Taking kid's out of school for cruise: advice?

[CanadianTwosome]

I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever.

 

Children are people. Children on cruise ships are paying passengers. You may make whatever choices you feel are in your best interests -- let families make the choices that work for them. If it means traveling with their kids, I will support that choice.

 

Cheers! :)

[sysguy]

I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever.

 

Children are people. Children on cruise ships are paying passengers. You may make whatever choices you feel are in your best interests -- let families make the choices that work for them. If it means traveling with their kids, I will support that choice.

 

Well said, thank-you!!:)

[Cruisin' Chick]

I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever.

 

Children are people. Children on cruise ships are paying passengers. You may make whatever choices you feel are in your best interests -- let families make the choices that work for them. If it means traveling with their kids, I will support that choice.

 

This bears repeating.:)

[quincytoo]

We lived in Whistler for many years and alas (actually we love travelling in slow season, cheaper prices and the bonus of resorts and cruise ships not being as crowded) our slow season was the only time we could vacation. Going without our children was NOT an option we would have considered.

 

So yes we did pull the children from school as did many of the parents. We had some pretty wonderful family holidays that we all have such foud memories of :)

 

We always had their schoolwork with us and made sure it was done before they got back usually a little each day. I remember a few times our middle son came back ahead of his class, they never fell behind.

 

Maybe we got lucky but their teachers always said "No problem and have GREAT vacation" when we asked for the homework, usually let the teachers know a few months before we went then reminded three weeks before.

 

Last Nov the Diamond Princess had well over 600 children and teens on board most of the children were school aged.

 

Funny thing is that my husband and I have been eagerly planning our first vacation without children next Oct on the Carribbean Princess, our youngest will be almost 17 and was going to stay with his 20 year old brother and 23 year old sister at home.

 

The night we booked the trip, our youngest son is still quite vocal that he WANTS to come with us!!!! I told him that if he payed his flight and cruise then he could come.......This son started workign last year and has saved every penny...he just bought a 1500. computer and still has 1400 in the bank, he HATES spending his own money. I foolishly thought if I said he could go but only if he pays his own way he would stop asking.

 

Without missing a beat he said "let me write you a cheque"

 

Aw yea, he is coming with us :) The cruise and flights ended up costing him $800 , we haven't asked him for the money yet...;)

 

Sorry about the rambling post but I really feel that one's children are wonderful additions to great holidays :)

 

Happy Holidays (no pun intended ;)

[Travelcat2]

I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever.

 

Children are people. Children on cruise ships are paying passengers. You may make whatever choices you feel are in your best interests -- let families make the choices that work for them. If it means traveling with their kids, I will support that choice.

 

Could you possibly be as homophobic and prejudice as this post sounds? Your list consists mostly of federally protected classes. Apparently my post was completely misconstrued. Wish all of these perfect children were on the cruise I took -- instead of ones rolling down the isle on the floor during the show. I blame the parents -- not the children.

 

Of course, everyone has the right to make choices. Apparently, according to you, it is okay to make a choice to travel with children, however, people who prefer a cruise with ADULT gay people,, buddhists, people with red hair, vegetarians, the elderly or physically challenged have no right to this preference. Hope you are not raising your children to bash others that have opinions that do not match your own.

[Cruisin' Chick]

Could you possibly be as homophobic and prejudice as this post sounds? Your list consists mostly of federally protected classes. Apparently my post was completely misconstrued. Wish all of these perfect children were on the cruise I took -- instead of ones rolling down the isle on the floor during the show. I blame the parents -- not the children.

 

Of course, everyone has the right to make choices. Apparently, according to you, it is okay to make a choice to travel with children, however, people who prefer a cruise with ADULT gay people,, buddhists, people with red hair, vegetarians, the elderly or physically challenged have no right to this preference. Hope you are not raising your children to bash others that have opinions that do not match your own.

 

Somehow I didn't get the same meaning from Odessa's post as you apparently did.

[CanadianTwosome]

Could you possibly be as homophobic and prejudice as this post sounds? Your list consists mostly of federally protected classes. Apparently my post was completely misconstrued. Wish all of these perfect children were on the cruise I took -- instead of ones rolling down the isle on the floor during the show. I blame the parents -- not the children.

 

Of course, everyone has the right to make choices. Apparently, according to you, it is okay to make a choice to travel with children, however, people who prefer a cruise with ADULT gay people,, buddhists, people with red hair, vegetarians, the elderly or physically challenged have no right to this preference. Hope you are not raising your children to bash others that have opinions that do not match your own.

