We discuss the week’s top stories with our readers in real-time. Join us from noon to 4.30pm GMT and get involved in the comments 12.23pm BST Here are some of your views so far – do get involved in the comments below. First, a point on _where_ you go on holiday: He took his daughter to Disney World, so the Supreme Court has a point, but what if she had pleaded to go on a 2-week trip to Greece to study the classical monuments with expert archaeologists and follow an intensive 4-hours a day course in Modern Greek that only took place during those dates? The problem with taking children out of school for two weeks in term time is not that each individual child misses out on crucial, life changing parts of their education in that time, but that schools have to put in additional effort to catch them up. That's OK for one of two children, but a ridiculous amount of extra effort when it applies to hundreds of children. Holidays for most children are extremely memorable, senses are heightened, every day is approached with the enthusiasm a school could only dream of. I suspect the things learned on a two week holiday, no matter the location, would be equal too if not above those things learned in a two week period at school. The concept of education is far too narrow. Most people learn far more out of school than in. 12.07pm BST To take your children on holiday during term time, or not to take your children on holiday during term time? That is the question. Or at least it’s one that has got people talking of late, after the supreme court ruled in a case about the legality of term-time holidays. The case involved Jon Platt, who refused to pay a £120 fine after taking his daughter out of school to go on holiday. The high court ruled last year in favour of Platt, but this Thursday the supreme court came down against him. Related: Where do you stand on taking kids out of school for a holiday? Continue reading...
 |
| READ THE ORIGINAL POST AT www.theguardian.com |