A headteachers’ leader has said he is keen to be involved in a “longer-term discussion” about changing the “shape” of the school year, including revisiting the six-week summer holiday.
Speaking to journalists ahead of the launch of the Association of School and College Leaders’ (ASCL) annual conference, general secretary Geoff Barton pointed out that the academic year was “built on an agrarian calendar and work patterns that now don’t apply” - and, particularly for disadvantaged children, “six weeks of not seeing a teacher or a teaching assistant may actually be quite a bad thing”.
Mr Barton said it was “helpful” that the education secretary had been “quite explicit” that he was not planning to make any changes this year - as that would be a “non starter”.
Related: Williamson looking at longer day and shorter holidays
Viewpoint: Longer days? Shorter holidays? Watch the resignations
ASCL: ‘Hard to repair damage’ from DfE’s threats to schools
He alluded to the subject forming part of Gavin Williamson’s keynote speech on the first day of the conference tomorrow.
Asked by Tes what action the education secretary could take to support schools now, Mr Barton said: “I think it’s legitimate to talk about the shape of the school year and the kind of services schools provide, with the right resourcing and the right funding. Is there a new conception of what that looks like?”
‘Longer-term discussion’ over changing summer holiday
Pressed on what form changes to the school year might take, he said: “So, the first we knew about that being on anyone’s agenda was what we read in the papers last weekend, so I don’t think there’s been any formal discussions or, indeed, informal discussions about it.
“But, actually, the fact that it was surfacing as an issue for lots of us seems a legitimate thing to do, just because we know that the school year basically was built on an agrarian calendar and work patterns that now don’t apply.
“And I think what has been helpful is that the secretary of state has been quite explicit, and I hope might be tomorrow, that he’s not talking about doing that this year, which, of course, would be a complete non-starter.
“It is an opportunity to say what in the longer term might be the shape of the school year - that’s all I know about it as of now, but I think we would very much want to engage in any discussion around that, but we’d want to root it in educational principles.”
He added: “Let’s just demonstrate why this is in the interests of children and young people, particularly disadvantaged children for whom six weeks of not seeing a teacher or a teaching assistant may actually be quite a bad thing for them.
“So it’s the beginning, I think, of a much longer-term discussion, hopefully driven by evidence.”
