Supreme Court sides with government on term-time holidays

[Mulledwine1]

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-judgment.pdf

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-press-summary.pdf

AIBU to get the popcorn out for the discussion of why this is/is not a great judgment?

I have looked at the absence stats, jelly, it's just that our interpretations of them are different - which I guess is often the case with stats

In some ways, though, that hardly matters since the bigger picture is that the Supreme Court has spoken and now we all have to work with the result. We are, of course, absolutely entitled to campaign for change, but at the same time that will involve accepting that he majority decision might go against what we want

Why does the dad not just pay the fine? I wonder why he's keeping going or what his motivation is. I'm imagining it would be quite stressful to have an on-going court battle.

Well it looks like he's going to have to but it was a point of principle and an unclear law.

*Yet in 2011 absence for family holidays counted for 11% of all absence, and 7% of all absence in 2015, 6% of all absence in 2014.

It seems they have worked.*

And illness stayed the same?

Yup, 58% in both 2011 and 2015

I have looked at the absence stats, jelly, it's just that our interpretations of them are different - which I guess is often the case with stats smile

Well yes. I'm just so fed up at the way education in England has become a tick box culture, there is no care about the actual children, all that matters is the data and I feel that this is one more example of that - fudging the figures without addressing the real issues.

As a teacher it really upsets and worries me.

Why does the dad not just pay the fine? I wonder why he's keeping going or what his motivation is

Some time ago, this father was offering to represent other parents in getting back the money they'd been charged in fines - which makes me wonder if he was hoping to take a cut out of such refunds

The fact that he runs a PPI claim company, and that such companies definitely do take a share of their clients' payouts, might seem to support this

I'm just so fed up at the way education in England has become a tick box culture

I imagine the vast majority of educators would agree with you, jelly

Yup, 58% in both 2011 and 2015

A whole 4ish% of total absences (4ish% in 2015). So 4% of 4% - a massive 0.0016% decrease in absences!

I could pick some years which show an increase but you know that as you've picked those years rather than others.

Oops wrong quote bit, should read:

Yet in 2011 absence for family holidays counted for 11% of all absence, and 7% of all absence in 2015, 6% of all absence in 2014.

A whole 4ish% of total absences (4ish% in 2015). So 4% of 4% - a massive 0.0016% decrease in absences!

I could pick some years which show an increase but you know that as you've picked those years rather than others.

I picked a year before the rules changed, and the latest data available to compare. Perfectly reasonable.

In some years the data changes marginally, but prior to 2011 absences for holidays had been around 11%.

If I'd wanted it to read as if there had been a more dramatic impact I would have said 2011 and 2014 which is closer, and the year after rules changed, where the drop is 5% .

But you knew that.

Puzzledandpissed my friend who lives opposite the school says the carpark was deserted by 3:30pm

I work in a secondary school - some of the teachers do very long hours - there's no options to close early for meetings there
And no it can't have been for meetings/training as it was technically optional so there would have been a few children there till the end
My school do it most holidays - please come in and take a look at your child's home and take the opportunity to take them home early - from 1pm

I know parents who work (luckily I don't work Fridays) where is a constant problem as the children left till normal hometime feel left out

Were there ant noticeable changes in types of absence around 2093 (when fines were introduced)?

If I'd wanted it to read as if there had been a more dramatic impact I would have said 2011 and 2014 which is closer, and the year after rules changed, where the drop is 5% .

Gosh yes, 0.002 (5% of 4%) that's certainly a significant and dramatic drop in absences as opposed to a 0.0016 (4% of 4%) which is just tiny. Thank god for the fines and all those children saved from a shitty future.

Jellyfrizz

I'm a teacher. No it doesn't (Primary, I can't speak for secondary)

Well perhaps different teachers view this differently then, as my friend is a teacher and she feels that if it happens to often it can cause disruption.

Posted that a few pages back Rose but no. It actually went up in 2005.

But Jelly its still different from you saying that it made "no difference".

