seems to be that schools are held accountable by ofstead for the absence rate regardless of the cause or whether the EWO is involved (and the EWO is only called in for the most persistent absenteeism). So the school is supposed to tackle absenteeism by sheer force of will (e.g. by denying authorization and making all absence uncomfortable)? Is that the case? Or is there flexibility for schools with large numbers of children who have chronic conditions, low immune systems, or parents who can't take holiday out of term time?

What are those "so many other things"?

(Genuine question - pressure to adopt an alternative is always better than just decrying. But of course it will still be up to individual schools to implement them? Just as it is individual schools which are being so silly about things unrelated to the rule changes such as individual days off for funerals or demanding doctor sick notes, which is not central government policy).

meditrina. there have been loads of suggestions on lots of different threads by MN posters. flexible term dates, closer working with EWO, targeting support at the parents that need it through help getting the kids to school, more engagement at a younger level, looking at individual attainment and circumstances rather than blanket bans. not using standard badly worded letters for absence for example telling someone attending a funeral that they should have planned this absence at another time. go back through the posts - you will see what I mean then. I think this rule is eroding the relationship and trust between parents and teachers. this can never be a good thing.

This 0.1/0.3 or whatever the figure is is not evenly distributed though. Most parents do not remove their children from school for a holiday - concentrate that figure on the children of parents who do and you easily reach a figure of 50 - 100% of absences. Which is as unhelpful a figure as any of the other stats being bandied about!

Another one figure of limited use: The 10 days extra leave that people seemed to think their children had a right to constitutes 5% of a child's entitlement to schooling. People are campaigning to lose 5% of their child's formal education, apparently

The work restriction argument is one that needs to be taken up with employers who lack the will or imagination to allow their staff to take leave out of term time. There are jobs where this would be impossible, granted - in which case HTs still have the right to grant time off.

All those except flexible term dates already exist. How they are implemented depends on the calibre of the head.

"....The work restriction argument is one that needs to be taken up with employers who lack the will or imagination to allow their staff to take leave out of term time. ...." yeah right Johnny. we have had this discussion you and me before. an office of 10 parents all wanting leave in school summer holidays and business constraints mean only 1 off at a time. of course the boss will employ someone on a temp contract to cover. the business wont suffer will it? not sure what industry you are in but this is not the reality for most employed people. my child does not have a right to 10 days leave and never has. all I am asking for is the flexibility that was there and the word exceptional prevents this. Meditrina - the calibre of the head is a whole different thing. if a head is incapable of doing it then what do we do?

johnny

No, we would never go away for ten days we cant afford to, we just want to take a few days here and there over the years to facilitate cheaper flights and accommodation.
And for us that would be once every few years.

Mummymeister why don't you just go on your holiday and pay the fine like everyone else is doing?

givemeaclue - it isn't just the fine. it is an offence. this means it is being criminalised. that's why I wont just take the fine and go. plus, I might be able to afford the fine many others cant. I want this to be changed and feel very strongly about it. yes, paintyfingers I read this as well about the sick note. really, 6 year olds with d an v needing a sick note. whats it all about.

It is not a criminal offence, that is untrue. Stop scaremongering.

so, if its not an offence how come you can be fined for it? I did not say it was a criminal offence. re- read my post givemeaclue. I said it is an offence and that I personally felt criminalised.

I read one about a sick note and the doctor was also horrible to her and said they didnt have time for it, but the school were demanding one? So the poor poster was totally trapped and caught in the middle.

I think these aspects are at the heart of the problem. If fines are imposed then surely some kind of offence is implied.

So, we are now fining (criminalising ?) parents for deciding that it is in their child's best interest to do something other than go to school on a given day?
Especially when this is implemented with very little discretion by HT's I feel it is an unreasonable response by the authorities. A step too far.

The current system of fines was brought in in 2003 in the AntiSocial Behaviour Act.

I think it has been a criminal offence since then, and possibly earlier (various education acts putting a duty on parents to ensure that a child enrolled in a state school attends every session unless ill or with HT permission)..

*asking people to provide evidence from doctors of illness is completely and utterly bonkers and you should know that

Some schools are indeed being unreasonable. But how are schools going to stop parents taking their children out of school for fake illnesses without asking for evidence? By the way, they don't all ask for evidence from doctors.

You seem to want the government to tackle persistent absence yet you also seem to be against every measure that could be used to do so.*

Why on earth would schools assume parents were faking illness any more than your employer can assume you are faking illness. Self-certification, as you are well aware, only starts after a week precisely for this reason- it is reasonable for people to be too ill to work but not so ill they require a doctors certificate D and V being the most obvious one.

As soon as you start talking about 'proving illness' of just one day then you have essentially admitted that the trust that existed between schools and parents in the past has completely broken down under the pressure of all the box-ticking and regulations surrounding absence. Normal everyday behaviours, such as a child being sick for a day or two are now recorded and sanctioned.

This is a bad state of affairs for all- and have standards of education gone up? No, I believe that the opposite is true sadly, and when we see the next set of OECD results, which Gove will not be able to blame on the last government, this will be quite obvious.

I know the students in my classes aren't cleverer than in the past and are over-dependent on spoon-feeding to pass exams and I feel sorry for them, and their teachers, as they were just doing what the system required to make the figures look better.

Ever heard the expression 'weighing a pig doesn't make it fatter'?

thanks juggling and Meditrina. I am not scaremongering. I am really concerned. I hate this change with an a passion - what its made schools do, parents made to worry etc. I just want it sorted out. MNHQ - no word from you?