Just take them and say your kid is ill. They can't question that. Your child is only 4 (i think) so it isn't like they're going to miss their GCSE's or anything.
Just take them and say your kid is ill. They can't question that. Your child is only 4 (i think) so it isn't like they're going to miss their GCSE's or anything.
I suppose you'd also have to tell the kids to lie to the teacher when they go back.
Well, the teacher might ask them if they're better, and the kids might blurt out something about having fun at the seaside. Plus they might have a new suntan.:D
It seems to me that the OP got the info (advice) he needed in post #2 but now seems determined continue to criticise the school and teachers for not rectifying the problems he himself is causing by removing his child from school as well as belittling the role of the teachers in the process.
Seeing as the OP has posted this in advice (although he seems only to want to rant) I will give some advice: if you want your child to have a smooth and happy school life, it would be easier on her if you worked with the school and not against it. I would also advise against involving a 4 year old in your personal grievances with the school or instilling her with an 'us versus them' attitude.
And just so you don't teach your daughter any bad habits, please spend a moment checking out the difference between there, their and they're.
It seems to me that the OP got the info (advice) he needed in post #2 but now seems determined continue to criticise the school and teachers for not rectifying the problems he himself is causing by removing his child from school as well as belittling the role of the teachers in the process.
Seeing as the OP has posted this in advice (although he seems only to want to rant) I will give some advice: if you want your child to have a smooth and happy school life, it would be easier on her if you worked with the school and not against it. I would also advise against involving a 4 year old in your personal grievances with the school or instilling her with an 'us versus them' attitude.
And just so you don't teach your daughter any bad habits, please spend a moment checking out the difference between there, their and they're.
I agree with the last two posts. I gave up on this some time ago when the OP was maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle, if only the school would tell him what was needed. He's simply ignored all posts pointing out that it isn't quite that easy.
Just take them and say your kid is ill. They can't question that. Your child is only 4 (i think) so it isn't like they're going to miss their GCSE's or anything.
So you teach your child that it's acceptable to lie to his teachers?
My final points and opinions on the issue is that the school are hiding behind a policy under a loss of education reasoning. When from what seems to be the case since the thread started is it's far more the school targets and ratings that affect the school directly than the education line as such. And sure, education in a legal obligation and responsability under law but the policy to fine is not a law and seems more and only enforceable when there has been the lack of education during that period in question or where a parent has signed a contract of sorts to the affect they will abide to that policy. Where education has took place during a period in question the law side of education has surely been complied with as we all know education can be done at home. Besides the policy can hardly be enforced to be signed upto on threat of having a child thrown out of school if a parent does'nt sign upto it can they?.
But for us the main issues are clear it is just a policy the school can still authorise if they wanted to and thus proves thats all it is, a policy and where it can be proven a family really cant afford a holiday in school holidays and the attendance is fine and there level of learning has been fine then where is the problem for a single week?. The dont go if you cant afford to go during school holidays line does not answer the issue. Because as many have said the so called loss of education for just a week upto a certain age does not really affect the child at all. And what they gain by an often much needed family holiday would outweigh any loss of classroom education for just a week upto a certain age. And as we had booked and payed at a time when the previous school had no issue because the attendance was fine. Then we have done all we can to work with the new school who had never made mention of this under no circumstances prior to asking. It's the schools line of pretty much suggesting we should cancel the holiday and loose all the money we spent a year saving up for because they want to protect there attendance and targets when under the circumstances they could but wont authorise even though it was authorised at the previous school and already paid for and the daughters attendance has been fine..
And as for what a previous poster Little Nell said, I have never once said or been maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle. All I have said was at her age and upto a certain age that to ask what subjects she is doing to to help with them while away can be done by a parent due to the childs age and that alone is nothing for the teachers to provide and is nothing short than petty not to provide a parent with that information.
Of cause this thread has also given us and others in our position possable options for the future and I'm greatfull for that, as never really thought to pay the newspaper holiday offers much attention thinking they were a scam and end up costing more after the extras etc. So it may just not be an issue for next year.
My final points and opinions on the issue is that the school are hiding behind a policy under a loss of education reasoning. When from what seems to be the case since the thread started is it's far more the school targets and ratings that affect the school directly than the education line as such. And sure, education in a legal obligation and responsability under law but the policy to fine is not a law and seems more and only enforceable when there has been the lack of education during that period in question or where a parent has signed a contract of sorts to the affect they will abide to that policy. Where education has took place during a period in question the law side of education has surely been complied with as we all know education can be done at home. Besides the policy can hardly be enforced to be signed upto on threat of having a child thrown out of school if a parent does'nt sign upto it can they?.
