School truancies lead to rise in prosecution of parents

[ProfessorDavey]

The biggie is Osfted and the pressure they bring over attendance figures. Children taking holidays in term time are unlikely to get that sanctioned in a state school, therefore it is recorded as an unauthorised absence, affecting the overall report. Hence head teachers tend to report parents for taking term time holidays with the resultant prosecutions. Most independent schools belong to an association which exempts them from Ofsted inspections and hence independent heads have greater freedom with parents going far less likely to face sanctions.

That argument doesn't really stack up at all on two grounds.

First. Sure OFSTED look at attendance, but they are (not unreasonably) rather more focussed on unauthorised absence levels. They are very unlikely to delved into specific decisions to authorise absence (and indeed may not be able to see the individual details due to confidentiality) so for a school to look better in the eyes of OFSTED if they think a parent is likely to take the kid out anyhow, they would be better to authorise that absence rather than flag it up more overtly to OFSTED as unauthorised.

Of course if the absence is likely to detrimentally affect progress to an extent that it would affect the inspection outcome then preventing the absence is always going to be the best policy. But if educational progress will be detrimentally affected then the school has a duty to prevent that anyhow in the best interests of the pupil regardless of any inspection.

Secondly. The Independent Schools Inspectorate (which is the main alternative to OFSTED for independent schools, although many independent schools also use OFSTED too) also assessed attendance as part of its inspection regime.

[Rhiannon]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

I am well aware of the importance of OFSTED - not only am I also a governor of a state school that is outside LEA control, but also own a 'private' school (albeit one that caters for very young kids) that is regulated and inspected by OFSTED.

Regarding the 'personalisation' of the matter - as I pointed out to NS the two lines on that (which seem to be taking over the debate to an extent I rather regret posting them) weren't used within my rebuttal of your claim at the time, nor since.

Your choice of school is entirely a matter for you, and your bad experience in the state sector does seem to be a major factor in that choice (I think you'd freely admit that). But your individual bad experience doesn't mean all state schools are tarred with the same brush. On the specific issue of discretion and authority for Heads to grant (or not) absence in term time I have demonstrated that your assertion that state schools don't have that option (while private schools do) is simply non-sense. Both through the example of the school where I am a governor where this has happened actually rather more recently than your example and within the more rigid recent framework. And also, by reference to the government framework itself (including linking directly to government documents) demonstrated that the rules that govern state school authority in this area are identical to those for private schools.

Now I am sorry if you have taken offence by my comment - trust me this wasn't intended. My comment about this saying more about you than about the state schools was perhaps ill judged, but let me try to explain what I mean. I sorry if you don't like this, but you do come across to me as someone who's bad experience in one state school seems to have somehow clouded their judgement of the whole sector, which of course includes thousands of schools both good and bad that neither you nor I have experience of. I have no problem with you bad-mouthing a particular state school that you have experience of (and how could I anyway because only you have that experience). Where I do have a problem, and will pull you up on it, is where you by inference bad mouth the whole sector. Again that may not be your intention, but that can be the impression given.

When I have engaged in these discussions I have always been at pains to point out (without prompting) that when defending the state sector that I freely accept there are good and bad schools in the state sector, just as I also accept that there are good and bad schools in the private sector. I trust you also accept both of those points.

Now I hope we can get back to discussing the issue in a less personalised manner (albeit we will bring our own individual experiences to bear but I trust we can accept that individual experience either good or bad of individual schools can never be a proxy for a view of the whole of a sector).

[BashfulAnthony]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

[BashfulAnthony]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Actually I am perhaps one of the few people here (maybe there are others) who has seen the effect of OSTED and inspection regimes on both state and private schools at the sharp end. For the former as a governor and the latter as the owner of a private school that I helped set up at times literally with my bare hands.

And actually the threat of a bad inspection is far greater for the private school. In the state system a poor inspection hits reputation, it hurts but in most cases it isn't an existential threat. As a private school owner a poor inspection can put you out of business - less parents sending their kids, some pulling kids out can make the school financially non viable, potentially with substantial personal financial loss as well as reputational loss. That is a step up from the threat in the state sector.

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

[BashfulAnthony]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Fine.  It would be interesting to hear how Rhiannon reconciles the two , apparently divergent, views on Ofsted!

