You have acknowledged that it is not a matter of need, but of choice, that's fair enough, fill your boots, but don't moan and expect sympathy when the school fines you.
As I have mentioned before you may not cause harm to your child's education but you do make it harder for the school to provide a consistent education for every other child in the class. The fine is their way of discouraging that.
Regardless, this woman taking a month off has no relevance to that issue, so I don't really see why people are treating it as connected, other to take the opportunity to air their annoyance over the rules about keeping children in school during term time. Again.
I think your point is well made.
If there'd have been any fines incurred for the actions I chose to take, I'd have had to suck-it-up really and rightfully so.
I guess what I don't understand though, is why what didn't used to be an issue has become one?
If there'd have been any fines incurred for the actions I chose to take, I'd have had to suck-it-up really and rightfully so.
I guess what I don't understand though, is why what didn't used to be an issue has become one?
I suspect it has to do with foreign holidays becoming more generally affordable and therefore more common and the difference in prices between school holidays and term time becoming more extreme, but I don't really know tbh.
Seems pretty silly to disagree with her actions simply 'cos pupils don't have the same leeway.
I think the beef is fundamentally about her needing to take time-off at all, given that teachers/teaching staff have what many would consider to be rather generous holidays already.
And if it was a matter of cost, then it's a bit unrealistic to not expect parents to say 'well that's what we have to put up with.'
I think refusing a one day honeymoon request is a bit OTT to be honest.
The thinking was that she is a teacher, knows she is a teacher, and knows that means she can't just take days off in term time for 'stuff' (the fact it was a honeymoon is irrelevant). She has 16 weeks a year to schedule as much 'stuff' as she wants...
I think the beef is fundamentally about her needing to take time-off at all, given that teachers/teaching staff have what many would consider to be rather generous holidays already.
And if it was a matter of cost, then it's a bit unrealistic to not expect parents to say 'well that's what we have to put up with.'
But that still conflates the rights of a pupil with the rights of a teacher.
You might as well moan about why a prison guard gets to go home at night when a prisoner can't or why a pilot gets to sit at the front of a plane while a passenger can't.
But that still conflates the rights of a pupil with the rights of a teacher.
You might as well moan about why a prison guard gets to go home at night when a prisoner can't or why a pilot gets to sit at the front of a plane while a passenger can't.
Not really the same thing - you know that
Your scenarios are way OTT and unreasonable, unlike a parent wanting to take their child on holiday during term time.
The parents have a legitimate question which is 'why isn't the teacher holding the ceremony during the ample 13 weeks of holiday time already allocated?'
As Head, they set the example and this is a poor one IMO
I really honestly think this is a one off and reading the article about this head teacher there certainly seem to be some exceptional circumstances. Its not the best example to take but it must be remembered that teachers especially head teacher do not have the same length of holidays as pupils.
I think parents should be allowed to take their kids out of school for holidays as this is obviously more important than education!
Trust me, a 4 year old will miss sod all. They do very little work at that age and it's mostly play based.
It's nothing to do with missing work and everything to do with OFSTED reports and looking good for the inspectors.
Every parents' evening I've attended for my kids has involved being given this large folder, which inside is like some great evidence dossier of their year in class, with photos, charts, score sheets, assessment papers, more photos etc etc
It's no wonder that teachers need classroom assistants, because if they're having to compile this for 30-odd kids, you wonder when they have time to teach!
And it all feels like it's solely for the good of the OFSTED inspector, not for me, and not for the kids.
I hope the governors also accept any leave requests from any other teachers or other staff in the school too now they have set a precedent.
I work in a school as a lowly administrator and I am only allowed time off in the school holidays with a very few exceptions (my son's graduation will be one of them and then I'm only allowed one day off)
I remember when headteachers seemed to be respected, efficient, charismatic, with obvious leadership skills.
With few exceptions those I have dealings with now seem anonymous, ineffective, idealistic, and lack any real accountability it seems. A few have only been capable of handling conflict through email or letter.
