Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bedlam breakout

double standards in the education system

46 posts in this topic

1. Some parents think its ok to take a holiday in term time because its cheaper; but if ALL parents did that then the consequences are obvious - there would be nobody there to teach.

 

2. Why should one or two families save a few bob by holidaying in term time? What about the rest who pay full whack and abide by the rules?

 

3. The solution is possibly to offer schools a chance to set their own holidays, which has already been proposed, but that creates its own logistical difficulties.

 

4. Its a difficult subject but try to see it from a head teacher's point of view. They are under immense pressure to produce "results" because politicians live for headline data (too stupid to see otherwise?), therefore the ethics and morals go out of the window in order to attain the statistical outcomes, which in turn masks the real issues.

 

5. Yes, there is a problem with some families who take their kids out of school for months at a time for various reasons (how can you justify a three month trip to a foreign county to catch up with the relatives? What about your kids' education?), but you have to see it from the teachers' point of view. They can't bloody win, to be honest.

 

And no, I'm not a teacher, but in reference to the original post, its not worthy of a dignified reply.

 

1. Families are exploited and frankly there would be no consequences as that's been the pattern for quite some time. A lot of holidays are educational for kids, foreign languages, historical sites etc. 

 

2. Why not? The rest are idiots to bring up their kids wholly at the behest of the State.

 

3. They can.

 

4. Goes with the job just like KPI's in almost all other corporate environments. The most unreliable aspect in any company or entity is the people employed or utilised.

 

5. Because your family is the one part of your life that has a chance of remaining stable and supportive. It also broadens horizons to travel. Education is a marathon not a sprint and should encompass all aspects of learning. I firmly believe parents have an obligation to provide learning way beyond the school curriculum. I think parents should be allowed a proportion of the year to provide educational support for their kids if they want. For example the last 2 weeks of any term, particularly primary is just one big jolly anyway, so why not visit Normandy, or the Dales instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a friend of mine took his kids away in school time for 4 days which resulted in snoopers going through his bins and issuing him with a fine, all seems a bit pointless when teachers go on strike willy nilly depriving kids of a days school and inconveniencing parents, do the teachers get fined in this case? think not.

I think not also

This is because the two situations have nothing whatsoever in common

I'll explain if necessary

Shoppers going this through his bins? I doubt it somehow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. ..... The most unreliable aspect in any company or entity is the people employed or utilised.

4. ..... The most profitable aspect in any company or entity is the people employed or utilised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most schools are over a barrel on this when parents book the holidays in term time.

It's easier and has less impact on the inspection judgement on the school if they grant 10 days authorised absence, covered by a holiday request from the parents, with appropriate paperwork to support the application than for the school to record it as unauthorised and cop a hammering from whichever inspectorate regime they are under.

Most schools allow 10 days on this basis per year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this correct?

 

In a push to improve pupil attendance levels across the country, new government legislation from 1 September 2013 means that headteachers will no longer be able authorise any requests for children to be taken out of school to go on holiday during term time.

 

see http://www.leeds.gov.uk/News/Pages/New-legislation-signals-an-end-to-holidays-in-term-time.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Private schools have shorter terms don't they? Meaning at the cheaper ones the cost saving on the family holiday can fund a good whack of the fees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this correct?

 

In a push to improve pupil attendance levels across the country, new government legislation from 1 September 2013 means that headteachers will no longer be able authorise any requests for children to be taken out of school to go on holiday during term time.

 

see http://www.leeds.gov.uk/News/Pages/New-legislation-signals-an-end-to-holidays-in-term-time.aspx

 

I believe it is.

 

Note: only applies to state schools in council control.  Free schools will still be able to make it up as they go along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Private schools have shorter terms don't they? Meaning at the cheaper ones the cost saving on the family holiday can fund a good whack of the fees.

 

Depends on the school but, round here, the majority break a week earlier at Christmas (and return a bit later) and have an extra four weeks in the summer.

