Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Children and Family Services which sought its views on proposed Leicestershire school term and holiday dates covering the period from autumn 2027 to summer 2032 for schools maintained by the local authority.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 10’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

(i)           A member queried the way in which the consultation options had been presented, noting that one option was described as maintaining the existing pattern, but would nevertheless alter the timing of the October half term to align more closely with other areas. It was explained that the two options retained the valued July fortnight which it was recognised as being important to parents. Both options were therefore aligned in this regard with current holiday patterns.  However, residents’ views were also being sought on the opportunity to have a two-week October half term which is where dates differed.  Officers emphasised that the consultation was intended to gather views on the relative importance of both options before any recommendation would be made.

(ii)         Members welcomed the fact that both options retained the Leicestershire fortnight, recognising the benefit this provided for families in relation to holiday costs and noting that it provided certainty for parents and carers.

(iii)        Members discussed the importance of alignment with Leicester City Council, particularly for families with children attending schools in both the city and county. It was noted that the County Council had attempted to work with the City Council and remained keen to align term dates where possible, particularly in the context of local government reorganisation. However, each authority would ultimately make its own decision. It was noted that at the time the County Council’s consultation had been prepared, the City Council’s position had not been sufficiently clear to include this within the consultation material.

(iv)       A Member asked whether the consultation should have been delayed so that information about Leicester City Council’s proposals could have been included, as this could influence how residents responded. The Director advised that there had been considerable dialogue with the City Council and he did not consider the omission to be a flaw in the consultation. It was reported that over 5,000 responses had already been received. The Member suggested that the consultation should specifically capture how important alignment with Leicester City Council was to residents, so that this could be taken into account alongside the other consultation responses.

(v)         The Committee was advised that Leicester City Council’s proposals differed from the County Council’s options only by a small number of days in some years. For 2027/28, the City Council was proposing to finish a week later than the County Council, but by 2028/29 the difference between the patterns was expected to reduce to approximately two days. It was also noted that the County Council did not set school inset days, which were determined by headteachers and academy trusts, and that this provided a degree of local flexibility around the start and end of term dates.

(vi)       Members questioned what issue the second model allowing for a two-week October half term were intended to address, given that the existing pattern was understood and valued by many residents.  The Director reported that educational considerations associated with the length of the autumn term, including the potential impact of staff and pupil illness was a factor.  There was also evidence that some children regressed during the long summer term. Members noted that it was thought that an additional week in October could also provide families with an opportunity to further access holidays at a less expensive time of year.

(vii)      While the Leicestershire fortnight had been heard consistently as the most important factor for parents, there was also evidence of an appetite for a different pattern, including the two-week October half term. Members noted that responses to the consultation so far were broadly equally split between the two options.

(viii)    In relation to safeguarding, a member asked whether there were implications arising from the length of school holidays. It was explained that referrals tended to increase before the summer holidays as schools raised concerns ahead of the break, and that the Council also saw an increase during the summer period. This was considered to be linked to the length of the summer holiday rather than to the specific term date option under consideration.

(ix)       The Committee discussed whether schools could be encouraged to group inset days together to provide families with additional flexibility. The Director advised that schools had autonomy to determine inset days and that clustering them into week-long blocks could have a detrimental impact on the quality of education and on staff development, as intensive blocks of training were not always the most effective approach. It could also result in pupils having longer blocks away from school, which could have a greater impact than individual inset days spread across the year.

RESOLVED:

That the comments now made by the Committee on the proposed Leicestershire school term and holiday dates covering the period from autumn 2027 to summer 2032 for schools maintained by the local authority be taken into account as part of the consultation and presented to the Cabinet for consideration.