But for us the main issues are clear it is just a policy the school can still authorise if they wanted to and thus proves thats all it is, a policy and where it can be proven a family really cant afford a holiday in school holidays and the attendance is fine and there level of learning has been fine then where is the problem for a single week?. The dont go if you cant afford to go during school holidays line does not answer the issue. Because as many have said the so called loss of education for just a week upto a certain age does not really affect the child at all. And what they gain by an often much needed family holiday would outweigh any loss of classroom education for just a week upto a certain age. And as we had booked and payed at a time when the previous school had no issue because the attendance was fine. Then we have done all we can to work with the new school who had never made mention of this under no circumstances prior to asking. It's the schools line of pretty much suggesting we should cancel the holiday and loose all the money we spent a year saving up for because they want to protect there attendance and targets when under the circumstances they could but wont authorise even though it was authorised at the previous school and already paid for and the daughters attendance has been fine..
And as for what a previous poster Little Nell said, I have never once said or been maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle. All I have said was at her age and upto a certain age that to ask what subjects she is doing to to help with them while away can be done by a parent due to the childs age and that alone is nothing for the teachers to provide and is nothing short than petty not to provide a parent with that information.
Of cause this thread has also given us and others in our position possable options for the future and I'm greatfull for that, as never really thought to pay the newspaper holiday offers much attention thinking they were a scam and end up costing more after the extras etc. So it may just not be an issue for next year.
a much needed holiday for whom? Let's be honest, it's for you, not the child. I would be interested to know what these 'educational benefits' are that you keep mentioning she will gain from the holiday, as i doubt there any.
You say "just one week" can't matter that much, but what if every child in a class of 30 has "just one week" extra holiday during term time. In any week of the school year, there would be children missing a week's schooling. This can mess up a teacher's training schedule. Although you might think that it doesn't matter in the early years, I'd say those years are just as vital, as the chlldren are learning the basic skills of reading, writing, correct spelling, etc. which not all parents are able to teach their children at home. It's inevitable that there will be days off for sickness occasionally. If you add in extra holidays for individual children, you're going to lose all continuity in the teaching/learning situation.
So some holidays can be granted at the schools discretion. Some people can be fined for taking kids out of school - despite many posters saying the law can t dictate what you can do with your own child - well it can - and can fine you or even imprison you if you want to continually flout the law.
Doesn't apply in your case OP as your child is under the legal requirement to attend which you have been told many times.
pS - the policy to fine is law and government plans to crack down even more.
The teacher may not have finalised what she is teaching the week of your child's absence, that could be a reason you haven't been told of that rather than thinking on the negative!
You say "just one week" can't matter that much, but what if every child in a class of 30 has "just one week" extra holiday during term time. In any week of the school year, there would be children missing a week's schooling. This can mess up a teacher's training schedule. Although you might think that it doesn't matter in the early years, I'd say those years are just as vital, as the chlldren are learning the basic skills of reading, writing, correct spelling, etc. which not all parents are able to teach their children at home. It's inevitable that there will be days off for sickness occasionally. If you add in extra holidays for individual children, you're going to lose all continuity in the teaching/learning situation.
I agree, I think the early years are the most important, it's also a time to instil a work ethic, which pulling them out of school regularly for a holiday doesn't do.
My final points and opinions on the issue is that the school are hiding behind a policy under a loss of education reasoning. When from what seems to be the case since the thread started is it's far more the school targets and ratings that affect the school directly than the education line as such. And sure, education in a legal obligation and responsability under law but the policy to fine is not a law and seems more and only enforceable when there has been the lack of education during that period in question or where a parent has signed a contract of sorts to the affect they will abide to that policy. Where education has took place during a period in question the law side of education has surely been complied with as we all know education can be done at home. Besides the policy can hardly be enforced to be signed upto on threat of having a child thrown out of school if a parent does'nt sign upto it can they?.
But for us the main issues are clear it is just a policy the school can still authorise if they wanted to and thus proves thats all it is, a policy and where it can be proven a family really cant afford a holiday in school holidays and the attendance is fine and there level of learning has been fine then where is the problem for a single week?. The dont go if you cant afford to go during school holidays line does not answer the issue. Because as many have said the so called loss of education for just a week upto a certain age does not really affect the child at all. And what they gain by an often much needed family holiday would outweigh any loss of classroom education for just a week upto a certain age. And as we had booked and payed at a time when the previous school had no issue because the attendance was fine. Then we have done all we can to work with the new school who had never made mention of this under no circumstances prior to asking. It's the schools line of pretty much suggesting we should cancel the holiday and loose all the money we spent a year saving up for because they want to protect there attendance and targets when under the circumstances they could but wont authorise even though it was authorised at the previous school and already paid for and the daughters attendance has been fine..
