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?

No 6% was the number of absences due to family holidays in 2014, in 2015 in was 7% of absences.

Your use of data is questionable.

Hello from the Adriatic BTW

All the stats banded around for absence do not include privately educated children. I've said a few days ago until 2017 Lancashire CC didn't even ask private schools for absence stats. I can't imagine they were the only LA. 7% of children are educated privately, I know figure much higher in some London areas.

Why is it right or fair I can take my child out this school year with no penalty but come September when she is in a state school I can't. So pay and there is no risk of prosecution, use the free at point of use state option and risk prosecution and a criminal record if DC has a day off.

I'm trusted now to make a decision in the best interests of my daughter simply because I pay £500 a month by direct debit ?! (yes that cheap we are up north)Yet come September my judgment can't be trusted and I no longer value education.

It's any unauthorised absence not just holiday. Yes most people won't take child out for 2 weeks disneyworld but we are human and shit happens. Just thinking about DC's school a dad suddenly died, a child's baby sibling had cancer necessitating treatment in the city and his Dad works away leaving mum juggling the lot. Oh but that will be authorised as exceptional. Will it? Suppose head authorises 5 days for death of Dad and child takes 6 or school say it's only sibling having cancer treatment no reason to miss a day.

So you get a fine and possible prosecution and criminal record. If I miss work unauthorised at worst I'm subject to disciplinary not criminal proceedings.

Hello from the Adriatic BTW

Are you on a wind up danny ?

Freind of mine took her children out of school for a week for a disney trip...might have been two or over half term as i know they went for two week

Head was very sympathetic to their reasons for going and agreed they were exceptional but still couldn't authorise the absence as their council is very strict with the schools themselves

I dont think they have been fined though

"Why is it right or fair I can take my child out this school year with no penalty but come September when she is in a state school I can't"

Because when you use a service, you gave to follow the T&Cs.

Which means that you have to follow state rules for attendance in state schools. Private schools tend to expel those with poor attendance (something not possible in state schools) though absenteeism is lower when you're dircetly paying about £80 per day

And not following the T & C of one type of school leaves parents open Criminal Prosecution. Not following the T & C of another school just leads to possibly being asked to leave (never happened at DC's school to my knowledge). Not fair or justifiable.

How can you say absence is lower when there are no stats for private attendance kept. Private isn't just the top public schools it's the small religious schools too.

(FWIW It's £33 a school day)

*No 6% was the number of absences due to family holidays in 2014, in 2015 in was 7% of absences.

Your use of data is questionable.*

There have been a few 6%s flying about.

I was talking about the overall absence rate before headteacher's discretion was taken away (it was 5.8% 2010/11 & 5.1% 2011/12). It was a response to another poster talking about parents 'taking the mick'. The aim was to point out that parents didn't really 'take the mick' before regulations changed.

I'm not sure what your point about absences due to family holidays in 2014 & 15 is supposed to illustrate.

why should your imaginary friend dictate whether you are allowed holidays in term time or not?

I'm surprised there's not been more said about this, considering that religion is a choice ... and yes, that applies to all such occasions, be it a catholic saint's day, yom kippur, eid or anything else

Maybe folk are worried about being told they're racist?

I think the fact that the majority of teachers do not support fines is a very important point.

Teachers have nothing to gain by not supporting fines (unlike headteachers who apparently gain a load of time by not having to make decisions on whether or not to allow holidays).

They cannot take their own children out during term time as they are working so wouldn't benefit from that.

If you believe that children being off only creates an extra workload for teachers then why wouldn't they be all for fines? God knows the workload is heavy enough already.

Performance management means that many teacher's pay increments are based on how their class performs. If holidays affect this why would every single teacher not support fines?

Why would they look at a correlation between absence and educational achievement and still not support fines?

I believe it is because teachers have experience of hundreds of children, they know what affects learning and mostly believe that family time is incredibly important to a child's wellbeing and success.

They also know that unless a child is a persistent absentee then a week here or there in non-exam years is not going to make a big difference to their educational attainment.

There's a thread on the TES forum where teachers are talking about it about it here:
community.tes.com/threads/holiday-in-term-time-isle-of-wight-council-wins-appeal.754797/

Teachers discussing generally have no problem with term time holidays and no one saying it is disruptive or adds extra workload or harms a child's education (except just before exams - obvs).

