1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Dad wins high court term-time holiday case

Discussion in 'Education news' started by Godmeister, May 13, 2016.

  1. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    This is an issue that is never going to achieve a universally satisfactory answer. Not so long ago parents would "ask" schools to take their kids out and they would always get permission as otherwise It was an unauthorised absence, then the pendulum swung the other way and they couldn't take kids out for hardly anything at all.

    This is a step in the right direction, but it now leans on teachers to make up the slack with the onus being on them to push the kids to catch up or be held accountable for the fact they didn't catch up. No-one will ever consider performance against 90 or 95% attendance, it will just be performance against their fantasy target with no allowances made.

    Another straw on the camels back, once again making teachers responsible for factors that are beyond their control
    hammie likes this.
  2. mrajlong

    mrajlong Senior commenter

    I think this was my point too. Measuring the immeasurable is hard enough already as is hitting pm targets regarding progress, without the added problem of children missing 10% of the curriculum added to the other things that are out of our control. If there was a target for life experiences I.e. family holidays I would welcome it with welcome arms as family time is the most important thing of all. Now where's that pile of marking?
    hammie likes this.
  3. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    It's all about the data yeah? Number 44, I note that you spent 25% of this lesson sitting unbalanced. This will prevent you from breathing in an optimal method. This reduction in oxygen to your brain will lead to a 3.6% reduction in your potential effectiveness. You must look straight at me. There is no room for error. I repeat. No. Room. For. Error.

    Then again I might 'hypothecate' that a hypothetical student making a 10% reduction in their hypothetical learning as the result of a hypothetical 90% attendance to a hypothetical teacher's lessons could just possibly be the result of some hypothetically compostuous teaching rather than their hypothetical absence.

    This is only a value judgement. For now.
  4. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    You could hypothecate that.
    To do so without any supporting argument or evidence would mean that it is just your opinion....and unsupported opinions are worthless.

    The first paragraph of your post is bluster, it has no relevance to the topic.
    The second paragraph distills down to: You have an opinion and your opinion could possibly be right, you do not consider any other possibility nor do you provide any reasoning why your opinion is more valid than any of those other possibilities.

    If I was marking this as a long written answer from a GCSE student, you would definitely be in band 1.
  5. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    A little unfair to mark somebody down on the basis of your inability to read and follow an argument. Please read again, including the original points in the context of the debate they relate to.

    Once done you can come back with an argument of your own. Ideally one with more substance than 'that's just your opinion'.

    Maybe provide some examples based on your experiences of how your students have suffered by missing 10% of your wisdom...
  6. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    Present an argument and I will engage with it, present your opinion and I will point out that that is all it is.

    I have read the thread and your post, I have responded in another post to the original point.
    The post that you are upset about questioned the implicit criticism of your comment, when you clarified with direct criticism, I pointed out that your opinion was completely unsupported and therefore worthless.

    Your response has been to continue with your lack of argument (even though you call it one) and lack of evidence, thereby making my point for me. Thankyou.

    Firstly, I have presented an argument of my own on this thread, perhaps you failed to read or understand it?
    Secondly, I have no problem with pointing out that your opinion is 'just opinion'...as that is all that you have presented so far. To turn it into an argument you would need to provide some supporting evidence or a logical justification.

    Why on Earth would I do that?
    That is not my point, my point is that you have implied and then clearly stated an opinion that you repeatedly fail to support. The evidence for that is in your posts, the supporting explanation is in mine.

    You do seem a little detached from the concept of reason.
  7. wanet

    wanet Star commenter

    Isn't cleverness inate rather than taught? if you reverse the situation, there attendance is 0% will they do well? If that is the cae then you are arguing the case for closing all schools.
  8. mrajlong

    mrajlong Senior commenter

    0% attendance would be great. I could finally get some work done! :)
    Anonymity likes this.
  9. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    It took a little while but I think I understand now.

  10. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    Except that cleverness is not the same as learning.
  11. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    Glad I could be of assistance.
  12. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    You confuse 'cleverness' and learning.
    Wanet points out your error.
    You dispute what Wanet has to say by agreeing with him?
    When I said 'detached from the concept of reason' I may have been a little too generous.
  13. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    Me too:


    Probably the result of too must eristical debation. If you mange to pull it out it might help you view the sections of debate in context rather than stuck in your personal narrow passage of thought.
  14. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    Would those be the sections of the debate where you:

    Deny that the government has the right to make laws?
    Consider that poor teaching is the only cause of underachievement?
    Claim that people are 'unable to read' because they point out that an unsupported opinion is just an opinion?
    Confuse cleverness and learning and then criticise those that correct you by saying the opposite?
    Post vaguely amusing pictures rather than provide evidence or argument to support your points?

    Are those the sections that you mean?
  15. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    Deny that the government has the right to make laws? I can see nowhere I made any such claim.

    Consider that poor teaching is the only cause of underachievement? I did not say it was the only cause. You chose to interpret it as such.

    Claim that people are 'unable to read' because they point out that an unsupported opinion is just an opinion? I claimed that YOU have difficulty reading as you had clearly either not read (or understood) the responses you highlighted in their relevant context. I see now that this was never your interest anyway as you were preoccupied with picking out a plaything for the thrill you get from what you are doing.

    Confuse cleverness and learning and then criticise those that correct you by saying the opposite? Again in context each usage was clearly intended. Cleverness' is hardly a scientific term!

    Post vaguely amusing pictures rather than provide evidence or argument to support your points? This seems preferable to not posting anything remotely amusing and yet not providing any evidence or supporting arguments to support your points - as with you.

    Try not to drown under your bridge.
  16. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    Who do you think creates and enacts laws about school attendance?
  17. redlamp2

    redlamp2 Occasional commenter

    You not only illustrate my point, you demonstrate your ignorance.

    My children. My rules. I decide what is in their best interests.

    I can choose to do this whatever the laws of the land and if I disagree I can challenge those laws. Take a look at the first post...

    ... see what I mean?

    You ignore the point of the whole topic. But let's be honest you never had any interest in the topic. Did you!
    hammie likes this.
  18. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    I said 'consider' not 'claim',,read more carefully.
    When you said:
    What other possibility were you considering?
  19. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    I'm not sure why you emphasise the YOU...are you implying that I am not 'people'?
    If you fail to communicate clearly, is my ability to read the only explanation?

    I take it that the last part is a desperate attempt to divert the conversation onto my motives..rather than making the slightest attempt to support what you say through reasoned argument....which has been my point all along.
  20. Sisyphus_rolls_again

    Sisyphus_rolls_again Established commenter

    I didn't choose the term cleverness, you did so i am stuck with it.
    If you would like to use a different term or clarify your position...I'm all ears.

    I don't think your usage was clear, I suspect Wanet didn't as he pointed ot the difference to you, i suspect that you didn't as your attempted correction of Wanet agreed with him and contradicted your initial position.

Share This Page