 

You definitely misread Onessa's post. Her point was not that it is okay to bash the groups she mentioned, but that CHILDREN are a group as well, and it's NOT okay to bash them either. Her point is that exclusion is exclusion, and it is NEVER okay to say 'I want a vacation that excludes that group'. Discrimination is discrimination, whether it is related to age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or any other difference.

 

Again, nobody wants badly behaving PEOPLE around them anywhere, whether on holiday or not. Excluding any one group will NOT ever guarantee that you will have only well behaved people. The subject of your post was 'prejudice' with a thumbs down symbol... I'm glad that you dislike prejudice. Please take a moment to step back and objectively consider your feelings about children as a group. I can almost hear you saying 'That's different.' But as I said, exclusion is exclusion and discrimination is discrimination. That's all Onessa was trying to point out. I'm certain that you had no intentions of behaving in a prejudicial way... but that's what exclusion is, and no group deserves it. :)

[hudvalleycruiser]

... I'm just asking that those who travel without children are given the opportunity to do so -- at least for a small part of year. quote]

 

I see Travelcat2's point and agree with the concept. Given two ships, one "adults only" and the other not, with them both following the same itinerary and all other things being relatively equal, I'd book the "adults only" cruise in a heartbeat. If a cruise line were to offer an "adults only" cruise, I see no difference in this decision and the decision made by many to host an "adults only" wedding reception, or an "adults only" house party, or any other number of "adults only" social venues. If one prefers to have an "adults only" experience, that's fine. Similarly, if one prefers to include children in the experience, that's fine, too. Travelcat2's point, I believe, is simply that the option should be made available.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Onessa

"I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever. ..."

 

Further, I find the above post inappropriate and am offended by the implication. In lieu of rebutting the concept presented by Travelcat2 with sound argument or personal opinion, Onessa instead challenges the concept of "adults only" by associating it with discrimination and prejudice in its many ugly forms. By implication, to support the idea of "adults only", according to Onessa, somehow makes one a bigot. I like the

idea of an "adults only" cruise, I like "adult only" wedding receptions, I like "adult only" nightclubs, but that does not make me a bigot.

 

And to those of you who were so quick to agree with Onessa, are you so polarized in your support of family cruising that you cannot admit the possibility of "adult only" venues for those who would prefer that experience?

[Onessa]

Could you possibly be as homophobic and prejudice as this post sounds? Your list consists mostly of federally protected classes. Apparently my post was completely misconstrued. Wish all of these perfect children were on the cruise I took -- instead of ones rolling down the isle on the floor during the show. I blame the parents -- not the children.

 

My DH is 58YO qualifying him for AARP membership and senior discounted cruises. I am a redheaded, I am a vegetarian, I am considered legally handicapped, and I do (beyond working full-time) volunteer 20+ hours a week for an international non-profit that deals with human rights for protected classes.

 

I attempted to make some of my examples as ridiculous as possible to avoid anyone possibly mistakenly taking it as "real". The point I was attempting to make -- that appears to have been lost in your reading -- was that all people are people. By singling out ANY group because one person believes them to be somehow less deserving of being treated as a human being for whatever reason is just wrong!

 

I feel sorry for you that you can possibly be so selfish that you cannot find joy in families spending time together. Because one or two kids behaved badly on one of your past trips, you seem to think it OK to keep ALL families from cruising when you want to cruise.

 

I stand by the original point I was attempting to make -- as long as families choose to sail on cruises that ARE NOT "adult-only" cruises -- kids have every right to be on that cruise (and they have the responsiblity to behave in a civilized manner -- and their parents have the responsibilty to make certain that their children behave in a civilized manner.)

 

But your original post stated (and what I quoted):

I'm just asking that those who travel without children are given the opportunity to do so -- at least for a small part of year.

 

What portion of that sentence did I misconstrue? I read that to mean that you want to be able to travel without any kids onboard. If you really do not want the "opportunity to do so" where so was defined as "be able to travel without children" -- I'm thinking you might want to rescind that statement.

 

Of course, everyone has the right to make choices. Apparently, according to you, it is okay to make a choice to travel with children, however, people who prefer a cruise with ADULT gay people,, buddhists, people with red hair, vegetarians, the elderly or physically challenged have no right to this preference. Hope you are not raising your children to bash others that have opinions that do not match your own.