As a school chair of governors I am often asked for my opinion on whether to allow a holiday in term time. We tend to agree if it is an exceptional circumstance - an opportunity that isn't going to happen again or a visit with a relative who is ill. we allow holidays to service families and other people who can prove they can't take time off in the holidays because of their work.
Other than that we don't allow time off in term because however people argue it is detrimental to education.Of course children are ill and have time off but if they have a weeks illness and then 2 week holiday that is15 days of school gone. It makes a difference to the teacher - should they be expected to help children catch up when they have been away? Is this fair on the other children who haven't had time off ? As others have said there are 13 weeks to take a holiday and spend time as a family.

As a school chair of governors I am often asked for my opinion on whether to allow a holiday in term time.

Have you read any of the thread?

Other than that we don't allow time off in term because however people argue it is detrimental to education.

?? So holidays in term time are not detrimental if families aren't able to have any other time off or are children of service personnel but it IS detrimental if they can't prove they can only have certain time off and/or are not services?

What special ability does having parents in the services give you so that something that affects all other kids detrimentally doesn't affect you?

@sniggy01 please find me a job where I can get 13 weeks leave... or even 2 consecutive weeks leave! (That isn't teaching).

Get in the real world. Booking annual leave to co-incide with DH is hard enough, getting it in school hols which is generally one of my busier periods nigh on impossible.
You have no idea.

Supreme Court judges are wankers. Pareants should have rights over children, not the fucking schools. Rant over. That was soooo cathartic!

Taking children out of school for holidays is par for the course in Australia, and I agree that kids catch up if they and their parents want them to, and if they don't, they don't. I set work if they ask for it, though it cannot be a substitute for the teaching, otherwise the course would be online. No, I don't do catch-up sessions unless specially requested, always after school on a Friday.

To be fair though, Au schools are not under the cosh about attendance and exam scores.

@jakeyboy1 - you may not realise but as a school governor I do it for nothing alongside my other job i.e. in my spare time. So I don't have 13 weeks holiday - often I work through any holiday I have catching up on things for the school. I do it because I have the best interests of the children at heart and want them to have the best education that is available for them.
I do live in the real world
If you have problems with taking holiday because you are working then, that is exactly what I was saying would be considered as an exceptional circumstance at this school.
It really upsets me that people seem to think that refusing holidays is done with malice to upset families - its not.

Sorry I missed the question about service personal - we are near an army base where parents are deployed for very long periods of time and it is thought to be in the best interests of the children to be allowed time off when their parent returns - sometimes for a holiday. It is of course still detrimental to their education but not their welfare. There are so many things to be taken into consideration. It is a thankless task making these decisions and somebody will always know better than you but `i don't see any people rushing forward to take over !!! It is so much easier to abuse people like me who try and do some good than to step up and try it yourselves.

It is of course still detrimental to their education but not their welfare.

These two things are not mutually exclusive.

It is so much easier to abuse people like me who try and do some good than to step up and try it yourselves.

Not knocking, just suggesting you read the thread as the reasons you have have been discussed, even in the comments directly above yours.
As a school governor you might find the discussion useful in making informed decisions about this issue.

Forces families are considered differently to others. This is because they are a group which (at the group level IYSWIM) underperforms in state schools. They attract pupil premium to help ameliorate this, have some additional measures in the Admissions Code (applying from a future address) and th education related but if the amilitary Covenant which lays out good practice such as authorising leave when a serving parent returns from a theatre of war.

This is based on much evidence, and is written government policy.

Hmm I was a forces child. The pp is for moving. We used to move every year or two and studies have shown that every time a kid moves school up it can set you back 6 months. We never had the money to go away every time dad came back even though he was a high ranking officer( he was back on base anyway), we didn't have pp either. We did go to France/ Europe in June/ July after exams and at the end of the year when very little was being done in school as that was the only time my parents could afford to go. Some of my happiest and funniest family memories. Said memories taught me a lot re aspirations,travel,learning languages,culture.......

Funnily enough even though our education had a lot of upheaval and said term time holidays both my sister and I have degrees.

We went to some truely shite schools too.

I've just read the comments under the TES article. I would say it's a pretty even spilt between supporters of the Supreme Court decision and non-supporters.

And not every comment is from a teacher, as you can see from the ones where they talk about how much money they're saving by taking their family abroad during term-time.

That's why I was careful to say 'as a group' underperform. There will always be high and low achievers within that population, but the average is lower than the general population (or every single bloody survey if it is wrong).

And yes, it is all to do with mobility, changing schools, missing the usual application rounds and - for the purposes of this thread - having leave at certain times (especially post-tour leave) without regard to school dates. And in a rare bit of joined-up cross-ministry policy work, POTL won out over school terms as a specific exception.

I've just read the comments under the TES article. I would say it's a pretty even spilt between supporters of the Supreme Court decision and non-supporters.

My point is that if it is disruptive to learning and adds work for teachers why would any of them not agree with fines?