AIBU to tell you it is not illegal to take your child out of school to go on holiday

[Pseudonym99]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-34543101

But that is easily solved by doing what they do in other countries, ie it's the parent responsibility to fill the gaps in knowledge, not the teacher. The teacher is teaching for the whole class at the speed appropriate for the class.

Or it is very clear for everyone that it might means little Johnny will be going onto the lower ability table to catch up on what they have missed.

To be fair, I know a few people who never really realised the importance of one week at school until their dc has been off for a week a few times in the year. With a good system in place that allows parents to see if children are doing OK or struggling with the concept learnt that week, it becomes very clear if little Johnny is struggling when he is off (whether a parent will care about it or not is a difference issue).
However, it is also masked because there is very little feedback to the parents on attainement/how well the chid is doing on a weekly or monthly basis. So it gets very well hidden indeed.

But the point is that ANY absence is a disbenefit.
Unless it's teacher training or teachers striking....

But no children are being taught then.

And as for mentioning teacher training days do people still have this daft idea that these are extra days off? Do people not want teaxhers to have their training updated?

To clarify: any absence which means 1 or more children is absent while the rest are present is a disbenefit.

Teacher training days are actually taken from our holiday, so are not absence - they are your holiday, just separate from the main holidays. Your child loses no education.

Teacher striking - I don't strike, because i don't think it is an effective way of negotiating, and my class has been taught as normal throughout the strikes over the klast few years.

However, the issues have been all those rehearsed here by parents as being a bad thing, and some teachers feel that striking is the only way to get them changed:

• Government interference ion school
• Loss of HT autonomy
• An over-full curriculum with little flexibility etc

But the point is that ANY absence is a disbenefit. What you want is for everyone to be in school - by allowing everyone more days because a few people MUST be given them by law, the schools are harming children's learning. Why would they want to do that?

no it's not. Not any absence is a harm. You can learn a lot out of school.

either give everyone the day off or more reasonably add up the days and give an allowance. rather than it being the total number of days pick a maximum based on the maximum days needed by the religion that asks for the most days. so if Jews need 4 days, Muslims 6 days, Hindus 3 days and a.n.other religion 7 then you would give 7 days overall. that way all the a.n.others could use all their days on their religion and the Hindus for example would have 4 extra days.

Let's not add more accounting and red tape. Leave parents alone and intervene when it's a problem.

"You can learn a lot out of school."

Yes, but when you come back, your need to catch up is a disbenefit to the 29 other children in the class, as well as the missed learning being a disbenefit to you. And every time someone else is absent, that disbenefit reoccurs. Over the year that can eb a LOT of 'indirect disbenefit' from absence

What's required is common sense and a return to the previous system where it was up to head teachers to authorise term time absences. Head teachers are in the position to understand each child's circumstances both at home and at school.

It is time to stop criminalising the majority of parents for the actions of a minority. The majority of those that take kids out of school in term time do so in exceptional circumstances and do not take this lightly. The present system is forcing parents to lie and phone their child in sick rather than face a fine. What sort of madness is this?

Yes, but when you come back, your need to catch up is a disbenefit to the 29 other children in the class, as well as the missed learning being a disbenefit to you. And every time someone else is absent, that disbenefit reoccurs. Over the year that can eb a LOT of 'indirect disbenefit' from absence

the parent should deal with the catch up. And kids can learn a lot outside of a book. One more story may not be as useful as going to France. Of course, that doesn't need to be stated. As for teachers, that should just be part of the job. We all have to deal with not ideal circumstances in our work.

But more to the point, why is the government deciding this? if all I am doing is having fun with my children, with no educational value, that is also a huge benefit. For some families, it's either a vacation in term time or nothing. Why are we stopping these families from enjoying family life? Because we decide what's beneficial?

Again, as others have pointed out, for some reason this isn't a national issue in other countries.

It's not always about cheap holidays or trips to Disneyland. For those with family abroad, attending important family events is now increasingly difficult. Our school will authorise 1 day only to attend a family event in 'exceptional circumstances'. However one day is often not enough when you have to travel abroad. I would always try to avoid taking my DCs out of school, but there are times when I feel that it is equally important that they can be with extended family at important family celebrations. I do not expect to be criminalised for this and I would always ensure that I helped with any catching up at home.

There are far greater 'crimes' being commited by parents. It is time to distinguish between those parents who try their best and occasionally need some leeway and those who can't be bothered to send their kids to school on a regular basis.

What's required is common sense and a return to the previous system where it was up to head teachers to authorise term time absences. Head teachers are in the position to understand each child's circumstances both at home and at school.

It is still up to the HTs. Why so many HTs seem to be telling parents that it is the government/legislation is an interesting question.

Interesting... I am a zealot when it comes to missing classes and DS' attendance has never been below 95%.