 

My DD has an openly gay math teacher. Her GS troop has been recognized as the most "racially diverse" in the state. We live on a reservation. She volunteers her study hall periods to be a peer tutor of ESL students. And of course her mom has (gasp!) redhair. And, apart from the fact that at 12YO she considers Mom to sometimes be a bit "lame" (figuratively, as well as my literal issues)-- she is very tolerant (but thank you so much for caring!)

[Onessa]

I see Travelcat2's point and agree with the concept. Given two ships, one "adults only" and the other not, with them both following the same itinerary and all other things being relatively equal, I'd book the "adults only" cruise in a heartbeat. If a cruise line were to offer an "adults only" cruise, I see no difference in this decision and the decision made by many to host an "adults only" wedding reception, or an "adults only" house party, or any other number of "adults only" social venues. If one prefers to have an "adults only" experience, that's fine. Similarly, if one prefers to include children in the experience, that's fine, too. Travelcat2's point, I believe, is simply that the option should be made available.

 

Travelcat2 did not mention wanting the cruise lines to offer adult-only cruises. His/her response was directly in response to people discussing parents removing children from school to cruise.

 

At the beginning of the post I quoted s/he said "Many adults plan their vacations when school is in session -- for many reasons. Some parents are lucky enough to have parents offer to watch their children for a week so they can get some "adult time" together. People that have raised their children can finally take a vacation when children are in school. " s/he goes on to state "In the past couple of years, we notice more and more children being taken out of school (or are being home schooled) to travel. I'm just asking that those who travel without children are given the opportunity to do so -- at least for a small part of year." and continues with "exceptions" to the "not during the school year" cruising s/he would like to see ". . .An exception to this would be Disney or Carnival cruises (or other children-oriented cruise lines and ) where the experience is designed for children." No mention of that the cruiselines should be offering adult-only cruises -- only the implication that those of us who might vacation during what s/he considers to be the school year are somehow infringing upon what s/he thinks should be adult-oriented times.

 

The real issue I addressed was that implication. Realize that kids are allowed on the cruises that we are discussing in this thread. And there appear to be people who do not belive that kids should be on these cruises -- not because the cruiseline has excluded them from a particular sailing -- but instead because these people seem to think that THEY should have some say in how other people choose to vacation and choose to educate their children. As long as the kids are allowed on the cruises, as long as the kids' parents agree that the kids should be on the trip with them -- it is really not any other pax's duty or business to determine whether a particular child should be in school instead.

 

There have been many other posts on other boards discussing adult-only cruises. The lines occassionally offer adult-only cruises, there are travel groups who occassionally charter ships for adult-only cruises. But unless you have specifically researched and have chosen an adult-only cruise -- don't be telling me (or any other family) that my child should not be on your cruise.

 

You can do what is best for you and your family. I will do what is best for me and my family. Thanks!

[CanadianTwosome]

... I'm just asking that those who travel without children are given the opportunity to do so -- at least for a small part of year. quote]

 

I see Travelcat2's point and agree with the concept. Given two ships, one "adults only" and the other not, with them both following the same itinerary and all other things being relatively equal, I'd book the "adults only" cruise in a heartbeat. If a cruise line were to offer an "adults only" cruise, I see no difference in this decision and the decision made by many to host an "adults only" wedding reception, or an "adults only" house party, or any other number of "adults only" social venues. If one prefers to have an "adults only" experience, that's fine. Similarly, if one prefers to include children in the experience, that's fine, too. Travelcat2's point, I believe, is simply that the option should be made available.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Onessa

"I always take posts like this and think to myself, "what if I substituted some other class of people for 'children' in that post?"

 

So -- would you support this same statement if we substituted "the elderly" or "physically challenged"?. Because both of these classes of people could or do provide particular challenges to the rest of us. They may not move very fast down a passage way, a buffet line, or the gangplank -- impacting other people's enjoyment of their cruise. They may speak more loudly than we are comfortable with. They may ask additional questions, they may take longer to do things, they may need special accommodations that take staff time away from other tasks.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted: "non-English speaking passengers" or "vegetarians" -- they could cause delays and/or take additional staffing.

 

Would you support this same statement if we substituted "gays/lesbians", "people of color", "buddists" or "people with red hair"? There are people who will argue that maybe these groups "make them uncomfortable" because of their actions or their dress or whatever. ..."

 

Further, I find the above post inappropriate and am offended by the implication. In lieu of rebutting the concept presented by Travelcat2 with sound argument or personal opinion, Onessa instead challenges the concept of "adults only" by associating it with discrimination and prejudice in its many ugly forms. By implication, to support the idea of "adults only", according to Onessa, somehow makes one a bigot. I like the

idea of an "adults only" cruise, I like "adult only" wedding receptions, I like "adult only" nightclubs, but that does not make me a bigot.

