Advanced search

Aibu to think this is Discriminating at its best?

(134 Posts)
pumpkinsweetie Sat 30-Mar-13 20:22:42

Just a general aibu, about a new scheme that has started at my dds Academy.
To reward children for having 96 percent per term by having a non-uniform day for those that achieved that greater and all those that do not succeed must come in full uniform!
Bare in mind the age ranges go from 3-11, do you think this is wrong?
My dds luckily achieved this but with one of them only being 4yo, if she doesn't succeed next term i will have one very upset little girl.

Aibu to think this will only upset the children who couldn't help being ill for a few days some terms and to also find that this discriminates those with health problems?

There are no special exemptions, the child must obtain 96 percent attendence or greater for the entire term to achieve one non uniform day.

I know its a tactic to achieve a better overall attendance, but at what cost to the child's emotions if there happens to be only one child in class in uniform.

Sorry to moan on, i just think its wrong.

Pendipidy Sat 30-Mar-13 20:25:10

Especially when children have very little control over their punctuality and attendance, its their parents!

Dancingthroughthefire Sat 30-Mar-13 20:25:47

I think it is wrong.
It marks children out very obviously for an entire day. I have diabetes and would have missed at least a day a term for hospital appointments and more when first diagnosed. If I was at school now I wouldn't be getting a certificate or a non- uniform day! They didn't do stuff like that when I was at school..

I actually do wonder when I read these things if it could be discrimination. There are surely some children who are never going to be able to attend all the time for pre existing reasons.

McBalls Sat 30-Mar-13 20:26:12

I don't like attendance incentives that reward/penalise the children.

They have no choice whether or not they're ill and no choice over unnecessary absences - they are parental decisions.

Tee2072 Sat 30-Mar-13 20:26:16

I think all attendance rewards are wrong so, yes, this is wrong. And stupid.

MrsLouisTheroux Sat 30-Mar-13 20:28:06

96% attendance allows for a few days illness hence the 4%. If someone is seriously ill their attendance is going to be much worse than that.
Generally speaking YABU because it is being used as an incentive and stops the average student taking days off when really they should be in.

ImperialBlether Sat 30-Mar-13 20:30:35

These are not students, Mrs Theroux; they are aged from 4-11 - they don't make a decision about having a day off, do they?

Dancingthroughthefire Sat 30-Mar-13 20:30:40

But they're too little to make the decision themselves anyway. Especially at 3-7ish. It'll be the parents deciding whether to take them in.

tiggytape Sat 30-Mar-13 20:31:15

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LynetteScavo Sat 30-Mar-13 20:31:38

It's wrong, and I wouldn't want my DC in a school like this, TBH.

Children can help if they are ill. One of my DC has below 96% attendance. I work full time, and it's very difficult to find childcare when he's ill, so I admit, he has sometimes been sent in when he really should have spent the day in bed. He still has low attendance though. I would be angry if the school adopted this crappy idea. Especially at primary level.

ENormaSnob Sat 30-Mar-13 20:33:17


It isn't really an incentive imo as at that age it's up to the parents to get them into school.

HungryClocksGoBackFourSeconds Sat 30-Mar-13 20:34:59

I wouldn't be sending my kid in to be humiliated. And I'd think most parents would feel this way, so all it will achieve is having a specific day where the children with low attendance will definitely skive. hmm

MrsLouisTheroux Sat 30-Mar-13 20:35:11

Imperial I teach 11-16. They are called students hmm

McBalls Sat 30-Mar-13 20:40:29

Students or not students, the point being made, I think, is that they are children and it is not their choice whether they attend or not. It's the parents.

pumpkinsweetie Sat 30-Mar-13 20:42:18

I plan on writing a complaint to the board of governors as this is Discrimination, a thing that i thought was supposed to be wiping out.
I don't agree with discrimination in any shape or form, and the only one that suffers in this instance is the child-that Imo is wrong.
These are not students, they are young pupils who have no decision of their own whether to be in school or not.

Four percent doesn't allow much, considering its a whole term they consider. The winter vomiting virus has hit the school too and when a child catches that it wipes them out for days.
My dd from a different school where its also prevalent has had it since Wednesday and is only just starting to feel better.

There are also other loony schemes at this academy too, including having to have a sick note or photocopied prescription every time they visit the doctor and an ill child must have proof they are ill, which has to include the above or it will be unauthorised. They can and do fine if childs attendance goes below 95 percent per school year, especially if a pattern is followed, even just a small one.

I have already moved my eldest from this academy, and I'm hoping to move my other dc as soon as i can, but my council don't make that easy either.

zipzap Sat 30-Mar-13 20:43:29

I think you should complain about it now - point out how it encourages people to disregard school rules on things like staying off school for long enough if they've been sick and could contradict disability disagreement laws etc etc

And if you do it this term then as your dd has qualified then it won't sound like sour grapes!

jungletoes Sat 30-Mar-13 20:45:46

I actually think it's a good idea, encourages children to go to school and not "do a sicky". My children often get 100% attendance at their schools and are rewarded accordingly; entered into a prize draw or given a certificate.

Booyhoo Sat 30-Mar-13 20:45:59

i hate attendance rewards. i remember bursting into tears in school once when prizes were handed out for 100% attendance and as i had been ill i hadn't gotten anything. it's just cruel. there is no need to do taht to children.

AgentZigzag Sat 30-Mar-13 20:46:59

That's just plain nasty, and I wouldn't be happy because DD1 gets chest infections because of her asthma and can hardly walk up the stairs let alone to school.

I wouldn't be able to stomach punishing and humiliating her in front of her peers.

It's a bit 'blue/brown eyes' experiment isn't it?

Booyhoo Sat 30-Mar-13 20:47:57

it can never be fair to reward attendance in this way as children have no control over illness or whether their parents get them there on time or at all.

zipzap Sat 30-Mar-13 20:48:00

Oops cross posted with the op.

Op - what do the local gp's think of the school's policy of needing sick notes? Would have thought that lots of them wouldn't be happy or parents would be out of pocket if they were charged for them.

YellowandGreenandRedandBlue Sat 30-Mar-13 20:49:22

I agree, hate these schemes. Sometimes kids get ill. Shouldn't be penalised for it.

pumpkinsweetie Sat 30-Mar-13 20:49:25

3 & 4 yo are not capable of "doing a sicky", unless of course the parents cba to get out of bed, and even only the children will suffer in the long run.

tiggytape Sat 30-Mar-13 20:50:14

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Nanny0gg Sat 30-Mar-13 20:50:26

jungletoes how many infants do you know that 'do a sickie'?
Attendance rewards are horrible and nothing to do with the child.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: