To think my colleague deserves to be fined

[Awdry]

For taking his reception child out of school for two weeks a week after they have gone back for half term.

They have booked 2 weeks abroad. Their dd is struggling in school. She took ages to settle in September and and seems to have a complete lack of confidence when it comes to school. (My ds is the same age and plays with her. They already took her out for a weeks holiday in February (however she wasn't 5 then so it could be argued it wasn't compulsory.)

She is now the term after they have turned 5 and they see nothing wrong with it. They havn't even told the school yet and they fly this weekend. Both parents have totally flexible holidays (I know I deal with holiday requests and she isn't working at the moment). It is purely so they can get a cheaper holiday abroad.

Their parents have a caravan they could use in this country instead.

I have namechanged in case I am recognised.

Hmm. Personally, I think a good education is one of the most important gifts you can give a child. And given that I feel my children are getting that in their school, I wouldn't mess with it in any way. In Reception, I might be relaxed about the odd day. But not two weeks in the middle of term.

Once a year is not regularly though is it and realistically parents usually only can afford one annual holiday if you could afford more you'd go private and do what the hell you like.

nkf - i guess that depends on the definition of 'lost' which is subjective. I would not consider it a loss if it can be caught up, learnt in another way at another time. Learning does not have to be a strict regime that must be followed to the letter at all times or else it is lost, it can be moved and changed and bent around to adapt to lifestyles, built on and enhanced.

If my child missing a swimming lesson, she learns those things another time, at the next lesson, or if i take her on a different day, it is just that particular session that is lost, not the skills she would have learnt from it, she can learn it different way.

I thought the family being cited had had a week in September, shortly after school started and a holiday since Christmas. This would be their third holiday in Reception year. I think that's quite high.

Yes, it can. And I did say there are children who won't suffer as a result of term-time holidays. I am relatively confident that if I chose to do so, I could help my children catch up.

The government guidelines are there because the numbers show that taking time off school affects how well children do at school. It might not affect A over here in this school or B in that one. But the guidelines are created to help children get the education to which they are legally entitled.

I think this is the second holiday, after one in Feb. She took a while to settle in Sept.

I still don't think 2 holidays is excessive at this age. She can do numbers on the plane, read books, practice writing. Or just wait til she comes back.

The 'guidelines' are there to be imposing and controlling, or if it was just to allow children the education they are legally entitled to, it would not be enforced by law. That is making sure they attend school as they are legally obligated to. That is different.

But, how does the OP know that this child is not one of those children who would have no problem catching up? Settling in at school is not the same as academia.

She doesn't does she? Neither do we. I'm really just interested in the question of fining and whether parents should take their children out. I don't know about the OP's family.

I think it's worth considering sometimes that there are parents who don't consider education of much value and whose children would be frequently absent if there weren't rules about attendance.

Children who's parents don't value their education I would imagine are the types who let their children have a day off to walk the streets or watch TV not take them on holiday, whole different kettle of fish.

pavlov - just a very rough calculation based on the budget for the school i worked in, divided by number of kids per school day. doesn't include any of the cost at county level, but only based on school days.

still, it is expensive & it should be valued.

And we are not legally olibiged to send children to school at all, they have to be educated by law that does not mean attending school.

Well "value" is relative of course. Some people place education above everything and cripple themselves for the "right" school. Others think it will all come out in the wash and the child will catch up or that they will do well if they are naturally clever. And any number of permutations. But attendance and achievement are linked.

If you've sent your child to school, you are supposed to ensure they attend. I know that you can home ed but I believe you have to de-register.

TBH I don't think they really miss much at that age. I also think you should keep out of it.

I value my kids' education. We've travelled plenty and missed a bit of school. (Privately educated so not 'wasting spaces') The two aren't mutually exclusive. I'm very happy with their academic progress.

Now it's not particularly fair to take kids away from school if it's going to screw up their exams or if it's going to mess up a group activity, but for a five year old, it's just not /that/ important - they learn from activities, from reading at home, from visiting museums, parks or going to ballet or just going for a walk and looking at the trees. I've seen five year olds at school and they're not generally doing some academic, mysterious things. Yes they're reading, writing and doing sums but often, they're learning about the world and their life. What better way to learn than to travel and meet new people? And to be fair, my kids tend to read or do workbooks in the car when we're travelling.

As someone said way back on the thread... travelling can boost a child's self-confidence and give them a sense of perspective - something which is lacking in people who think that school is the be all and end all.

Personally, I think school is overrated and the whole educational system is very artificial. What a shame that you either have to turn over your children full time to school to have control over their education or you have to do it all yourself through home education. Surely we can be a bit more creative than that.

Yes low attendance is related to low attainment.
I don't think a 2 week holiday would mean that attendance is so low that they can't learn.

Children with very low attendance tend to have parents who don't care if they go or not. THere is an unrespecting attitude to education. THAT is the problem, not holiday time.

And for heaven's sake, the child is in YR!!!! I took my children out at that age, but I am more reluctant to take them out the closer they get to finishing Primary school.

People DO have a right to a holiday. Relaxing is an important skill as well. Did you know that anxiety/depression in children is skyrocketing? Sad.
So yes, holidays are important. Families on low incomes should not be penalised for wanting some precious family time away.

I always get cheesed off whenever this topic comes up. Why don't more people get angry at the tour operators etc who hike their prices up so massively during breaks?
Once again parents get it in the neck because we are the soft target. Ticks me off.!!