To think this mother is right. Holiday in term time.

[derxa]

Normally I think children should not be taken out of school for holidays but this mother may have a point.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3559089/Mother-four-fined-60-truancy-taking-youngest-daughter-term-time-holiday-Government-free-meant-children-s-Easter-breaks-different-times.html

Good sad face as well

Sorry Jelly your wrong there about attendence.

the article is blacked when I click the link.

So, did they find a causal link? did they control for other factors? It of course can be the case that children with good attendance also have many other advantages (organized, educated, high income parents etc etc etc). Since I can't see the article, I can't tell if this was controlled for.

But chilli private roads aren't necessarily private land are they? I live on a private road but it's not private land.

I don't know, but I am not hugely invested in this point.

I just did a quick google and what a few (non-official) sites seem to say is that if the public can access the road, speed limits apply even if the road is private.

Private schools do have to abide by the same rules, but as stated they don't have the same attendence issues? Do you know how I know? Because I've worked in partnership with private schools on issues, they don't have the same issues with attendence because the vast majority of attendence issues are linked with socio economic issues that tend not to effect the children of people who can afford to send their children to private schools.

They do have issues with school refusers, but this tends to be solved by the parents either taking them out of school, or paying for some help, not waiting months for CAMHS.

You might be "dubious" of the evidence, but its been peer reviewed, and replicated so its more likely to be correct.

The rest of your comment is a bit: " I don't want to be told what to do", which is a shame because you state educate your child which involves giving up some of the absolute control you have over "your child."

Oh and you used:" My child" you are soooo one of "those" parents.

Private schools do have to abide by the same rules, but as stated they don't have the same attendence issues? Do you know how I know? Because I've worked in partnership with private schools on issues,

Private schools have to abide by the rules, but from above it sounds like they don't. which is it?

Ok. Was a study done comparing the two systems? I am not asking you to post the study, just asking if it is more than hearsay or your knowledge is limited to the schools you were in contact with. Again, I'll ask if stripping out the habitual absentees makes attendance more or less the same at schools.

Second, I don't doubt it is a socio economic issue, but not all state schools have this problem. Lots of state schools have a substantial to wholly middle class intake. Why should the rules apply to them?

"In schools with an average absence of 7.5 days or fewer per pupil per year, 90% of pupils gain five or more good GCSEs. This drops to 31.3% in schools with an average absence of more than 20 days per pupil"

You are talking about averages for schools, not individual students.

And that would suggest that 7.5 days is ok. So why fine people for taking 5 days?

Have a look at this: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/412638/The_link_between_absence_and_attainment_at_KS2_and_KS4.pdf instead.

Figure 4 shows that 90.1% pupils missing 40-45 days of school over the key stage gained 5 GCSEs at A*C.

A school which has an average of more than 20 days is going facing significant challenges. That is huge.

Oh and you used:" My child" you are soooo one of "those" parents.

really? I have a great relationship with our children's school. Near perfect attendance for younger child (a couple of legit sick days). The older child has been unwell more than usual this term, but that's been only a few extra sick days. DP is a parent governor.

Stop name calling, it's really not nice.

I don't have study data, but even if you strip away persistent absence from most schools their data won't look like private school absence data, theres is much, much lower. The ones I have worked with have so low rates it is crazy, they even tend to have time off for illnesses.

You can't apply the rules differently to different types of state school, that wouldn't be fair.

Private schools do have to abide by the same rules, but as stated they don't have the same attendence issues?

So apply the law fairly then. Do not allow independent schools to authorise any leave unless medical or family funeral and fine anyone who takes time off other than this. It shouldn't cause any upset if, like you say, no one takes time off in term time should it?

Or just scrap the whole fining nonsense as it's not working anyway.

She has a point
School Easter holidays were very strange this year. You would think that schools within same borough would have the same holidays.
We booked a week away, and only realised later that the two children didn't have the same time off.
One had Easter weekend off, then had to go back in then had 2 weeks off.
That's never happened before.
If anyone had told me that we didn't "need" that holiday they'd have got short shrift from me.
Would have just accepted the fine though.

That document pretty much proves the link between absence and achievment for example:

"Specifically, pupils with no absence are 1.5 times more likely to achieve 5+ GCSEs A-C or equivalent and 2.8 times more likely to achieve 5+ GCSEs A-C or equivalent including English and mathematics than pupils missing 15-20 per cent of KS4 lessons."

Jelly, I'm not sure if your point makes any sense, private schools have such low absence rates that heads can approve absences if requested. Its the ones in state schools that know that if one gets approved then they will get inundated ( like we used to) for requests for absence during term time.