The head of my school and other senior teachers say that holidays in term time are disruptive in secondary. Children did often miss things like controlled assessments, or delivery of key material

Well perhaps different teachers view this differently then, as my friend is a teacher and she feels that if it happens to often it can cause disruption.

Well, yes if a single child is persistently absent of course it will affect their progress but there are usually underlying factors (chaotic family etc) and it doesn't affect other children.
Thing is, it doesn't happen too often and never has - see link to govt. stats posted above if you want to check out the actual data. Most parents really care about their child's education and wellbeing.

What should be done is support given to persistent absentees to help families. Trouble is this is complicated and costly. Much easier to cut the figures slightly by fining everyone.

But Jelly its still different from you saying that it made "no difference".

I'm pretty sure I said fuck all difference - not no difference.

See, fuck all means a piddly amount, not even worth worrying about. No means none.

But ok if that 0.0016% is significant in your eyes then fine. I disagree.

Where do you get 0.0016% from?

Please do show your working out.

In 2011 11% of all absences were down to family holidays, in 2014 it was 6, and in 2015 it was 7%.

mummymeister

No Jacks11 you really cant see the argument about poorer families otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned florida. poorer families don't even get to the beach in this country. poorer families don't get nice weekends together because often their mums and dads work at the weekend and have 2 or 3 jobs......But its ok because the rich families, who can afford to send their kids to private school and pay the fines and the higher prices and their kids get the music lessons and the after school clubs and all the other advantages - well they are just going to keep on getting them

I think you misunderstand me. I mentioned disneyland, as that was the case this ruling related to. And I stand by the fact that a trip to Disneyland is not, IMHO, an "exceptional circumstance" in the vast majority of cases.

Those parents who cannot afford to take children to the beach or for a day out in this country are unlikely to be taking a week off during term time every year to go abroad.

As I said, when I was little my parents could not afford to take us on holiday- even in this country- unless it was a trip to stay with my grandparents. We managed, and I don't feel particularly short changed. We did quite a lot of free things during our holiday and I have many happy memories of these times. Hence my comment that although I can see the logic in the argument (and have some sympathy) that poorer families take children out in term as they can't afford one during school holidays, on balance I do not agree with taking children out of school for a cheap holiday. In part because of my own experiences of not having a holiday away every year.

But its ok because the rich families, who can afford to send their kids to private school and pay the fines and the higher prices and their kids get the music lessons and the after school clubs and all the other advantages - well they are just going to keep on getting them

Well, again it comes back to whether you view a holiday away from home as a necessity/a right, or not. I do not. I think if you are spending money on a holiday during term, perhaps it would be better to stay at home and use that money to do things during the school holidays but based from home.

I am lucky enough to be able to take holidays during school holidays. My DC also go to private school (and have music lessons every week). But if I had to forego holidays in school holidays because I could not afford it, I would do so. And I would not take holidays during term time.

*Where do you get 0.0016% from?

Please do show your working out.

In 2011 11% of all absences were down to family holidays, in 2014 it was 6, and in 2015 it was 7%.*

Ok. You are talking about the % of all absences, a % of a %.
So the difference between % of absences between the years you are talking about is (lets be generous) 5%.

Overall absences were about 4% so the % of difference made by just the holiday part in all absences is 5% of 4% = 0.02, or in your initial post 4% of 4% so 0.0016.

Perhaps if you lived in a shitty place with your kids having very little aspirations and year on year never experiencing life beyond your dull surroundings you'd want to give them other experiences
away from home. Travel brings huge advantages way and above language opportunities. Times have changed and studying/ working abroad is far more common. Kids need aspirations and to see the wold beyond their town, county and country. Those with the least experiencing even less is not a good thing.

That's a disingenuous way to present that, because we are talking about the % of absences down to school holidays.

Putting it nominally that means that 13,120 fewer children had absences because of holidays.

I am lucky enough to be able to take holidays during school holidays.
why?
If holidays are so unnecessary and you don't see why people feel the need to go in term time, then why bother with your school holiday holidays at all huh? since they're as unneccesary for a happy famiily life as you say, why not just not ?

They're not unnecessary, they're also not a necessity