If you work in education then you are not supposed to take leave in term time, it's written into your contract. Obviously on occasion there will need to be exceptions for things such as illness, bereavement or pregnancy but quite honestly this takes the piss. I've never heard of anyone anywhere who took four weeks off work just to get married. If she really needed so much time off then there's a perfectly adequate six week holiday during the summer.
Two weeks of her leave is during the Easter holiday though isn't it?
Children are supposed to be in school to learn, taking them out during term time takes time away from that learning and is disruptive, not only to their own education, but also to that of others in the class as the teacher has to focus on helping them catch up what they have missed.
This Head Teacher taking time off simply isn't equivalent, assuming that her deputy is up to covering the role there will be minimal disruption to the education of the children. People who dislike the rules about taking kids out of school are just looking for another reason to bitch about how unfair it is, but this isn't relevant to that debate at all really.
The problem is the massive rip off of prices from travel firms and the expectation that holidaying abroad is a right which should be facilitated by schools imo.
I'd wager that a week off school is less disruptive to a child's education than the head being off for an entire month.
Sorry but as headteacher she is paid to be there. A month off when the head of the school, a position she's paid to be in, and she's not there? I don't care there's deputies. You've either taken the role of headteacher or you haven't.
I'd wager that a week off school is less disruptive to a child's education than the head being off for an entire month.
Really?
In a lot of well run schools a teacher (even the head teacher) taking a month of as part of planned leave would likely barely be noticed in terms of the pupils other than possibly (in the case of a teacher) a different face in the classroom.
It's like almost any reasonably well run company or organisation, if things are in place properly the customer (or pupil) should barely notice a change in the running of things if a senior member of staff has planned leave.
If for no other reason than if they can't cope with a planned and approved leave for someone they'll have absolutely no chance of coping with unplanned absences, say if the head had become ill or been involved in an accident and wouldn't be able to work for that time.
If anything it says a lot about the School and how well it's run that the governors seemed to think that the head could take time off, if for no other reason than it suggests that there are no ongoing major issues and things are running smoothly (if you can't afford for any one member of your staff you be away you're generally running an organisation that is one second/heartbeat away from disaster).
It's also worth remembering that this is the age of telephones, mobile phones, fax machines, and that odd little thing called the internet.
I suspect the head in question will be available if an emergency came up to make a decision (you don't need to be in an office to read reports, speak to people and make a decision, something that has been relied upon for decades with teachers being expected to take a lot of their work home to do).
She's obviously a very hard working lady who has worked a lot more than a month extra, going in when everyone else was off. So this is basically time off in lieu that she isn't even getting paid for.
Her deputy head will cover for her and it won't have any detrimental effect on the school. After all, if she was off sick, her deputy would also be expected to cover and hence has to be competent in the role.
The whinging is probably all coming from parents who want to take little Johnny out of school to go on a holiday and think it's unfair that they're unable to. Making a child miss education is completely different to a headteacher having a few weeks off. She's an employee.
The argument that just because a teacher can take holidays during term time and not pupils makes no sense whatsoever.
Teachers are employees, pupils are not. It's absurd to say they should be treated the same way.
A teachers work can be delegated to holiday cover, a pupil cannot send another kid into school to take over while he or she is away. As long as the work the head teacher is responsible for was covered, I really can't see what the problem is here, apart from "wah! it's not fair!"
Nail, head. All I see on this thread is bitter parents who expect teachers to have no life just because they get charged more to take their kids on holiday. Tough shit.
Sorry but as headteacher she is paid to be there. A month off when the head of the school, a position she's paid to be in, and she's not there? I don't care there's deputies. You've either taken the role of headteacher or you haven't.
Did you miss the bit about it being unpaid leave, and how she had worked through the summer holiday?
Comments
If there'd have been any fines incurred for the actions I chose to take, I'd have had to suck-it-up really and rightfully so.
I guess what I don't understand though, is why what didn't used to be an issue has become one?
Personal views shouldn't come into it and besides..
'The school refuses to authorise any pupils' holidays during term and issues letters stating this at regular intervals'.
