Gaming2 mins ago
Was the school correct in refusing this boy's absence?
49 Answers
http://
Although I have never condoned truancy or parents taking their children out of school for a variety of unnecessary reasons, I think in this case the school was vastly unsympathetic in not granting this woman's 13 year old son absence from school, so that he could attend his mother's wedding.
Although I have never condoned truancy or parents taking their children out of school for a variety of unnecessary reasons, I think in this case the school was vastly unsympathetic in not granting this woman's 13 year old son absence from school, so that he could attend his mother's wedding.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"I am all for term time holidays..."
Why would that be, sherrardk?
This woman is foolish and inconsiderate. Regular AB-ers will know my views on unnecessary absences from school and this ranks among the most unnecessary.
She has refused to pay the (totally inadequate) fixed penalty. I'm not quite sure what "principle" she thinks she is upholding. I imagine it's the principle to take your child out of school for frivolous reasons.
She has no defence to the charge that has been laid. If she takes legal advice she will be told she should plead guilty and avoid a hefty fine and prosecution costs.
Why would that be, sherrardk?
This woman is foolish and inconsiderate. Regular AB-ers will know my views on unnecessary absences from school and this ranks among the most unnecessary.
She has refused to pay the (totally inadequate) fixed penalty. I'm not quite sure what "principle" she thinks she is upholding. I imagine it's the principle to take your child out of school for frivolous reasons.
She has no defence to the charge that has been laid. If she takes legal advice she will be told she should plead guilty and avoid a hefty fine and prosecution costs.
New Judge - and regular AB-ers know my views on term time holidays (which I have explained on previous threads) and speak from the position of being an ex-senior teacher with 16 years experience (although I have also said children shouldn't be take out of school during exam years - so years 10 to 13).
As an ex senior teacher then, sherrardk, you will obviously be aware of the disruption that unnecessary absences cause in class, be they among exam year pupils or others. You will also be aware of the that those more gullible children who see their classmates disappear to the Caribbean or Majorca for a fortnight see no difference between that and them disappearing to roam round the local shopping centre for a similar period. Finally, you will also know that such absences at fee-paying schools are virtually unheard of because, in the case of the young lady who is the subject of this question, two weeks off would have meant she had paid something like £500-£600 in fees for which her child had received no education.
The lady clearly gave her £8k ostentatious wedding higher priority than the educational needs of her child and I hope she pays a proper price to maintain her "principles".
The lady clearly gave her £8k ostentatious wedding higher priority than the educational needs of her child and I hope she pays a proper price to maintain her "principles".
If you do a bit of searching, AP, you will find similar information from what you might consider as less dubious sources.
Your general impression of people who pay to have their children educated is misplaced, sherrardk. Yes of course, many of them are well heeled and the cost of holidays at peak times is not an issue for them. However many parents are not so well off but make huge sacrifices to afford private education for their children because the State version on offer is so very often sub-standard. Ironically among the things sacrificed are often foreign holidays. A further point rarely mentioned is that holiday companies’ pricing policy is nothing new. Holidays in term time have always been cheaper than in the school hols and prospective parents need to take this into account rather than moan about it after they have children.
But back to Mrs. Harden. Cost was not the issue for her. The only reasonable grievance she has is that her younger son’s school did not apply the law with the same rigour. She had no need to see herself “hauled to court” as The Mail so emotively puts it. She could have paid a £50 fixed penalty. But better still, if it was so important that her children and others attended her wedding she could have held it at the local Register Office on a Saturday afternoon. That way her requirements would have been met, her child’s education would not have been jeopardised and taxpayers’ cash would not have been wasted provided education for a child who was not in school.
Your general impression of people who pay to have their children educated is misplaced, sherrardk. Yes of course, many of them are well heeled and the cost of holidays at peak times is not an issue for them. However many parents are not so well off but make huge sacrifices to afford private education for their children because the State version on offer is so very often sub-standard. Ironically among the things sacrificed are often foreign holidays. A further point rarely mentioned is that holiday companies’ pricing policy is nothing new. Holidays in term time have always been cheaper than in the school hols and prospective parents need to take this into account rather than moan about it after they have children.
But back to Mrs. Harden. Cost was not the issue for her. The only reasonable grievance she has is that her younger son’s school did not apply the law with the same rigour. She had no need to see herself “hauled to court” as The Mail so emotively puts it. She could have paid a £50 fixed penalty. But better still, if it was so important that her children and others attended her wedding she could have held it at the local Register Office on a Saturday afternoon. That way her requirements would have been met, her child’s education would not have been jeopardised and taxpayers’ cash would not have been wasted provided education for a child who was not in school.
I have conferred with the present Mrs Hughes on this for some expert advice - she is a Schools Inspector for both OFSTED and ISI (state and private schools).
Her take on it is that attendence records form part of the asxsessments for schools, and as such, are not played about with at the whim of parents.
More importantly, she advises that no school would reasonably report a parent to the Local Authority for a 'first offence' resulting in a fine, and it is more likely that this parent has established a history of in-term absences, and that is why action was takn on this occasion.
Armed with the 'official line' - it makes the school's response far more reasonable than the apparently draconian and emotionless nit-picking stance that the media choose to apply to its actions.
Her take on it is that attendence records form part of the asxsessments for schools, and as such, are not played about with at the whim of parents.
More importantly, she advises that no school would reasonably report a parent to the Local Authority for a 'first offence' resulting in a fine, and it is more likely that this parent has established a history of in-term absences, and that is why action was takn on this occasion.
Armed with the 'official line' - it makes the school's response far more reasonable than the apparently draconian and emotionless nit-picking stance that the media choose to apply to its actions.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
I Am Supposed To To What I Am Told
Body & Soul20 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.