The Student Room Group

Child robbed of once in a lifetime acting role because of her school refused time off

Scroll to see replies

Original post by zippyRN
you are either a troll or a shill for Mrs Worthington


How am I trolling?

If you actually saw my thread you'd noticed it had a link to a genuine news paper, the Herald Express, so the story was not fake.
Original post by Tiger Rag
Why couldn't this have been filmed during half term or the weekend?

I don't get the parents issue at all. Her attendance is 85%.


I must admit that is a very valid point. If an advertising firm was recruiting children then the last thing they should have done was to have it on a school day. So it is partly the advertising company to blame for putting this child and her parents in such a difficult position.

I certainly think they should not hesitate in offering the girl a similar role without question at a more suitable time, eg, weekend, evening or school holidays.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Ambitious1999
How am I trolling?

If you actually saw my thread you'd noticed it had a link to a genuine news paper, the Herald Express, so the story was not fake.


you are trolling or a shill for mrs worthington

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7ay6E345e0
Original post by Ciel.
Yep, probably. Still isn't 85% a lot? I think mine was way below 70% and I didn't get into too much trouble. But that was like 7 years ago or something.


I think a lot of its down to an over zealous head teacher trying to impress school league tables and look good. It's all about their ego, get a pay rise, promotion, or a dream job in a public school because Headteacher of the year has the best league tables.
Probably did their PGCE before tuition fees were invented. They don't care about this poor little girl and her parents aspiration for her to have an acting career being ruined. By the time she's finished school university tuition fees will be unaffordable anyway. At least she and her parents were trying to make something of her.

But That's not important just so long as the selfish head teachers ego shines above all else. They got their dream career and that's all that matters.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Ambitious1999
I think a lot of its down to an over zealous head teacher trying to impress school league tables and look good. It's all about their ego, get a pay rise, promotion, or a dream job in a public school because Headteacher of the year has the best league tables.
Probably did their PGCE before tuition fees were invented. They don't care about this poor little girl and her parents aspiration for her to have an acting career being ruined. By the time she's finished school university tuition fees will be unaffordable anyway. At least she and her parents were trying to make something of her.

But That's not important just so long as the selfish head teachers ego shines above all else. They got their dream career and that's all that matters.


you are talking complete and utter rubbish and sailing very close to the wind ona report for the trolling / reposting of the same message .
Original post by doodle_333
yeah see the kid had only 85% attendance - the parents were happy to keep her off nearly 1 day a week but not to take half a day for an advert? very weird... sounds to me they thought this would be more publicity than the ad


According to the news paper link she lived with her parents in Torquay and went to school in Preston, no wonder she had only 85% attendance! Thats a hell of a long school run! Perhaps if schools provided suffice spaces for local children they'd not have to travel from one end of the country to another.
Pretty rich of the school to deny the girl an acting role in Cockington only a few miles from her home.
Original post by doodle_333
Why didn't her parents just take her out of school anyway? they'd get a small fine but I'm sure the kid would have earned more than the fine for doing the advert. It's silly not to give the kid the day off but plenty of parents take their kids out of school anyway.

EDIT: just read the article and seen the kid had 85% attendance and that's why it was denied... 85% attendance is really low for anyone who doesn't have a serious health condition so that's really her parents fault for giving the kid so many days off

also the government's fault for putting so much pressure on schools to keep kids above certain attendance %s without considering the actual needs of the students, I still think this kid should have been given a day off but the school will be under huge pressure to keep their average % high (and good attendance is 95% min. so this kid is way under)

Original post by Ciel.
Exactly. Or they could get a sick note, from a private doctor (or they could just write one), like most people do when something important comes up. But nope, they had to run to the newspaper just to get more attention. Of course, they had to get them to include lots of pictures of their daughter, too.

Original post by simon_g
why the hell did the parents ask the school for a day off?

I've not opened the article, but I know a little about children performing on stage and screen. Before they even step onto the stage or in front of a camera, they need a performing licence, and getting a performing licence depends on the school and local authority allowing them to. A sick note, or sneaky day off, wouldn't cut it, unless Cadbury's wanted the advert to be pulled.
Original post by Ambitious1999
According to the news paper link she lived with her parents in Torquay and went to school in Preston, no wonder she had only 85% attendance! Thats a hell of a long school run! Perhaps if schools provided suffice spaces for local children they'd not have to travel from one end of the country to another.
Pretty rich of the school to deny the girl an acting role in Cockington only a few miles from her home.


I take it you're joking? There's 0 chance she commutes 4 hours each way to school...

Original post by MildredMalone
I've not opened the article, but I know a little about children performing on stage and screen. Before they even step onto the stage or in front of a camera, they need a performing licence, and getting a performing licence depends on the school and local authority allowing them to. A sick note, or sneaky day off, wouldn't cut it, unless Cadbury's wanted the advert to be pulled.


Ah I didn't know that
Reply 48
Original post by MildredMalone
I've not opened the article, but I know a little about children performing on stage and screen. Before they even step onto the stage or in front of a camera, they need a performing licence, and getting a performing licence depends on the school and local authority allowing them to. A sick note, or sneaky day off, wouldn't cut it, unless Cadbury's wanted the advert to be pulled.
We can't let the facts get in the way of a Dumbitious1999 hissy :smile:
Oh well, they probably wanted her to prioritise her education which is fair enough... Education is after all compulsory until 16 and for a good reason.
Reply 50
Original post by Little Popcorns
Oh well, they probably wanted her to prioritise her education which is fair enough... Education is after all compulsory until 16 and for a good reason.
I suspect she might have preferred 15 mins of fame as a z-lister sleb than a lifetime of academic and vocational excellence.
Original post by MildredMalone
I've not opened the article, but I know a little about children performing on stage and screen. Before they even step onto the stage or in front of a camera, they need a performing licence, and getting a performing licence depends on the school and local authority allowing them to. A sick note, or sneaky day off, wouldn't cut it, unless Cadbury's wanted the advert to be pulled.


you are clearly taking the piss, aren't you?
Reply 52
Proposed alternative thread title

'Child narrowly avoids missing a once in a lifetime opportunity to be educated at educational establishment. Phew, that was lucky!'
Original post by simon_g
you are clearly taking the piss, aren't you?


No (s)he's not,

Ordinarily children under 13 cannot undertake ANY paid work , except in within the family setting ( an exception written in times past when many farming families farmed as a family and children would help with feeding /milking / tending glasshouses etc before and/or after school or during school holidays ...

performing for stage or screening is another exception and there are very strict criteria and lots of hoop jumping - far more than tthere have been elsewhere in youth activities ...
Original post by simon_g
you are clearly taking the piss, aren't you?

I am not.
Original post by MildredMalone


:colone:
thanks for the link btw
(edited 7 years ago)
I passed my GCSEs with only something like 70% attendance in year 10, I don't think 85% is going to have terribly tragic consequences for a 6 year old.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending