What exactly is the strictness in English schools actually achieving?

[WaitAMinutePlease]

I’ve been on Mumsnet for years and one thing that genuinely puzzles me is how strict many English schools seem to be.

The thread today about the little boy with severe leg pain, and his mum asked if he could temporarily leave school at 1.30pm instead of 3.30pm because he’s struggling physically. The school apparently refused and said they wouldn’t “release” him. (Sorry? You won’t ‘release’ MY child??? WTAF!)

I see similar threads all the time. Parents being threatened with fines over attendance, children not being allowed time off for family holidays, requests for flexibility being refused, schools insisting on attendance despite medical issues that are still being investigated, and so on.

I’m Irish, and honestly this feels ridiculous to me. Irish schools are generally much more pragmatic. If a child was struggling with a health issue, even one that hadn’t yet been formally diagnosed, most schools would work with the parents. Reduced hours, work sent home, flexibility around attendance, none of that would seem remotely controversial. Equally, while schools don’t encourage term-time holidays, taking children out of school for a family holiday isn’t generally treated as some major disciplinary issue.

What I don’t understand is what the strictness is actually achieving. Ireland has a higher proportion of students progressing to third-level education than England by a mile (approx 76% vs 46%), so it’s not obvious to me that a highly punitive attendance culture produces better educational outcomes.

So my question is: why are English schools like this?

Is it government pressure? Ofsted? League tables? Funding linked to attendance? Or is it actually genuinely believed that this level of strictness benefits children?

This!!

Exactly this. To oldies like me, schools today sound incredibly lax. I went to an ordinary comp, and it was strict on uniform, a couple of hours' homework per night, and discipline. Even from a dodgy school, they got high university entry (in the days when it was usually low) and young people who knew how to behave in the adult world. And if you misbehaved, your parents backed the school.... which is how it should be, not pleading for special treatment for every little thing.

The problem lies in part with the academy system. When an academy takes over a school the new management feel that they have to be seen to be making a difference, and the easy way to do that is to impose an expensive new uniform with lots of logos, and ridiculously rigid discipline policy that enables them to chuck out the difficult children (especially those inconvenient SEN children) at the earliest possible moment. Of course, it would be much better if they concentrated on being bloody good teachers, but that's much more difficult.

Huh!

A lot of my friends are teachers. We met at uni so they come from all classes and all corners of the country. Not a single one says secondary standards have improved!

We were in secondary 20 years ago!

Poor attendance is strongly correlated with poor achievement, the EEF research suggests that disrupted schooling, principally student absence, is the second most important influence on school achievement, especially in disadvantaged students.

The trouble is that some schools are ludicrously hypocritical about this. Where they use isolation and suspensions a lot, that means children lose large amounts of teaching, and giving them worksheets to do in isolation certainly doesn't make up for that. If one day off school is meant to be so harmful for attendance purposes, why does it apparently suddenly stop mattering when they want to put children in isolation? It just sets up a vicious circle in many cases - when children get back into class, they've missed so much they have no idea what is going on and may well play up even more to disguise that fact.

What does Ireland do about parents who think it is completely fine for kids to only attend school 60% of the time? Because in England schools are told we have to step in where parents are neglecting their children’s education in this way. I’m really not sure it was better when we just left them to get on with it. (Because I now have the children of those poorly education people in my school. Parents who never had a job, didn’t value education, some even ended up in prison and the next generation isn’t likely to fare any better unless we intervene.)

I suppose I come at this from a very different perspective than the average MN user. I was a kid on free school meals. We were properly poor. But education saved me, and my siblings. We are all able to provide for ourselves (and families for those who had kids). We don’t worry about money the way our parents did. The kids I teach deserve the same chance I had, the same chance my previous (private / grammar schools) kids had. I refuse to lower the standards for these kids.

There is so much wrong with this post.

By the way, Irish is a langauge.

The best teacher in the world cannot teach children who refuse to even stay in the classroom. I’ve taught when there were no consequences- kids weren’t safe (to the point I nearly quit) and nobody learned anything. I’m now known as one of the “strictest” teachers in the school and most parents want me to teach their kids. Children with SEN actually outperform those without SEN in my classes. Because calm, orderly classrooms are really good for the vast majority of children with SEN.

I am in Ireland but have also lived in various parts of the UK. I feel that schools in the UK tend to have to take on much more of a ‘social care’ role than is expected of schools in Ireland - possibly because, as a previous poster has pointed out, schools in England are run by the local authority/council whereas in Ireland they answer to the department of education only and are not part of a council’s remit.

Also, education in Ireland has historically been seen to be an answer to poverty and is still seen as a positive and achievable way to improve your life. Perhaps in England this has not been the case in recent times?

This

If a child was missing 40% of their schooling then there would absolutely be flags flown. I’d imagine the school would get involved and try to work with the parents to find a solution. If there were welfare concerns it would be escalated to social services.

Children can miss about 20 school days here without it being a huge disciplinary, fining and legal threat situation. Obviously if there were concerns about welfare, things would escalate faster.

And nowhere would our local authority step in, I just find that so strange. Why are office working civil servants in charge of fining parents for their children’s school attendance 😳

So I agree with you OP. And it’s infuriating because I have kids about to start school.

I am a 90s baby. Millennial. So in upper years of secondary c. 20 years ago. We had plenty of term time holidays, everyone I speak too did. We had a few bad eggs in secondaries but overall things were manageable behaviour wise in most schools.

Millenials are the most educated generation. Have the highest academic achievement in UK history, the highest IQs, the highest employment rate in history.

Clearly holidays and time off school for being ill was not a problem. It’s incredible how people are rewriting history in their heads.

Because those children are in isolation as they were disrupting the learning of the other 31 students in the room. No teacher wants to put a child in isolation with a worksheet, they just want to teach.

It isn’t hypocritical to say that disrupted learning is very bad. Our ideal is obviously to have all pupils in class and learning. If there is a pupil who is disrupting the learning of all the others sometimes the only option is to remove the disruptor. I’m not sure what else could be done?

As far as I am aware if children miss more than 20(?) days the school is obliged to report it to Tusla(social services). I'm not sure what happens from that point.

If all the DCs took 20 days off a year -2 2 week holidays, a possibility as people take multi holidays a year - surely it would impact their schooling

I'm also in Ireland and lived in UK previously. As I understand it, the irish constitution has it enshrined in law that parents are the primary educators of their children. This means, in my interpretation, that they cannot force as much to insist the child attends all classes. I can choice to withdraw my children for any classes if I wish (and I do withdraw from the crazily forceful religious class, which told my young son he's not as special as he's not baptised, but that's another story).
I know there's still a limit hereafter TUSLA is informed, around 20 days absent, maybe.
We have enjoyed term time holidays, nice and quiet and a good deal cheaper.

So the reason why another country is doing something better is because in English schools there are people from other countries? Seriously?

And yet it’s common to take children out for holidays but Irish school attainment is regularly ranked higher than that of England.

This.

Children in secondary are already in school for significantly less days per year in Ireland compared to England which is interesting when you factor in the attainment differences.

I know im going to sound like an arse, but you’re incredibly naive. Vague ideas of social services and flags being raised do suggest you’ve never known or worked with families like this. The poster talking about the child with unspecified leg pain meaning losing a third of their education was a giant red flag that you entirely missed.

In England local authorities are the ones with overall responsibility of ensuring that our government meets its obligations to educate every child. They’re the ones who have to figure out the hospital schools, support for the perm ex kids, young offenders institutions etc. It might be organised differently in Ireland, but there is (I assume) some branch of the government which checks the UN rights of the child are actually being met?

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/education-rankings-by-country

UK is above Ireland in this list

Given the high educational achievement of Irish children this doesn't seem to be an issue. I've taken my kids out for holidays before, never 20 days in a year but they are both nearing the end of education now and both doing very well. The way I saw it was they are bright kids, their work is always up to date, there is nothing that can be done during the length of a holiday that can't be caught up on. Now I did only choose to take them out in primary because secondary holidays are very long anyway, my 2 have already been off for a few weeks and won't be back until September.

Because a term time holiday makes the difference for some kids between having a holiday or not having a holiday at all.
I'm not talking about something fancy or 2 weeks in Disney , just a few days in a caravan in Wales near a beach.
Missing 5 term days max in a year makes bugger all difference to the absolute vast majority of children, but those days spent near the sea , on the beach ,and all the other usual holiday things kids love does make a difference.
There is more to life than school , learning can take place anywhere , you can't label all parents bad for doing this.
Life is for living and when we look back and our kids are grown and looking back too, none of us are going to agonise over a few missed school days.