Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think its fine to take a reception child out of school this Friday.

88 replies

ReallyTired · 09/07/2014 10:59

My neighbour's son was five years old last week. Legally he does not have to be in school. There is no school tomorrow and my neighbour is planning to take him out of school on Friday and take a mini holiday.

I feel that the school doesn't have a leg to stand on if the teachers are striking tomorrow. The poor kid is utterly shattered and I think a short holiday will do him the world of good. I would take my daughter on Friday out if I didn't have an older child.

OP posts:
Thenapoleonofcrime · 09/07/2014 18:48

I feel tired of getting them to school, they are tired of being there. Mine don't even want to play out as they are too tired and my youngest is having daily meltdowns. Roll on the hols!

I would take this little boy away, just send in a note next week.

BoneyBackJefferson · 09/07/2014 20:44

Reallytired

You are moaning about something that gove has imposed and moaning about people striking against gove. Is this some sort of ironic statement that you are making?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 09/07/2014 21:30

If your friend feels as you do and is coming to the same tiresome over worked conclusion about the strike, I'm sure she'll take her child out on the day she feels it would be inconvenient for him to go to school, OP. Whatever.

Lara2 · 09/07/2014 21:37

I'm not going to debate the rights and wrongs of taking a child out of school, but just want to clarify a couple of things.
A child doesn't legally have to start school until the term after their 5th birthday. However, once you have started school, whatever age you are, you MUST attend everyday.

littlejohnnydory · 09/07/2014 21:41

That's not true Lara. There is a separate mark in the register that signifies being below statutory education age (if the registers are being completed correctly). Children below statutory school age don't count as part of the school's attendance figures. Parents can send them part time until they are statutory school age and don't require the permission of the school.

SuburbanRhonda · 09/07/2014 21:45

If they are not yet of statutory school age (5 in England), the EWO cannot enforce the usual sanctions for unauthorised absence. However, we do encourage parents of all children on roll, whether of school age or not, to bring them in every day to make sure they develop good attendance habits.

SuburbanRhonda · 09/07/2014 21:48

littlejohnnydory, I wouldn't advise any parent to only bring their child in part-time without discussing it with and getting the permission of the school. There are a great many practical issue to consider, such as what to do when the class has an outing or an all-day activity.

That would be guaranteed to create a poor relationship from the start.

littlejohnnydory · 09/07/2014 21:52

I've done it with both my eldest children Rhonda - well, not without discussing it but making it clear it was my right and that I wasn't asking their permission. If the child wanted to go on an all day outing or to something extra like Christmas concert rehearsal, then of course I let them. Worked very well for us. I do know several families formally flexischooling older children but that does need the Head's permission. It can work very well in practice though - slight diversion from the topic of the thread.

littlejohnnydory · 09/07/2014 21:53

And we've got a good relationship with the school!

SuburbanRhonda · 09/07/2014 22:17

Oh, I see what you're saying, littlejohnnydory, you sent your child in part-time when it suited you, but when there was an opportunity to take part in something fun or exciting, you sent them in full-time. You sure about that good relationship?

Hmm
littlejohnnydory · 09/07/2014 22:25

No, suburbanrhonda, they were always part time, but it was flexible, in discussion with the school, depending on their best interests. I don't think being rigid or inflexible helps anyone, least of all the children concerned :-)

SuburbanRhonda · 09/07/2014 22:30

That's rather different from what you said first. Of course flexible schooling is appropriate for some children, but allowing them to decide they want to go in when there's something fun rather undermines the argument that you're acting in their best interests.

Presumably by "always part-time" you mean from age 4/5, so did you allow them to decide when they wanted to go in even from that age?

littlejohnnydory · 09/07/2014 22:39

I don't think that undermines the argument - a common concern about part time attendance is that children might miss out on special events like trips and concerts. If an event like that arose, I let the child decide whether they wanted to go. Yes, they were 4 or 5, below statutory school age. They didn't decide what their usual school days were and the issue of them not wanting to go on a usual school day never arose for us. If they'd hated school full stop, I'd have Home Educated (I did for a time with the oldest).