 

And to those of you who were so quick to agree with Onessa, are you so polarized in your support of family cruising that you cannot admit the possibility of "adult only" venues for those who would prefer that experience?

 

I think Onessa answered this very well, and I see no need to add to her clarification between someone supporting the idea of an 'adults only' cruise vs. suggesting any particular group should be excluded from an otherwise 'open' cruise. I was quick to agree with her and still do.

 

When someone has a right to determine who should be allowed to enter a venue, unless they will be breaking a law by excluding someone, I don't think it's anyone's business but theirs, whether I agree with them or not. I think the example of an 'adults only' nightclub is a bad one to use as a comparison, because the law states that minors are not allowed in such establishments, so it is not the choice of the proprietors to exclude them. In the other venues suggested, however, there is a choice involved, and I don't believe it has anything to do with how children behave. I believe that in almost every case where a proprietor or host deems their establishment, business, or party 'adults only' it is about the behaviour - or potential behaviour - of the adults. They want the freedom to behave 'as adults' without having to worry about any children being around. I support this. I attend adults only parties, I see movies that are rated R (which even when I rent at home my daughter is not allowed to watch), and of course, I have 'private time' with my husband. There are many valid reasons that some situations should not include children. If, however, you are in a restaurant that allows people of all ages, what would you think of a patron who suggested that once a week they allow only adults to eat there? (again, not a bar where minors are not allowed for legal reasons)

 

As you have noted, there are plenty of 'adult only' establishments. There are also adult only resorts, and possibly occasional adult only cruises (I have no knowledge of any, but there may be some). Someone wanting to travel and be guaranteed that there will be no children around has the option of going to a resort like Sandals. Yes, it's on land... but it's adult only all year round. Suggesting that there be a particular time of year when children aren't taken on cruises not only excludes the children, but their parents - and may mean that those families would not be able to cruise, since it's the only time they can do so. I'm not okay with that. We are able to cruise this January. What if January was the month designated as 'no children' month?

 

Travelcat's post, to me, implied that they should have the freedom to choose whatever cruise they wanted and not have to deal with children - at least for part of the year. I believe that if someone doesn't want to be around children on their vacation, THEY should be the ones who have to compromise. FIND an adults only cruise and schedule your vacation around it. Plan a land vacation so that you can take advantage of an adults only resort.

 

One last point... I don't believe Travelcat meant to be discriminatory. I think a lot of people don't mean to... but that doesn't change how their ideas come across. I hope that between Onessa's explanation and mine, a distinction can be understood between the two ideas - a designated adults only cruise vs. excluding a specific group from a cruise otherwise open to everyone who pays for a ticket. It's often a fine line between offensive and reasonable when it comes to things like this, which is why the ideas of political correctness are both necessary and in some cases excessive. As I said, I hope this correspondence has led to a better understanding of how something can come across as offensive without intent. :)

 

Edit: Oops... I guess I did add to Onessa's post... all in the name of understanding, though... hope it comes across as I intended it!

[Cruisin' Chick]

When I read travelcat's last post (and before getting to Odessa's and Canadian Twosome's last posts), I was just thinking of recommending tc look into Sandals and other already established "adult only" vacations. And perhaps also look into cruiselines and charter companies that specialize in adults only cruises. Rather than expecting parents to avoid booking a cruise with their kids when travelcat wants to cruise.

[pla]

WE always give our kids a cruise for Christmas, starting when they were 2, 5, and 7. This is their 7th cruise, and 6th one out of school. We usually go in January, but last year we went the last week of school before Christmas. My 1,3 and 5th grades missed Pajama Day, Hot Chocolate while watching Polar Express, Christmas Parties (yes, we still have them in our district) and absolutely NO homework. I cannot believe how little work they had that week, and they most definitely learned more on the cruise than in school!

 

We continue to cruise with our kids every year as they get mostly A's (one got a B last quarter). And as long as they continue with good grades, we will contine with taking them.

 

I prefer to cruise when the ship is not packed with other kids (summer, breaks, etc), and it is also cheaper for the 5 of us. I have never spoken to the principal, but none of the teachers have ever had problems with it....I take that back, I told my oldest daughters 3rd grade teacher at the beginning of the year, and she freaked out. It is the year they take their first Texas Standardized Test, and the 3rd grade teachers all freak out about that. however, as she got to know my daughter (and my daughter scored perfect scores on the pre-tests), she said, "go, have fun!"