And as for what a previous poster Little Nell said, I have never once said or been maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle. All I have said was at her age and upto a certain age that to ask what subjects she is doing to to help with them while away can be done by a parent due to the childs age and that alone is nothing for the teachers to provide and is nothing short than petty not to provide a parent with that information.
Of cause this thread has also given us and others in our position possable options for the future and I'm greatfull for that, as never really thought to pay the newspaper holiday offers much attention thinking they were a scam and end up costing more after the extras etc. So it may just not be an issue for next year.
Hi Dave909, just wanted to say I agree with you. Don't worry about things and have a great holiday with your wife and little girl. We also had problems having a child and one of the best things I ever did was to take him out of school and home-educate him. When people go on about parents disrespecting teachers, I just smile, when I think about the times teachers disrespect parents and children. I could write a book about it, but am not going to as I am not well and don't feel up to doing so. My son has been happy and has ended up with a degree, that's what matters. I hope all goes well for you. Love your little girl and be happy on your holiday and always.
I d just take them on holiday and tell the school thats what your doing.Your child is 4 not 16 and in the middle of exams. Its not going to impact on their future.
If the school has an issue with this then i would ask them to pay the extra needed to take a holiday in the school holidays.
I wouldnt give it another thought and I wouldnt give a stuff about school attendance targets or other such drivel.
And as for what a previous poster Little Nell said, I have never once said or been maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle. All I have said was at her age and upto a certain age that to ask what subjects she is doing to to help with them while away can be done by a parent due to the childs age and that alone is nothing for the teachers to provide and is nothing short than petty not to provide a parent with that information.
.
Agreed that you didn't actually use the word 'doddle', but in various posts you have said a) that you are perfectly capable of teaching what she would miss by not being in school, and b) that it would be 'no effort' for the teachers to give you the necessary 'few details' of what she would be learning. Here's an example -
Post 268 I'm asking for education information to best match any teaching we can do and give her while on holiday based on what she is doping in school, this has been ignored yet is no effort for the teachers what so ever to give a few details on what she would be learning. And at her age I'm pefectly capable of teaching her the lessons that a 4 year old would be having in school as would most parents with there children probably upto the age of 10 or 11.
I think you're wrong on both counts, but frankly it's like trying to explain colour to someone who's been blind since birth. I'm not an early years specialist but if there's a poster who is, who hasn't yet lost the will to live, maybe they could explain why early years teaching is considered by many to be more, not less, challenging than (say) A level. And the thought that the teachers could tell you in just a few words both what they plan to cover that week, and arguably more importantly, how they intend to teach it, is risible.
Agreed that you didn't actually use the word 'doddle', but in various posts you have said a) that you are perfectly capable of teaching what she would miss by not being in school, and b) that it would be 'no effort' for the teachers to give you the necessary 'few details' of what she would be learning. Here's an example -
Post 268 I'm asking for education information to best match any teaching we can do and give her while on holiday based on what she is doping in school, this has been ignored yet is no effort for the teachers what so ever to give a few details on what she would be learning. And at her age I'm pefectly capable of teaching her the lessons that a 4 year old would be having in school as would most parents with there children probably upto the age of 10 or 11.
I think you're wrong on both counts, but frankly it's like trying to explain colour to someone who's been blind since birth. I'm not an early years specialist but if there's a poster who is, who hasn't yet lost the will to live, maybe they could explain why early years teaching is considered by many to be more, not less, challenging than (say) A level. And the thought that the teachers could tell you in just a few words both what they plan to cover that week, and arguably more importantly, how they intend to teach it, is risible.
Cross curricular teaching is used in most primary schools in the UK which means that it takes several weeks worth of teaching to form the whole jigsaw! It's far more complicated for a teacher to give a parent the information they would need than it might sound, particularly if you take into account all the subjects covered in the curriculum.
It's worth considering that even though the child in question is only 4, attitudes towards school and authority in general begin forming at an early age. This child would benefit more from experiencing her parents showing respect for the school, the rules and the teachers than she will from feeling it's a 'them and us' situation, and that 'we' must win at all costs. IMHO it's not a good message to be sending to a 4 year old.