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Fine.  It would be interesting to hear how Rhiannon reconciles the two , apparently divergent, views on Ofsted!

No idea - possible that they are scary, as they have power, but incompetent (which wouldn't be an uncommon view).

[BashfulAnthony]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Fine.  It would be interesting to hear how Rhiannon reconciles the two , apparently divergent, views on Ofsted!

No idea - possible that they are scary, as they have power, but incompetent (which wouldn't be an uncommon view).

I always found them intimidating, but usually thorough;  but by no means free of criticism.

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Fine.  It would be interesting to hear how Rhiannon reconciles the two , apparently divergent, views on Ofsted!

No idea - possible that they are scary, as they have power, but incompetent (which wouldn't be an uncommon view).

I always found them intimidating, but usually thorough;  but by no means free of criticism.

Not sure I'd entirely agree form my experience. Actually the most important aspect of OFSTED (and in fact almost any inspection regime) is what they achieve when they aren't inspecting. What do I mean by that - well that the knowledge that there will be an inspection at some point in the future forces organisations to up their game in preparation. And that's the same in other contexts too - in universities we have the REF (assessing research quality) and a variety of measures of teaching quality. Sure, just as with OFSTED there are plenty of academics who rail against the inspection philosophy, but if truth be told these measures have forced UK universities to up their game.

Where there can be an issue is complex game playing - a kind of elaborate dance between the inspectors and the inspectees, each trying to be one step ahead. It think this is more an issue in universities that schools, because we think we are smart arses!!

[jeremyp]

Is that because you have misunderstood what an ad hom is? I have attacked your comment. I haven't said it is wrong because of some irrelevant personal issue as you have done with Rhiannon (in this case where on some faux scale her remark can be placed).

I'm not sure you understand what an ad hominem is either.  The Prof did claim Rhiannon has a bias but that was his conclusion, not his argument.  Merely casting aspersions is not ad hominem. 

The prof didn't say "I think you are wrong because you are biased", he said "I think you are biased because you are wrong".  His evidence for why he thinks she is wrong involves a single anecdote which is a logical fallacy but not ad hominem.  Although it wouldn't surprise me if, on reading my post, the prof can provide other evidence.

[BashfulAnthony]

PD, I've been a governor, I know how important Ofsted are; independent schools are able to have much more flexibility. And they fall outside LEA control, who are responsible for fining parents for term time holidays.

You personalised this discussion by saying that my 'disapproval of state schools' (a position I don't hold) ''says more about me'. I'm sorry if I have made choices for my children that you don't like, and for believing I know them better than any teacher ever can. Quite what that 'says about me' I have no idea.

So what did you mean when I referred to Ofsted in the Parenting thread, and you repied, "seriously?"

Context please?

Read the thread, PD.  I was suggesting that Ofsted was an important check on schools and their treatment of individuals, and that was Rhiannon's reply. See, M88 and 89, in Modern Parenting.

Yes found it - somehow I thought you'd suggested it was me, rather than Rhiannon that posted 'seriously'. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Fine.  It would be interesting to hear how Rhiannon reconciles the two , apparently divergent, views on Ofsted!

No idea - possible that they are scary, as they have power, but incompetent (which wouldn't be an uncommon view).

I always found them intimidating, but usually thorough;  but by no means free of criticism.

Not sure I'd entirely agree form my experience. Actually the most important aspect of OFSTED (and in fact almost any inspection regime) is what they achieve when they aren't inspecting. What do I mean by that - well that the knowledge that there will be an inspection at some point in the future forces organisations to up their game in preparation. And that's the same in other contexts too - in universities we have the REF (assessing research quality) and a variety of measures of teaching quality. Sure, just as with OFSTED there are plenty of academics who rail against the inspection philosophy, but if truth be told these measures have forced UK universities to up their game.

Where there can be an issue is complex game playing - a kind of elaborate dance between the inspectors and the inspectees, each trying to be one step ahead. It think this is more an issue in universities that schools, because we think we are smart arses!!

I agree; but this kind of situation compelled us to keep up our standards, to the extent that it all became what it should be:  routine best efforts.

[ProfessorDavey]

Is that because you have misunderstood what an ad hom is? I have attacked your comment. I haven't said it is wrong because of some irrelevant personal issue as you have done with Rhiannon (in this case where on some faux scale her remark can be placed).