 

We have never had an issue with getting zeros, or not being able to make stuff up. However, I am concerned next year as my oldest will be in 7th grade, and that gets tough with 6 teachers! I only have to deal with 3 for my 6th grader this year.

 

IMHO, take them out of school, as long as THEY can handle it!

[louanne93]

What about when teachers take students out of school for a field trip? It could be one day or one week (last year my son went with his science class -Marine Biology- on a week long trip to Florida). Is it ok for a teacher but not a parent???

 

I have asked this question before but it always seems to get over looked. BTW~We always pull our 4.0 students out of school for a weeks cruise:eek: .

[CanadianTwosome]

What about when teachers take students out of school for a field trip? It could be one day or one week (last year my son went with his science class -Marine Biology- on a week long trip to Florida). Is it ok for a teacher but not a parent???

 

I have asked this question before but it always seems to get over looked. BTW~We always pull our 4.0 students out of school for a weeks cruise:eek: .

 

I'm not going to overlook it!! Mind you, I think it's okay to take your kids out of school, so I see it as an excellent point!! Kids also miss school for sporting events, academic events, musical events... there are all kinds of school related activities that involve missing class. In my opinion, any such events should depend on a child achieving a certain grade average before being allowed to participate - and I feel the same way about taking a vacation. :)

[sdmike]

Don't worry about taking a 1st grader out of school for a week. At that age you can replace school work with things like reading at bedtime, doing some simple math problems for 20 minutes, etc. They won't fall behind. Like others suggest, this sounds like the school trying to keep from losing their per-student/per-day allocation. When we took our kids out of school (we spent 2 weeks in FL, a week on DCL and a week at Disney) we were able to take work with us. When we turned in the assignments, the school still got credit for the days as if we were there. You might want to check into this.

 

Right now we're having a similar issue, but it's complicated by the fact we have two boys with difficulty in school (13 and 10) and we don't want to get them further behind. Because of this we're opting for a more expensive summer cruise. However, as I said before, I would not worry at all about pulling a 1st grader out.

 

Enjoy!

[IAO]

I haven't read all the posts, but will weigh in anyway. My family does not hesitate to take our kids out of school for vacation (they are in kindergarten and 3rd grade). IMO, travel is as much a part of education as classtime is. Our school system allows us up to 5 days away from school for vacation and we take full advantage of it, either taking those days all at once or splitting them up. The teachers have been in full support of it. When we go away, our kids keep a journal to present to the class. DDs class loved her presentation on Spain 2 years ago. And they really enjoyed her cruise presentation last month. We have also taken work with us. In some cases, we have been able to complete it before we left or at the beginning of the trip.

 

As for the person who said travel is year round so those of us who take our kids out of school are *only* concerned about off-season fares...Well, I own my own business so I am flexible But my husband? Not at all. He works a job where leave restrictions are often in place periodically throughout the year. The summer is actually particularly stringent - he already put in for one week of leave next summer and we know that is all will get. In addition, we have to organize trips around things like soccer. Both of our kids play, plus DH has a side soccer business which keeps him very busy throughout the year and does impact our vacation time. Furthermore, yes, we do concern ourselves with off-season fares. We want to give our kids as many travel experiences as possible. And if going at unconventional times means being able to do that, then so be it. Sure, there may be a time that we can no longer take them out of school to travel, but until that happens - if it does - then we will be doing it.

[familycruzr]

I agree that travel is very educational and we travel regularly as a family. My children (12 and 10) have visited 7 countries and over 30 states. My oldest daughter missed 2 days of kindergarten (5 hours total) for her first cruise, but all of the other trips have been during school holidays. It is more expensive to travel during school breaks, but we place a high value on education and want our children to do the same. I don't want to send the message that saving money on a vacation is more important than school.

 

On a side note, how would you feel if your child's teacher decided to take a week of vacation during the school year?

[familycruzr]

we have to organize trips around things like soccer.

 

Why do you think it is important to organize trips around things like soccer, but not around things like school?

[familycruzr]

What about when teachers take students out of school for a field trip? It could be one day or one week (last year my son went with his science class -Marine Biology- on a week long trip to Florida). Is it ok for a teacher but not a parent???

 

I have asked this question before but it always seems to get over looked. BTW~We always pull our 4.0 students out of school for a weeks cruise:eek: .