Hi Dave909, just wanted to say I agree with you. Don't worry about things and have a great holiday with your wife and little girl. We also had problems having a child and one of the best things I ever did was to take him out of school and home-educate him. When people go on about parents disrespecting teachers, I just smile, when I think about the times teachers disrespect parents and children. I could write a book about it, but am not going to as I am not well and don't feel up to doing so. My son has been happy and has ended up with a degree, that's what matters. I hope all goes well for you. Love your little girl and be happy on your holiday and always.
Is it? I would have said that having a child emerge from childhood socially and emotionally well developed, able to communicate with his/her peers, form relationships and apply what they've learned to the real world is far more important than a piece of paper. There are lots of people with degrees who are completely inadequate human beings unable to function well in society. What about those who are unable to achieve that standard.
Attending school is about far more than educational achievements - it's about learning to function as part of a community.
Is it? I would have said that having a child emerge from childhood socially and emotionally well developed, able to communicate with his/her peers, form relationships and apply what they've learned to the real world is far more important than a piece of paper. There are lots of people with degrees who are completely inadequate human beings unable to function well in society. What about those who are unable to achieve that standard.
Attending school is about far more than educational achievements - it's about learning to function as part of a community.
My son is all that you say a person should be. Emotionally well developed, has lots of friends and communicates well with all ages from babies to over 90's. He is certainly not inadequate, yet I know many many adults who went through school and are very inadequate. How a person turns out depends on many things, their nature, their nurture, their intelligence, their parents, their teachers and much much more.
As a low income family, we struggle to pay the summer holiday prices for our single, annual holiday in the school holidays. We're only talking about a caravan holiday in the UK, nothing flashy and not abroad. I resent the price hikes around the summer holidays. Yes, it's the way of the world but it is unfair.
I would not dream of taking holiday in term time if the school did not approve it and I would certainly check with the school before I booked. Our son is in YR1 and I can see how important his education is. However, he is autistic and I have found that whenever we have had a week's family holiday, he has become much more communicative and "switched on". I would hope that our school would understand the argument on this basis for taking him out in term time, if the difference in prices from term time to school holidays meant we risked not having the holiday one year.
Just a thought, but as this seems to be a primarily financial issue, perhaps the answer lies in anational school holiday voucher scheme and not to simply penalise those parents who genuinely can't afford to take their children on holiday in the approved holiday period. Perhaps parents could apply for a means-tested voucher. If you earned over a certain amount, you don't qualify. A bit like free school meals. Not for the whole cost of the holiday, but to cover the difference in prices (on average) between term time and school holiday period.
I understand that this is hardly the time for the nation, ie taxpayers, to fork out more but then if school attendance is such a burning issue, perhaps it's worth it? Wouldn't it be worth it for a generation of well-educated and well-rounded children, who all had holidays and saw places outside of their narrow existence - new cities, new countries, whatever, but also got all their education?
As to the arguments about whether or not a holiday is a right, or whether you can have quality time as a family without a holiday. Sure you can have fun times at home, or day trips away, but there's a limit to how far you can go and how much you can do on a day trip with young ones. If you start staying anywhere overnight, it gets expensive and you need a lot of equipment if you have a baby or toddler too. It's much easier to book a week somewhere as your "base". And why should poor families be restricted to the same old trips and environments? There's only so many times I can take the nipper to the local park, or the museum, or a day trip to the beach, etc. If that was all there was for years, it would get awfully stale quickly.
Just a thought, but as this seems to be a primarily financial issue, perhaps the answer lies in anational school holiday voucher scheme and not to simply penalise those parents who genuinely can't afford to take their children on holiday in the approved holiday period. Perhaps parents could apply for a means-tested voucher. If you earned over a certain amount, you don't qualify. A bit like free school meals. Not for the whole cost of the holiday, but to cover the difference in prices (on average) between term time and school holiday period.
I understand that this is hardly the time for the nation, ie taxpayers, to fork out more but then if school attendance is such a burning issue, perhaps it's worth it? Wouldn't it be worth it for a generation of well-educated and well-rounded children, who all had holidays and saw places outside of their narrow existence - new cities, new countries, whatever, but also got all their education?
As to the arguments about whether or not a holiday is a right, or whether you can have quality time as a family without a holiday. Sure you can have fun times at home, or day trips away, but there's a limit to how far you can go and how much you can do on a day trip with young ones. If you start staying anywhere overnight, it gets expensive and you need a lot of equipment if you have a baby or toddler too. It's much easier to book a week somewhere as your "base". And why should poor families be restricted to the same old trips and environments? There's only so many times I can take the nipper to the local park, or the museum, or a day trip to the beach, etc. If that was all there was for years, it would get awfully stale quickly.
sorry, as a tax payer there is no way I would be agreeing to this. A holiday is not a right.