I think refusing a one day honeymoon request is a bit OTT to be honest.
I suspect it has to do with foreign holidays becoming more generally affordable and therefore more common and the difference in prices between school holidays and term time becoming more extreme, but I don't really know tbh.
And if it was a matter of cost, then it's a bit unrealistic to not expect parents to say 'well that's what we have to put up with.'
The thinking was that she is a teacher, knows she is a teacher, and knows that means she can't just take days off in term time for 'stuff' (the fact it was a honeymoon is irrelevant). She has 16 weeks a year to schedule as much 'stuff' as she wants...
But that still conflates the rights of a pupil with the rights of a teacher.
You might as well moan about why a prison guard gets to go home at night when a prisoner can't or why a pilot gets to sit at the front of a plane while a passenger can't.
Your scenarios are way OTT and unreasonable, unlike a parent wanting to take their child on holiday during term time.
The parents have a legitimate question which is 'why isn't the teacher holding the ceremony during the ample 13 weeks of holiday time already allocated?'
As Head, they set the example and this is a poor one IMO
I think parents should be allowed to take their kids out of school for holidays as this is obviously more important than education!
Every parents' evening I've attended for my kids has involved being given this large folder, which inside is like some great evidence dossier of their year in class, with photos, charts, score sheets, assessment papers, more photos etc etc
It's no wonder that teachers need classroom assistants, because if they're having to compile this for 30-odd kids, you wonder when they have time to teach!
And it all feels like it's solely for the good of the OFSTED inspector, not for me, and not for the kids.
I work in a school as a lowly administrator and I am only allowed time off in the school holidays with a very few exceptions (my son's graduation will be one of them and then I'm only allowed one day off)
Fair enough indian weddings can be a celebration covering up to 4 weeks but she could have booked it for the summer holidays.
I'm a strong believer in leading by example.
With few exceptions those I have dealings with now seem anonymous, ineffective, idealistic, and lack any real accountability it seems. A few have only been capable of handling conflict through email or letter.
Two weeks of her leave is during the Easter holiday though isn't it?
Why? I am sure the deputy is more than capable of running the school for a few weeks.
Really?
In a lot of well run schools a teacher (even the head teacher) taking a month of as part of planned leave would likely barely be noticed in terms of the pupils other than possibly (in the case of a teacher) a different face in the classroom.
It's like almost any reasonably well run company or organisation, if things are in place properly the customer (or pupil) should barely notice a change in the running of things if a senior member of staff has planned leave.
If for no other reason than if they can't cope with a planned and approved leave for someone they'll have absolutely no chance of coping with unplanned absences, say if the head had become ill or been involved in an accident and wouldn't be able to work for that time.
If anything it says a lot about the School and how well it's run that the governors seemed to think that the head could take time off, if for no other reason than it suggests that there are no ongoing major issues and things are running smoothly (if you can't afford for any one member of your staff you be away you're generally running an organisation that is one second/heartbeat away from disaster).
It's also worth remembering that this is the age of telephones, mobile phones, fax machines, and that odd little thing called the internet.
I suspect the head in question will be available if an emergency came up to make a decision (you don't need to be in an office to read reports, speak to people and make a decision, something that has been relied upon for decades with teachers being expected to take a lot of their work home to do).
The school allowed us 7 days
And I went back and started a new year in September like I never missed anything!
Good times!
She's obviously a very hard working lady who has worked a lot more than a month extra, going in when everyone else was off. So this is basically time off in lieu that she isn't even getting paid for.
Her deputy head will cover for her and it won't have any detrimental effect on the school. After all, if she was off sick, her deputy would also be expected to cover and hence has to be competent in the role.
The whinging is probably all coming from parents who want to take little Johnny out of school to go on a holiday and think it's unfair that they're unable to. Making a child miss education is completely different to a headteacher having a few weeks off. She's an employee.
Nail, head. All I see on this thread is bitter parents who expect teachers to have no life just because they get charged more to take their kids on holiday. Tough shit.
Did you miss the bit about it being unpaid leave, and how she had worked through the summer holiday?