But I really resent having to pay ?100+ extra per ticket (the difference between traveling on Friday term time or Saturday holiday time) so my DS can spend the last Friday before the holidays watching movies in school or relaxing with his friends.

Especially as these ?100 extra per ticket is the difference between seeing my family once every couple of years or not. (We have no family in this country).

I think that chn have great experiences on holiday with family but they miss so much at school in the process. So much work is built on over a period of weeks, culminating in a final piece of work sometimes. If a child has missed the build up then they are disadvantaged.

I agree when it's the last couple of days of term but i've seen parents take a child on holiday at the end of September for 2 weeks!!!

Unless the teacher operates on the basis that all the children in the class must do the same work lockstep, which is impossible unless they all go at the pace of the slowest, then it makes no difference if child 1 misses a week or child 2 etc .Where are parent rights in this crazy 1984 scenario? Someone will challenge the uk system at the European Court of Human Rights at some point.

The chn all have to work towards a common goal, at different paces of course but Teaching Assistants are not employed to bring absent children up to speed. They are there to accelerate the learning of specific groups, i.e the more able or the less able. If their time is then taken helping the absent children catch up, the others suffer. Remember, that most children already have to cope with absence due to illness which can't be helped, so to add more for a holiday can leave some serious gaps in the child's learning.

Where are parent rights

As a parent you have a right to choose not to educate your child within the state education system. If you want a quality, free education (which by far the majority of children in the world do not have access to - at any level), then you abide by the rules. End of. If you don't want to abide by the rules, you accept the consequences.

If your boss said 'no, you can't have that day off but you can have this day off' you would expect to be sacked if you ignored him/her. Perhaps it's time for schools to simply refuse to educate children who don't meet the basic requirement of being in school unless they are ill? Perhaps if you had to explain to another headteacher why your child had been removed from the school down the road, you might begin to expect what it is we actually have in this country?

*respect, not expect

Whilst price differences like this happen - term time holidays will always happen.

And whilst this may be a CP grab. the issue is not limited to just CP - it is pretty much EVERY holiday company or agency.

Hulababy - supply and demand. the new legislation has caused and will continue to cause prices in school holidays to rise even higher and faster and the gap between in season and out of season will continue to grow. no holiday business that I know of actually wants this to happen. they want regular steady trade throughout the year. not the situation they are currently in - being able to sell their rooms or cottages 1000 over in August but not at all in May or June. if you want holiday prices to come down then you should be against this legislation. 20% vat on british holiday accommodation as opposed to 5% in France. that would knock 15% off the cost before you even started!

I think Section 444 of the Education Act is deliberately worded vaguely specifically to leave the definition of 'regular' to parents to decide, or at least to be negotiated between the school and parents.

This sounds like Alice in wonderland! The boss is the taxpayers . The kids are not workers. The Education workers are the employees. Other countries do not operate in this rigid fashion. Uk not so long ago did not operate in this fascist way. Children are of different abilities and work at different rates so why wd it matter if they have a week off? Parents are being fined for their children missing days at school ?! It's madness and needs to be challenged.

It´s still normal & ok to take term time holidays where I grew up, my cousins do it routinely (one is currently in Baja California with her 2 school age children missing school).

Taking a week off to go skiing every yr was very normal in my youth (1970s). I can´t believe any of us were terribly harmed by it. Even though we had a continual assessment system (every bit of daily homework and any unscheduled quizzes all counted towards the final grade).

I live in a different country now.
Children can justify their absence, but I'm pretty sure a holiday wouldn't be accepted regardless of "need". They can miss school for two weeks without an accepted justification and any more than that they will fail that year. Of course it's up for the parents to decide what to do. But I've never heard of anyone going on holiday during school term, except for the odd day, maybe.

Personally I'd never take them out but as both dh and I work if we went on hols during term time it would be the school holidays with an extra 2 weeks in holiday clubs. I think the appeal of holidays in term time is probably greater if you have a sahp.

In terms of cost you need to be a bit canny if you book early then there are bargains to be had. I've paid 500 for return flights to a European destination for all 4 of us next summer holidays, I booked as soon as the flights were released 12 months in advance. I will sort accomodation shortly but it will be a fraction of the price of a package. Likewise the better value uk holiday accomodation books up first. CP you have to seize the opportunity when your dc have a teacher training day or a slightly odd holiday (we're going next year in school hols and paying 350 for 4 of us sharing a cabin with friends).

I don't really buy taking children out is that detrimental though and it should be up to the parents imo.

I cannot see how taking your child out of school for 8 days can by any stretch of the imagination constitute sending them to school regularly, and it certainly cannot comply with the statutory requirement to give them full time education. I'm quite concerned that parents are being misled by the reports of this decision which is not of binding legal effect anyway: parents who rely on it and take their children out of school assuming that they can't be convicted could be in for an ugly shock.