The teacher may not have finalised what she is teaching the week of your child's absence, that could be a reason you haven't been told of that rather than thinking on the negative!
The |OP seems to think that info is only needed on one thing. He's forgeting thwe child is in school for about 30 hours a week - and he wants info on all those hours and all those different areas. Ridiculous to expect us to believe that he's going to spend 39 hours of his holiday teaching.
Yeah, it's just a pipe dream. Now's certainly not the time to implement a scheme such as this, I know.
It's just a shame that the good old "have" & "have not"s divide starts so early.
as I mentioned a while, I didn't do 'holidays' when I grew up and I didn't feel that I missed out. As somebody else mentioned the holidays I take now are as much for me as my kids.
Comments
I suppose you'd also have to tell the kids to lie to the teacher when they go back.
Because a teacher is going to grill a 4 year old.
Well, the teacher might ask them if they're better, and the kids might blurt out something about having fun at the seaside. Plus they might have a new suntan.:D
Seeing as the OP has posted this in advice (although he seems only to want to rant) I will give some advice: if you want your child to have a smooth and happy school life, it would be easier on her if you worked with the school and not against it. I would also advise against involving a 4 year old in your personal grievances with the school or instilling her with an 'us versus them' attitude.
And just so you don't teach your daughter any bad habits, please spend a moment checking out the difference between there, their and they're.
I've been longing to post the same.
So you teach your child that it's acceptable to lie to his teachers?
But for us the main issues are clear it is just a policy the school can still authorise if they wanted to and thus proves thats all it is, a policy and where it can be proven a family really cant afford a holiday in school holidays and the attendance is fine and there level of learning has been fine then where is the problem for a single week?. The dont go if you cant afford to go during school holidays line does not answer the issue. Because as many have said the so called loss of education for just a week upto a certain age does not really affect the child at all. And what they gain by an often much needed family holiday would outweigh any loss of classroom education for just a week upto a certain age. And as we had booked and payed at a time when the previous school had no issue because the attendance was fine. Then we have done all we can to work with the new school who had never made mention of this under no circumstances prior to asking. It's the schools line of pretty much suggesting we should cancel the holiday and loose all the money we spent a year saving up for because they want to protect there attendance and targets when under the circumstances they could but wont authorise even though it was authorised at the previous school and already paid for and the daughters attendance has been fine..
And as for what a previous poster Little Nell said, I have never once said or been maintaining that covering the work that his child would have done was a doddle. All I have said was at her age and upto a certain age that to ask what subjects she is doing to to help with them while away can be done by a parent due to the childs age and that alone is nothing for the teachers to provide and is nothing short than petty not to provide a parent with that information.
Of cause this thread has also given us and others in our position possable options for the future and I'm greatfull for that, as never really thought to pay the newspaper holiday offers much attention thinking they were a scam and end up costing more after the extras etc. So it may just not be an issue for next year.
a much needed holiday for whom? Let's be honest, it's for you, not the child. I would be interested to know what these 'educational benefits' are that you keep mentioning she will gain from the holiday, as i doubt there any.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/SchoolLife/DG_4016103
So some holidays can be granted at the schools discretion. Some people can be fined for taking kids out of school - despite many posters saying the law can t dictate what you can do with your own child - well it can - and can fine you or even imprison you if you want to continually flout the law.
Doesn't apply in your case OP as your child is under the legal requirement to attend which you have been told many times.
pS - the policy to fine is law and government plans to crack down even more.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/feb/19/gove-crack-down-term-holidays
I agree, I think the early years are the most important, it's also a time to instil a work ethic, which pulling them out of school regularly for a holiday doesn't do.
Hi Dave909, just wanted to say I agree with you. Don't worry about things and have a great holiday with your wife and little girl. We also had problems having a child and one of the best things I ever did was to take him out of school and home-educate him. When people go on about parents disrespecting teachers, I just smile, when I think about the times teachers disrespect parents and children. I could write a book about it, but am not going to as I am not well and don't feel up to doing so. My son has been happy and has ended up with a degree, that's what matters. I hope all goes well for you. Love your little girl and be happy on your holiday and always.
If the school has an issue with this then i would ask them to pay the extra needed to take a holiday in the school holidays.
