I knew Gove was a prat but .....

[beorhthelm]

Because teachers won't be that concerned over the change - it's not them who will 'suffer', at least not in their capacity as a teacher.

so why are they making the noise against it?

and to point out, im not in favour necessarily, just think the reaction is overblown and misguided. instant rejection of the idea, without any discussion of why its been suggested, the possible benefits, do those outway the problems, etc.

its clear from here that there will be no such discussion, its all bad, end of.

 

[Simster]

Regrettably evidence suggests he might be. Let's all learn Latin as its good for medicine and law. But let's not bother with Spanish or mandarin or Cantonese despite the way that the trade market is going.

The number of parents with children in different schools must be at the current time c15% and most parents unless they have twins or an only child, are likely to face this issue for at least one year in the 12 or 14 years that their child is in education.

No, no, no. beorhthelm has said it's only ONE PERCENT of children affected.


beorhthelm - defender of the status quo (unless change come from a suggestion from the biggest twàt in the tory party).

 

[Westdene Seagull]

i couldnt quote a group, but its certainly something ive heard of before. it will solve the holidy price bubble, help child care, align with other countries holidays, better for education outcomes (apparently kids dont retain knowledge over 6 wk). all of course double edged arguments. Gove didn't invent this idea, someone pushed it and he's let it through.

since acedemies already can adjust their holidays, we can judge from that how many schools will take advantage of this change. as the Head Teacher's leader said, schools will probably follow local authority guideance and there'll be little to no change.

I'd be very surprised if it solved the holiday price bubble. How would it help childcare - if I have three children all at different schools that decide to have different holiday dates it will actually make it more difficult.

There MAY be little change, to start with BUT there's always the possibility of the status quo being changed because the ability is there.

 

[Simster]

so why are they making the noise against it?

and to point out, im not in favour necessarily, just think the reaction is overblown and misguided. instant rejection of the idea, without any discussion of why its been suggested, the possible benefits, do those outway the problems, etc.

But it isn't overblown or misguided at all. It's a reaction to a(nother) terrible suggestion.

 

[The Large One]

so why are they making the noise against it?

Because they see it as a bad idea. Just because it may not directly affect teachers (though it will affect teachers who are also parents), it doesn't mean they can't raise the point.

and to point out, im not in favour necessarily, just think the reaction is overblown and misguided. instant rejection of the idea, without any discussion of why its been suggested, the possible benefits, do those outway the problems, etc.

The reaction is actually quite reasonable to such a poorly thought-out idea.

No-one was pushing for this idea. It's a political decision to take another part of education control away from LEAs - something that's not happening fast enough as far as Michael Gove is concerned.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

But it isn't overblown or misguided at all. It's a reaction to a(nother) terrible suggestion.

I'm worried - we both agree

 

[beorhthelm]

No, no, no. beorhthelm has said it's only ONE PERCENT of children affected.

come on, you know that was a flippant number to make a point. you have any idea the number of families likely affected? do you know how many schools are affected? do you know how many current acedemies have changed and the impact? no. but you'll outright reject a change, presumably because its from the biggest tawt in the tory party.

 

[Simster]

I'm worried - we both agree

Don't worry. It's only the EU and royalty that you're fundamentally wrong about.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Ridiculous idea.

The current timetable works perfectly well, and I speak as a parent and as an employer. It's going to piss me off if every school has different holiday times because another 6-12 weeks of the year that were ringfenced as "term time" might now be "school holiday" time. Staff are going to require more time off to look after kids if the holidays are spread out.

I don't see any upside to this, only downside.

 

[beorhthelm]

Because they see it as a bad idea. Just because it may not directly affect teachers (though it will affect teachers who are also parents), it doesn't mean they can't raise the point.

ok fair enough they have a view. but why the emotive language use, like "choas". why no call from a parents group?

 

[ROSM]

It won't solve the price bubble. It might actually prolong it and affect people who don't have children and go on holiday outside of school holidays currently.

 

[Simster]

come on, you know that was a flippant number to make a point. you have any idea the number of families likely affected? do you know how many schools are affected? do you know how many current acedemies have changed and the impact? no. but you'll outright reject a change, presumably because its from the biggest tawt in the tory party.

You're missing the point, deliberately I think. The fact that there is a sizeable minority of people who would be negatively affected by these proposals means that they ought to be dead in the water.

My guess is that 15% of parents are affected at any given time, and maybe two or three times that number would be affected at some point. And what differece does it make how many current academies have changed? There are only 1800 such schools in the country FFS.

 

[The Large One]

come on, you know that was a flippant number to make a point. you have any idea the number of families likely affected? do you know how many schools are affected? do you know how many current acedemies have changed and the impact? no. but you'll outright reject a change, presumably because its from the biggest tawt in the tory party.

It will be rejected because it's a bad idea - irrespective of who it's from.

If it was a good idea, I'm sure we'd have heard more about it before. There may be benefits to altering the school term times, but if you really believe changing them will be beneficial in the way you suggest, why isn't the government insisting all schools do it as a matter of instruction? Why give them the opportunity to create family chaos by allowing them to choose?

FWIW, I suspect most schools will stick to the status quo, purely because it by and large works for them.

 

[The Large One]

ok fair enough they have a view. but why the emotive language use, like "choas". why no call from a parents group?

Is there a national parents' group?

I can think of the exceptionally rabid, militant Netmums, but that's about it.

 

[Simster]

Is there a national parents' group?

I can think of the exceptionally rabid, militant Netmums, but that's about it.

Nope, there's mumsnet too.


Actually, we shouldn't be too flippant towards these two sites - they are quite powerful lobby groups these days. Enough to make senior politicians seeking votes go on line and respond to questions there anyway at the time of the last election.

 

[beorhthelm]

You're missing the point, deliberately I think. The fact that there is a sizeable minority of people who would be negatively affected by these proposals means that they ought to be dead in the water.

i just think i was making a different point very badly. i dont know why the change is being made, there no debate only a auto-responce from a union. it may affect many negativly, is it good for the majority? is that good enough justification? dont know. Labour are supporting it, why is that? about the acedemies, they are sizable chunk of the number of schools and it would give us a view on how likely LEA schools would be to want to change their calander, thats all.

 

[The Large One]

You're missing the point, deliberately I think. The fact that there is a sizeable minority of people who would be negatively affected by these proposals means that they ought to be dead in the water.

My guess is that 15% of parents are affected at any given time, and maybe two or three times that number would be affected at some point. And what differece does it make how many current academies have changed? There are only 1800 such schools in the country FFS.

About 300 open or in the pipeline, apparently.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more-than-100-free-schools-applications-approved

That doesn't include previously-opened academies and independent schools, of course.

 

[sten_super]

There are two distinct ideas here which have been (unnecessarily, in my view) rolled into one.

1) Reducing/changing the amount of school holidays
2) Giving schools independence to set their own holidays

I think the first idea is perfectly legitimate and makes sense; I think 6 weeks for a summer holiday is OTT. The second makes absolutely no sense to me. I think it's wildly optimistic to expect holiday prices to come down; but it is clearly going to impact families where children go to different schools, and I really can't see any benefits. I'd go for more regulation of term dates, not less.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

i actually think that Michael Gove means well. Just such a pity that he is totally out of touch with the electorate.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Don't worry. It's only the EU and royalty that you're fundamentally wrong about.

Well at even a broken clock is right three times a day ! Shit, there's my education during Tory cuts coming out