Term-time absences banned by Gove? Have you heard anything?

[FantasticDay]

Just that really. A colleagues had heard that all schools had received a letter from the Education Minister saying that term-time absences were not to be authorised. I wondered if any of school staff on here could confirm /deny? Cheers.

[saintlyjimjams]

Oh just saw your post Meditrina - thank you that's helpful to know. In which case there shouldn't be a problem.

[BoffinMum]

Schools should not mark a pupil as attending school, using the attendance code B for off-site education activity, unless the school is responsible for supervising the off-site education, and can ensure the safety and the welfare of the pupil off-site.

I sent one of mine to a full time German language course in German boarding school for 3 weeks in term time once, with the full blessing of the HT. A course that didn't run for his age group in UK school holidays, run by the Goethe Institute, the German equivalent of the British Council. Presumably this would be truanting and I would have been fined under the new regulations.

WHICH IS WHY INFLEXIBLE REGULATIONS ARE STOOPID.

[rabbitstew]

meditrina - it is not an insignificant change.

For one thing, reference to "special circumstances" is now changed to "exceptional circumstances." It used to be the case that up to 10 days holiday were allowed in special circumstances and more than that in exceptional circumstances. So now, 1 day should be treated with the same disdain as 2 weeks... and how many people know of a school that has permitted anyone to have more than 10 days' holiday during term time in a year???...

For another, prior to changing the law, the DfE made it very clear it disapproved of holidays in term time and wanted to change the law to make its disapproval very clear. So it would be a very brave HT who would take seriously the faux-discretion they are apparently given in any meaningful way.

[BoffinMum]

exotic, in our area the schools are quite far apart so the LA would end up having to taxi the child losing the place to a school more than 2 miles away, so they wouldn't pull that one.

[exoticfruits]

It wouldn't work in our area.
I'm not saying that I agree with it- just that it will come.

[Holliewantstobehot]

So only the well off can take their kids away now. We have just had a week off to go away and it cost me under £300 which has taken me a whole year to pay off. We always do educational stuff on holiday as well as the fun stuff and I think we all benefit. I'd like to know if Gove would happily go through the rest of his kids childhood without ever giving them another holiday again.

[meditrina]

It is a small change because now as then a HT can authorise up to 10 days, and it remains entirely at the HT's discretion.

There is no difference between 'special' and 'exceptional' in this context.

[TheDoctrineOfAllan]

Boffin, if there is a waiting list for the school I don't think they have a choice - especially as I assume your plan only works if you don't tell them you'll be re-registering a week later.

[BoffinMum]

Technically speaking, and I am not recommending this as a course of action but more a sticking up of fingers if you feel like taking a risk or avoiding a fine, you could submit the mid year application form a day or two after the letter removing your child. In terms of the bureaucracy you would have won. In terms of risk, you might lose your place if there's waiting lists locally (which believe it or not, there aren't everywhere).

[BoffinMum]

And if everyone did this regularly, the rules would change pretty damn sharpish.

[rabbitstew]

meditrina - what makes you think there is no difference between "special" and "exceptional" or that 10 days has any relevance any more???!!!!!! The words were specifically changed for a reason. A headteacher can now only use their discretion to allow holidays in "exceptional" circumstances, not in any old circumstance. And the word "exceptional" has a precedent - holidays of over 10 days were only allowed in "exceptional" circumstances in the past, so this is clearly intended to mean something far more restrictive than "special" circumstances.

[rabbitstew]

And the removal of the reference to 10 days was also done deliberately - there is no acceptable time frame for holidays anymore. So for a HT to have some fantasy 10-day time limit in their head is just fantasy - 1 day is too much unless it's an exceptional day...

[rabbitstew]

Mind you, a HT could now authorise several months in exceptional circumstances. But of course, "exceptional" means the same thing as "special...."

[rabbitstew]

Unless you can point me to some official advice about the change that is coming into effect in September that says something different?

[rabbitstew]

(If "special" and "exceptional" are supposed to mean the same thing and by HT discretion the law means HT right to ignore the words "special" v "exceptional" and permit any holiday he or she fancies, then I'll eat my hat...).

[meditrina]

The 10 days is relevant because it's written into the law (then and now).

As is HT's (and no-one else's) discretion on what can be (exceptionally) authorised. Which is no change.

[rabbitstew]

No, that's wrong. The legislation has specifically been amended to remove reference to 10 days - see www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/756/regulation/2/made

[rabbitstew]

And sorry, but in law the change of a word from "special" to "exceptional" is never meaningless - HTs are expected to change the exercise of their discretion as a result.

[JugglingFromHereToThere]

If it becomes impossible to obtain an authorised absence, (as my daughter has been able to for two afternoons this school year, to enable attendance at interesting and valuable young people's residential activities mainly in holiday) - I think a lot of goodwill will be lost. People may just opt for unauthorised absences, and defend their case if necessary a little further down the line/ risk a fine, or whatever the consequences will be.
I will be sorry if providing the best upbringing and education for my child means incurring unauthorised absences - mainly due to the breakdown in communication and the lack of acknowledgement of a home/school partnership that it would represent. But it's unlikely I'd just send her to school instead as I already only ask in special/exceptional circumstances.
I feel these new measures are very undermining both of the home/school partnership, and of my role as my DC's mother and guardian/ educator.

[JugglingFromHereToThere]

I think they may also widen the gap between the privileges of privately educated and state educated children. I imagine private school HT's can use far more discretion in authorising absences to enable participation in interesting extra curricular activities ? And feel private schools may be better anyway at recognising the benefits of a broad and individually tailored education ?

[meditrina]

It's "exceeding 10 days" and 'for purpose of a holiday" that are changing.

Up to 10 days is still OK at head's discretion of what counts as exceptional/special.

[rabbitstew]

No, they are omitting any reference whatsoever to holidays or to 10 days worth of holiday (or any other type of absence) being OK. Up to any time whatsoever is now OK for any type of leave of absence, but only in "exceptional circumstances." The only reference to 10 days now relates to how much time beyond the leave actually granted must pass before the child concerned can be deleted from the admissions register for failing to attend.

[rabbitstew]

ie up to 10 days is NOT "still OK." They haven't specifically omitted s.7(3) and s.7(4) of the 2006 Regulations in the 2013 Amendment for nothing.

[rabbitstew]

Unless you mean to imply that it's OK to take your child off on a 10 day holiday because the school can't delete your child from their admissions register if you do, even though it's totally unauthorised rather than with their permission and will result in you being fined.