I'm not sure you understand what an ad hominem is either.  The Prof did claim Rhiannon has a bias but that was his conclusion, not his argument.  Merely casting aspersions is not ad hominem. 

The prof didn't say "I think you are wrong because you are biased", he said "I think you are biased because you are wrong".  His evidence for why he thinks she is wrong involves a single anecdote which is a logical fallacy but not ad hominem.  Although it wouldn't surprise me if, on reading my post, the prof can provide other evidence.

Thanks for wading in Jeremy.

Actually I'm not sure I used my view that Rhi appears to be a bit biased in any argument against her assertion.

Lets remind herself what that assertion was - she claimed that state school Heads don't have the discretion to grant term time holidays and that private schools do (on the basis of a single anecdote in each case). Clearly all I need to disprove this is a single anecdote of my own - namely that a state school Head has demonstrate her ability to exercise that discretion. Thats what I did, and also backed it up with further evidence on the regulatory framework that demonstrates that the discretion and authority is identical for Heads, whether form the state or private sector.

So I have no idea where NS's claim of ad hom comes from, nor how his response (lazy, unpleasant anyone) can somehow been seen as lesser in that context than my original comment.

[ProfessorDavey]

The prof didn't say "I think you are wrong because you are biased", he said "I think you are biased because you are wrong".

Actually I think I said that I thought Rhi was biased (an assertion I fully accept, but one that seems borne out by quite a number of discussions on the state vs private schools with her on many threads over many years) potentially because she had a bad experience in the state sector with her own kids (which wouldn't seem to be an unreasonable view).

[SweetPea]

Re the OP.... absolutely appalling.

Once again, the control of the people by the elites.

[Rhiannon]

PD, the only issue I gave with state schools in general is that they don't make enough of a stand against the endless shit dished out from governments. The thing that saddened me the most as a governor was that we were required to sanction more and more hoop jumping, to the detriment of the welfare of the children - the pressure got so intense that parents were asked to make their five year olds account for reaching their targets or not that week. But I thought I'd made it clear that it is what successive governments have done to state education that I find so objectionable, not state schools.

Like so many things governments come up with, Ofsted and the national curriculum were good ideas. The school we left was failing until Ofsted came in some fifteen years or so ago and kicked it up the arse. Similarly I can remember rocking up to my secondary school from an 'old fashioned' primary only to find that the rest of my new classmates hadn't been taught to punctuate a sentence. I can see exactly why both were necessary. But now they have become political footballs. Teachers are confronted with continual curriculum changes, extras according to the fashionable issues of the day, and are expected up make up for weaknesses in parenting. And Ofsted have gone beyond making sure schools are producing good teaching and instead encourage the pressurised atmosphere around SATS, targets and teaching to the test.

I don't know how the politics can be taken out of education, but until it is I don't see how it will ever go back to placing child welfare at its heart, however dedicated individual professionals may be. 

[Rhiannon]

The prof didn't say "I think you are wrong because you are biased", he said "I think you are biased because you are wrong".

Actually I think I said that I thought Rhi was biased (an assertion I fully accept, but one that seems borne out by quite a number of discussions on the state vs private schools with her on many threads over many years) potentially because she had a bad experience in the state sector with her own kids (which wouldn't seem to be an unreasonable view).

Leaving aside the fact I don't think we've discussed things over 'many years', I think I've made my point crystal clear that I object to how the state system is run by government, not state schools. I would have loved to have good state schools to send my children to and I am glad for those who manage to find those that flourish in spite of Ofsted and its masters at the DofE.

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, the only issue I gave with state schools in general is that they don't make enough of a stand against the endless shit dished out from governments. The thing that saddened me the most as a governor was that we were required to sanction more and more hoop jumping, to the detriment of the welfare of the children - the pressure got so intense that parents were asked to make their five year olds account for reaching their targets or not that week. But I thought I'd made it clear that it is what successive governments have done to state education that I find so objectionable, not state schools.

Like so many things governments come up with, Ofsted and the national curriculum were good ideas. The school we left was failing until Ofsted came in some fifteen years or so ago and kicked it up the arse. Similarly I can remember rocking up to my secondary school from an 'old fashioned' primary only to find that the rest of my new classmates hadn't been taught to punctuate a sentence. I can see exactly why both were necessary. But now they have become political footballs. Teachers are confronted with continual curriculum changes, extras according to the fashionable issues of the day, and are expected up make up for weaknesses in parenting. And Ofsted have gone beyond making sure schools are producing good teaching and instead encourage the pressurised atmosphere around SATS, targets and teaching to the test.