 

I've never heard of a week long field trip during the school year, but my child would not be going. There is a HUGE difference between a day and a week. Also, if you really want to know what your kids are learning, look at their standardized test scores. They will tell you much more than their grades.

[SweetAngel]

On a side note, how would you feel if your child's teacher decided to take a week of vacation during the school year?

 

Well, now, that could be a very good thing ... just depends ...

 

As a teacher, I once took off three days of school for vacation (We teachers were allowed two personal days, and I was granted a third day unpaid).

 

The substitute followed my well-written plans, so the learning indeed continued, but when I got back ...

 

I brought Mardi Gras back with me straight from New Orleans. I shared history, music, culture, traditions, and French language that fascinated not only my students, but their parents, and most of the teachers in the school. I even tied Mardi Gras into the lessons we were already learning. The beads that I tossed out for correct answers encouraged greater participation and studying than I had ever encountered.

 

Many, many parents and supervisors stopped by to give praise at what I was doing. Not one person complained about their teacher taking a vacation (at least that I am aware of). I am thankful for a supportive school district ... a district that grants teacher and student vacations, yet still manages to keep its students ranked at the top in the nation.

 

In the years to come, two hundred other children and some girl scout groups also benefitted from my knowledge and expertise of Mardi Gras gained from that week in New Orleans.

 

Like many other things in life, Mardi Gras can not be experienced in the summer or during school vacations.

 

Everything in life can be part of your education ... just depends on what you do with it.

 

And for those of you (like me, a teacher) who must consider cost when planning a vacation, you are teaching your children something equally important as the value of classroom education. You are teaching about the real world: about the value of money and the value of an experience that might not have ever occured at the "proper" time of year. Yes, it is essential to study history and culture, but those are not substitutes for living history and experiencing culture.

[CanadianTwosome]

I agree that travel is very educational and we travel regularly as a family. My children (12 and 10) have visited 7 countries and over 30 states. My oldest daughter missed 2 days of kindergarten (5 hours total) for her first cruise, but all of the other trips have been during school holidays. It is more expensive to travel during school breaks, but we place a high value on education and want our children to do the same. I don't want to send the message that saving money on a vacation is more important than school.

 

On a side note, how would you feel if your child's teacher decided to take a week of vacation during the school year?

 

I can tell you exactly how I would feel, since my daughter's teacher did go to Florida for a week last year. I thought it was great - I love Florida, so I knew she'd have a great time. She was able to take her sons with her, and they had a blast. :)

[Onessa]

I agree that travel is very educational and we travel regularly as a family. My children (12 and 10) have visited 7 countries and over 30 states. My oldest daughter missed 2 days of kindergarten (5 hours total) for her first cruise, but all of the other trips have been during school holidays. It is more expensive to travel during school breaks, but we place a high value on education and want our children to do the same. I don't want to send the message that saving money on a vacation is more important than school.

 

On a side note, how would you feel if your child's teacher decided to take a week of vacation during the school year?

 

My DD's Kindergarten teacher coached tennis at the college level. We all supported her request for time off to accompany her team to an NCAA championship.

 

I place a very high value on education and communicate that message to my DD on a daily basis. If $$$ spent is the only value you place on education, you are doing your child a disservice.

[familycruzr]

If $$$ spent is the only value you place on education, you are doing your child a disservice.

???

 

I don't understand this statement. The value I place on education has nothing to do with money. It is about learning.

 

As a high school math teacher, I do everything I can not to miss school. I find very few subs can step in and teach my classes, even when lessons are written in detail. When I am absent, I always return to students complaining that the sub did not know anything, or did not explain things well.

 

I'm not interested in getting into arguments with anyone, but I have very fond memories of my childhood days on a Mardi Gras float and have often considered taking my children to New Orleans for Mardi Gras. If I were to do so, they might miss one day of school and we would go on a weekend prior to Mardi Gras. Bacchus was always one of my favorite parades and it's always on the weekend.

[clansac]

Week long field trips? Happens every year for every grade above 4th at my son's school. 5th graders go to science camp, 6th graders to outdoor camp, 7th graders to Renaissance camp, 8th graders to DC and NYC. We picked this private school for that reason along with others.

 

As a teacher, I always took my 7th graders to Ashland, OR for a week and my 8th graders to DC for a week. It was built in to our curriculum. At public school.

 

And if a teacher took a week long vacation during the school year? I'd be happy to sub for her since that's my job now :). Otherwise, I'd say thank goodness on her cheap little penny of a salary she could afford a vacation anytime of the year.