KEY POINTS:
Families pulling their children out of school to take advantage of cheap flights and "piggy-back" deals are contributing to the country's growing truancy rate, an internal Ministry of Education report has revealed.
Principals agree, saying that although it is illegal to take a student out of class for a family holiday, parents are doing it anyway and schools have no way of stopping them.
The report, obtained under the Official Information Act by National's education spokeswoman Katherine Rich, was handed to Education Minister Steve Maharey before he discussed truancy with officials last April.
Under the heading "What are the causes of school drop-out?" the report lists school culture, home environment, student behaviour, the promotion of youth training courses and family holidays.
"Another adverse incentive may be the availability of reduced-price airfares during school term time, including 'piggy-back' airfares that allow children to travel cheaply in the company of their parents. Advertising of these... actively encourages parents to remove their children from school during the school year. It also sends [a] conflicting message about the value of school."
Other figures recently released by the ministry showed 30,000 students were wagging school every week - a jump of 41 per cent since 2002.
The report also noted that only a "very small number" of students were staying at school until the end of Year 13 and retention rates "lag behind the average rate for OECD countries".
Travel agents told the Herald on Sunday many families chose to holiday in term time, to avoid the rush for tickets.
And Air New Zealand confirmed it ran "piggy-back" promotions "from time to time".
Tickets were not necessarily cheaper during term time, but cheap seats sold out more quickly during school holidays, meaning parents often had to pay more for holidays at that time.
Principals said the deals also meant students were missing out on NCEA assessments, and were often punished for being absent without explanation.
Craig Monaghan, principal of Westlake Boys High School, said the school had a zero-tolerance policy on holidays during term, but many parents simply rang in sick for their children while they were away.
Only two or three families each year would be upfront about asking to go on holiday.
They would always be refused - but usually went anyway.
"A parent says, 'Well, what's the worst thing that's going to happen - are they going to get a detention for this? Well, that's worth $400.' The school really has no jurisdiction. [The school] can say we don't approve but if parents still want to take their kids out, they will."
Roger Moses, principal of Wellington College, said his school took a hard line on holidaying during term.
He said students who did take time off "inevitably" missed NCEA assessment opportunities.
"We will not provide catch-up work for them," Moses said. "I would not try and help that kid catch up."
The problem was repeated throughout the country and was "certainly not uncommon", he said.
"I think it is an issue... it certainly is a frustration."
"We make it very clear to [parents] that it's actually illegal," he said, but added truancy was often not worth pursuing "in terms of any punitive action".
The problem was first flagged three years ago, in an Education Review Office report into truancy management, which said: "Many principals are concerned about cheap air flights during the school year and feel powerless to stop students going on a family holiday.
"However, some also concede that when the employer states the time of the holiday and it is not school holiday time, families have no choice about when they take their holiday."
A Ministry of Education statement said all young people between 6 and 16 must be enrolled at a registered school and attend whenever it was open for instruction.
"Principals will make allowances for occasional absence from school where there is a legitimate reason for this, such as bereavement or illness. Arguably, holidays during term-time are not a legitimate reason for absence and a principal may therefore decide that such absence is unjustified.
"Wherever absence is persistent and unjustified a board of trustees may choose to prosecute under section 29 of the Education Act 1989. In all cases, this is the board's decision, not the Ministry of Education's."
A mother's view
A cheap flight to Bali was the prompt for Hamilton solo mother Alison (not her real name) to take her 11-year-old daughter out of school for several days before the official end of term.
"The flights at the time were considerably cheaper, so why wouldn't you do it? Obviously, I would prefer to keep her in school, but when you look at the price difference, it sort of forces you into doing it. If I could get the same price for a flight on the day they broke up, then I would do that."
She knows other parents who have done the same thing, sometimes several times a year, to make the most of out-of-season fares.
All are what Alison describes as "middle-class public servants, because not everyone can afford to do it, even at the cheaper rates".
She has always told the school about her plans and believes in similar circumstances most parents would.
"I've never had any complaints about it. It's just one of those things you have to weigh up. Sure, it is taking them out of school, but you're not doing it all the time, and generally, they're not missing a lot of school. They're not doing a lot of work at school in the lead-up to the holidays, anyway."