Original poster
ReallyTired · 09/07/2014 22:41

I feel that children who attend part time miss out socially. My friends little boy has attend school full time since september. He is so tired that I feel there is almost medical justification for him to have a long weekend.

OP posts:
Lara2 · 10/07/2014 06:51

Interesting little johnnydory - I've had this discussion with my HT and she was quite clear that once a child is at school they attend everyday. Rhonda is right about EWO, but that's a moot point round here - we don't have any. I agree that children who attend part time miss out on so much - big chunks of learning and they never really settle in the same way that the rest of the class do.

And I said I wasn't going to debate...............bowing out now.......

Noodledoodledoo · 10/07/2014 07:36

I wonder how many people on here stating how tired the children are also moan about the length of holidays and the childcare issues they cause.

It's a moan thrown out on most threads re the strike and unauthorised absence. The children need the holidays!

Metalgoddess · 10/07/2014 08:18

He should go on the mini break, life's too short, he's only 5, won't make any difference to his education. Just do it!

Iownafourinchporsche · 10/07/2014 08:59

Legally he doesn't have to be in school till the term after his 5th birthday - so September

He would get more out of not being at school that day by the sounds of it

Hulababy · 10/07/2014 09:14

Strike and fines for holidays are unrelated.

The teachers don't fine parents for missing days. The LEA does that.

Infact all the teachers I know at primary don't really have an issue with their pupils missing a week or two of school for a family holiday. They know that the short time off, well it doesn't really cause the child, the teacher or the other children in the class any issues.

And can I just say - no wind down here! It's full on with transition, school play, class work, a themed learning week and more. We have also had the much anticipated whole year trip to celebrate them leaving infants and moving to new schools - a fun day but very full on for staff! Hate it when people say we do nothing in the final few weeks. We are working just as hard as ever - just having more time away from the classroom and more enrichment for the children's benefit.

Retropear · 10/07/2014 09:18

Hmm my dd's teacher has gone off for a week with another class(no idea why,no letter) so she's had a selection of TA's and supply all week.Said teacher was out of the classroom planning for a lot of last week,on top of the normal TA's teaching during PPA time.I presume today is going to be yet more disruption.

Wish I'd booked our holiday the last two weeks instead of during the hols.

Cockadoodledooo · 10/07/2014 09:28

The teachers are effectively fined for striking as they're not paid for strike days.

The net result in this case is not the same because 2 days are being missed rather than just the one strike day.

If y

Cockadoodledooo · 10/07/2014 09:31

Buggering phone.
If your friend is happy to pay the fine I'd say at this time of year for a reception child I wouldn't have a problem. I would check they weren't likely to miss any 'firsts' like sports day or move up day first though.

Original poster
ReallyTired · 10/07/2014 09:38

We had sports day, transition day. As far as I know there are no "firsts" this Friday.

"The teachers are effectively fined for striking as they're not paid for strike days."

Teachers lose a day's pay because they choose not to work. That is not the same as being fined.

Our primary has shown no sign of winding its full on phonics and numeracy. The children are being made to work really hard. Its partly why my neighbour's son is flagging so much.

OP posts:
Cockadoodledooo · 10/07/2014 09:57

That's why I said 'effectively', not actually ;-) And it's not 'choosing not to work', but that debate is for another thread.
Meh, her kid, her decision. Actually I would imagine it's something quite a few people would consider doing and I can understand her reasons for doing so.

MidniteScribbler · 10/07/2014 09:59

It grates on my nerves when people pull their children out of school on the last day of the year. That's a big clean up day, so you're sending the message that it's ok to use the equipment and classroom all year, but take no part in the clean up. You're putting the onus on the rest of the students to clean up after your child. Being part of a school community means taking part in all aspects of the classroom, including the cleaning up part.

Swipe left for the next trending thread