I wouldn't scrap the law, there are some really daft decisions made by parents. I seem to remember a young man in 2010 missing a week and a half of term after easter as he was skiing, his father then compained about his poor GCSE results, schools fault of course.

Jelly, I'm not sure if your point makes any sense

How can wanting the law to be applied fairly not make sense??!!

*That document pretty much proves the link between absence and achievment for example:

"Specifically, pupils with no absence are 1.5 times more likely to achieve 5+ GCSEs A-C or equivalent and 2.8 times more likely to achieve 5+ GCSEs A-C or equivalent including English and mathematics than pupils missing 15-20 per cent of KS4 lessons."*

15% is the definition of persistent absence. As I said earlier absence does not make a significant difference to achievement unless it is persistent absence.

Well I've explained why it doesn't work like that, and the fact that the number of absences granted by heads in the private system for term time holidays will be extremely low.

Well I've explained why it doesn't work like that, and the fact that the number of absences granted by heads in the private system for term time holidays will be extremely low.

The law should be applied fairly. The number of absences granted by heads in some state schools may be extremely low too, should they be exempt as well?

Do you understand how this works?

The head either authorises or doesn't, after that it is dealt with by different organisations.

The head at the private schools can grant it, as can the head at the state school, but the 10 days at the heads discrention no longer exists.

So the private school , with its low absence levels and very few of these requests is more likely to do so, and can do so within the law. The state school who get more of these requests is unlikely to do so because they usually deal with more issues to do with attendence and it creates too much time wastage to explain why little chilli is allowed a holiday at a certain date, and little jelly isn't at another.

The law is applied the same.

I wouldn't scrap the law, there are some really daft decisions made by parents. I seem to remember a young man in 2010 missing a week and a half of term after easter as he was skiing, his father then compained about his poor GCSE results, schools fault of course.

How would the law have helped? Fining the family would not have improved his GCSE results.

The head at the private schools can grant it, as can the head at the state school, but the 10 days at the heads discrention no longer exists.

So what you are saying is that the head at the state school CAN'T grant it? Yes, that's what I thought.

The head at the state school can grant it if they choose to.

The head at the state school can grant it if they choose to

Except they can't unless it's one of a list of clearly defined exceptional circumstances.

So it is not being applied fairly.

Which heads at the state school can just put down on the form if they wish to, as can the heads at the private, whose going to check?

However, as heads at private schools will get so few requests they are more likely to grant them ( and they get so few because the parents will pay the fees for the days missed anyway), heads at the state school are more likely to say no because they get so many requests.

Anyway, this is going round and round in circles.

Whose going to check? Um, OFSTED for one. You want heads to lie? Why not just have a fair system instead.

Anyway, this is going round and round in circles.

Yes, because it's a stupid, pointless, unfair fine that doesn't have any benefit to students or families. It's not helping with absence or achievement.

You can't apply the rules differently to different types of state school, that wouldn't be fair.

Sure you can. if the rationale is that school that don't have an attendance problem don't need these rules, then state or otherwise that don't have this problem don't need these rules.

That document pretty much proves the link between absence and achievment for example:

Link? yes. Causation? Not one eensy weensy bit as far as I can tell (I only scanned the document, so if someone finds any controls, that would be good). In fact, the document is pretty explicit about this very big piece of the puzzle missing.

Absence is not the only factor that has a link to a pupil’s attainment. There are other complex relationships, such as the strong link from prior attainment and the link between different pupil characteristics and attainment, which should also be taken into account. This release aims only to provide an overview of the link between pupil absence and attainment based on available evidence.

So, frankly, I am not convinced it's worth the electrons it's using on the internet. What's entirely likely is the same child will attain the same amount if they miss any small amount. What of course it doesn't show is attainment and absence caused by the same factor (parents).

Well, from the teaching side it certainly seems to have stopped the number of holidays taken in term time, with whole fortnights taken off.

OFSTED will look at the data, which is why noone will know if a private school approves one of its few dates as a funeral or one off absence, a state school will get noticed because it will have far more, the inspectors will be like:" Little Jelly seems to have had absences for 5 grandmas funerals this year."

*may be caused

Well, from the teaching side it certainly seems to have stopped the number of holidays taken in term time, with whole fortnights taken off.

And yet the official stats suggests overall absence has actually increased.

OFSTED will look at the data, which is why noone will know if a private school approves one of its few dates as a funeral or one off absence, a state school will get noticed because it will have far more, the inspectors will be like:" Little Jelly seems to have had absences for 5 grandmas funerals this year."

What are you on about? Independent schools can authorise leave for a holiday. State schools can't. Why would an independent school be putting anyone down as attending a funeral when they are on holiday?

Are you on the Pimms lurked?