I wouldnt give it another thought and I wouldnt give a stuff about school attendance targets or other such drivel.
Agreed that you didn't actually use the word 'doddle', but in various posts you have said a) that you are perfectly capable of teaching what she would miss by not being in school, and b) that it would be 'no effort' for the teachers to give you the necessary 'few details' of what she would be learning. Here's an example -
Post 268
I'm asking for education information to best match any teaching we can do and give her while on holiday based on what she is doping in school, this has been ignored yet is no effort for the teachers what so ever to give a few details on what she would be learning. And at her age I'm pefectly capable of teaching her the lessons that a 4 year old would be having in school as would most parents with there children probably upto the age of 10 or 11.
I think you're wrong on both counts, but frankly it's like trying to explain colour to someone who's been blind since birth. I'm not an early years specialist but if there's a poster who is, who hasn't yet lost the will to live, maybe they could explain why early years teaching is considered by many to be more, not less, challenging than (say) A level. And the thought that the teachers could tell you in just a few words both what they plan to cover that week, and arguably more importantly, how they intend to teach it, is risible.
Cross curricular teaching is used in most primary schools in the UK which means that it takes several weeks worth of teaching to form the whole jigsaw! It's far more complicated for a teacher to give a parent the information they would need than it might sound, particularly if you take into account all the subjects covered in the curriculum.
It's worth considering that even though the child in question is only 4, attitudes towards school and authority in general begin forming at an early age. This child would benefit more from experiencing her parents showing respect for the school, the rules and the teachers than she will from feeling it's a 'them and us' situation, and that 'we' must win at all costs. IMHO it's not a good message to be sending to a 4 year old.
Is it? I would have said that having a child emerge from childhood socially and emotionally well developed, able to communicate with his/her peers, form relationships and apply what they've learned to the real world is far more important than a piece of paper. There are lots of people with degrees who are completely inadequate human beings unable to function well in society. What about those who are unable to achieve that standard.
Attending school is about far more than educational achievements - it's about learning to function as part of a community.
My son is all that you say a person should be. Emotionally well developed, has lots of friends and communicates well with all ages from babies to over 90's. He is certainly not inadequate, yet I know many many adults who went through school and are very inadequate. How a person turns out depends on many things, their nature, their nurture, their intelligence, their parents, their teachers and much much more.
I would not dream of taking holiday in term time if the school did not approve it and I would certainly check with the school before I booked. Our son is in YR1 and I can see how important his education is. However, he is autistic and I have found that whenever we have had a week's family holiday, he has become much more communicative and "switched on". I would hope that our school would understand the argument on this basis for taking him out in term time, if the difference in prices from term time to school holidays meant we risked not having the holiday one year.
Just a thought, but as this seems to be a primarily financial issue, perhaps the answer lies in a national school holiday voucher scheme and not to simply penalise those parents who genuinely can't afford to take their children on holiday in the approved holiday period. Perhaps parents could apply for a means-tested voucher. If you earned over a certain amount, you don't qualify. A bit like free school meals. Not for the whole cost of the holiday, but to cover the difference in prices (on average) between term time and school holiday period.
I understand that this is hardly the time for the nation, ie taxpayers, to fork out more but then if school attendance is such a burning issue, perhaps it's worth it? Wouldn't it be worth it for a generation of well-educated and well-rounded children, who all had holidays and saw places outside of their narrow existence - new cities, new countries, whatever, but also got all their education?
As to the arguments about whether or not a holiday is a right, or whether you can have quality time as a family without a holiday. Sure you can have fun times at home, or day trips away, but there's a limit to how far you can go and how much you can do on a day trip with young ones. If you start staying anywhere overnight, it gets expensive and you need a lot of equipment if you have a baby or toddler too. It's much easier to book a week somewhere as your "base". And why should poor families be restricted to the same old trips and environments? There's only so many times I can take the nipper to the local park, or the museum, or a day trip to the beach, etc. If that was all there was for years, it would get awfully stale quickly.
sorry, as a tax payer there is no way I would be agreeing to this. A holiday is not a right.
The |OP seems to think that info is only needed on one thing. He's forgeting thwe child is in school for about 30 hours a week - and he wants info on all those hours and all those different areas. Ridiculous to expect us to believe that he's going to spend 39 hours of his holiday teaching.
It's just a shame that the good old "have" & "have not"s divide starts so early.
as I mentioned a while, I didn't do 'holidays' when I grew up and I didn't feel that I missed out. As somebody else mentioned the holidays I take now are as much for me as my kids.