I don't know how the politics can be taken out of education, but until it is I don't see how it will ever go back to placing child welfare at its heart, however dedicated individual professionals may be.

I'm no great fan of government intervention, and most definitely no fan of the current government, but the fact remains that state funded schools are, well, err funded by the state and it is right and proper that there is appropriate oversight over how that money (which is a huge amount) is spent and what outcomes are achieved.

One of the reasons I have a big problem with free schools is exactly that lack of accountability - effectively schools that increasingly can do what the heck they like, sucking up disproportionate amounts of money for dubious benefit. And money thrown at the Gove pet project free schools is money not available for existing schools.

But in spite of all that there are many, many fantastic state schools up and down the country, achieving exceptional things with our young people (and I don't just mean academic results and box ticking) and demonstrating a level of professionalism that is inspirational. And doing so always with limited resource, so providing exceptional value for money.

It is easy to achieve great headline results, with a phenomenal quality intake of kids, backed up by motivated and engaged middle class parents plus with the ability to tap into huge levels of resource. To do so with challenging kids from disadvantaged backgrounds, whose parents are (at best) disinterested and with very limited resources really is something. And yet that is the reality within many, many state schools.

I know which is the better school, and I suspect in your heart of hearts so do you.

[Rhiannon]

Wow, that's quite some mind reading there.

[ProfessorDavey]

The prof didn't say "I think you are wrong because you are biased", he said "I think you are biased because you are wrong".

Actually I think I said that I thought Rhi was biased (an assertion I fully accept, but one that seems borne out by quite a number of discussions on the state vs private schools with her on many threads over many years) potentially because she had a bad experience in the state sector with her own kids (which wouldn't seem to be an unreasonable view).

Leaving aside the fact I don't think we've discussed things over 'many years', I think I've made my point crystal clear that I object to how the state system is run by government, not state schools. I would have loved to have good state schools to send my children to and I am glad for those who manage to find those that flourish in spite of Ofsted and its masters at the DofE.

We have - no idea of the actual thread, but I remember distinctly discussing this matter probably 2-3 years ago when I was holed up in a rather uninteresting hotel on the outskirts of Paris where I was at a conference.

But again, just because your experience was that there wasn't a state school that fitted our preference nearby doesn't mean that is the case elsewhere.

Where I live there are 4 or 5 exceptional primary schools within a couple of miles. The two nearest secondary schools (both mixed non faith 'bog standard' comps - both now academies) are amazing both academically and in terms or extracurricular activities. Plus if your flavour is faith school etc there are others of similar academic standard nearby. The issue isn't trying to find a good state school, but the challenge of decide which of them to put first choice.

And this isn't just a leafy middle class issue. Where I work (in one of the most deprived areas in the country) the two nearest state secondaries are genuinely inspirational, particularly considering the demographic of the kids. Both are Outstanding across the board from OFSTED, have attracted a jaw dropping list of inspirational role models who support the schools and in one case the quality of the Head teacher was such that he was knighted.

[ProfessorDavey]

Wow, that's quite some mind reading there.

Don't understand your point here. Can you explain please.

[Rhiannon]

The problem is that I live in a well- heeled middle class area and the local state school has exactly the kind of wealthy, motivated pupils you associate with the private sector. Its facilities far outweigh those of the school my kids go to. Maybe it is the demands of that kind of parent that contribute to the skewing of education away from the pupil in favour of statistics and headlines. And it is just as much based on purchasing power - house prices /rental rates in the guaranteed catchment area are well out of the reach of those on average incomes, let alone low income families. One woman I spoke to at the weekend told me her rent has just been put up by ｣300/month.

[Rhiannon]

Wow, that's quite some mind reading there.

Don't understand your point here. Can you explain please.

You appear to think you know what is in my heart.

Look, I don't live or work in an area of deprivation or difficulty, I live in an area of leafy hypocrisy. And I'm more impressed with the school my kids go to that takes on a rag tag of different kids of a whole range of backgrounds, incomes and abilities and creates a family where they all feel valued.

Being accountable to the state is not the same as being dictated to by it or manipulated by it.