 

It's still close to peak rate for most holidays I imagine.  It's not like they're getting March off to go on holiday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the school but, round here, the majority break a week earlier at Christmas (and return a bit later) and have an extra four weeks in the summer.

 

It's still close to peak rate for most holidays I imagine.  It's not like they're getting March off to go on holiday.

 

You're kidding right?

 

The difference in prices between a fortnight covering the last week in June/first week in July compared to when the schools have broken is staggering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're kidding right?

 

The difference in prices between a fortnight covering the last week in June/first week in July compared to when the schools have broken is staggering.

 

For places your band tours to, perhaps.

 

For places the rest of us like to go to, less so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For places your band tours to, perhaps.

 

For places the rest of us like to go to, less so.

 

I don't take my band on holiday.  That would be silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. ..... The most profitable aspect in any company or entity is the people employed or utilised.

 

Couldn't agree more but state funded schools don't make profits on the back of pupils, they suffer due to their unreliability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a woman being interviewed on breakfast TV a while ago, about her taking holidays outside of school holidays.  The 'fine' she paid to the school was a fraction of what she saved by going off-peak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when did it all go so wrong! When I see kids in some parts of the world walk several hours in the hope of getting a few hours education, when their families sacrifice everything to give their kids a few hours a day in a classroom.

And then you come here. KIds ###### around in class, bunk off school, think it's cool to be stupid. Parents think their human rights are being infringed because not being able to take their kids out if school means they'll have to pay a bit more for a holiday.

 

And to cap it all off, the constant whining about jobs going to foreign workers! What a bunch of cretinous tw*ts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because we teach the wrong things to the wrong kids in the wrong schools. The curriculum is set up for pupils who plan on university. There is no provision for future hairdressers, brickies, plumbers, mechanics etc. So by 14 or so they realise they are being set up to fail and switch off. I would too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because we teach the wrong things to the wrong kids in the wrong schools. The curriculum is set up for pupils who plan on university. There is no provision for future hairdressers, brickies, plumbers, mechanics etc. So by 14 or so they realise they are being set up to fail and switch off. I would too

 

This is of course true. If a child 'succeeds' in our education system, what will they look like at the end of it? They will almost certainly be quite academic, intellectual and bookish. You could argue that a top scientist or university academic is what our whole system is geared towards creating. There is of course a need for the basics to be taught regardless of the job.

 

Sadly, headlines like today's, comparing us to countries like China and Korea, is likely to lead to an increased focus on this. Regardless of the fact as well that it is almost certain to fail anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we do need education aimed to produce the academic and bookish. We also need an education to produce the practical and the craftsmen. Sadly we have neither. A state sector where some succeed despite the system, but many fail because of the system.

 

I am a teacher.........................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we do need education aimed to produce the academic and bookish. We also need an education to produce the practical and the craftsmen. Sadly we have neither. A state sector where some succeed despite the system, but many fail because of the system.

 

I am a teacher.........................

 

So am I. However, I don't think the system fails as much as people like to believe. It's not perfect by any means but we have some serious cultural issues that are causing us to fall behind in the international tables. Our culture by enlarge doesn't promote a love of learning or place a high importance on intelligence, if anything it actively goes against it. I don't think the same can be said of China or South Korea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because we teach the wrong things to the wrong kids in the wrong schools. The curriculum is set up for pupils who plan on university. There is no provision for future hairdressers, brickies, plumbers, mechanics etc. So by 14 or so they realise they are being set up to fail and switch off. I would too

well that depends on the age, ability and needs  of the child

 

there is a case to be made efor a more vocational aspect to education for some students in say the last two years of secondary education  but this should be in the form of education not training-ie the context in which children learn can be a work skills one within a work sttyle environment, but it isn't the job of schools to turn out plumbers hairdressers and so on, but it is a valid idea that some childen leave school armed with the means to flourish when they enter the world of work and their chosen careers.

It also helps that there is work for school leavers to go to when they do leave school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schools should be providing education as an end in itself not as a means to employment ends. The latter tends to mean pushing kids into career paths way too early, very much as the 11 plus did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017