to think children shouldn't be punished for being poorly?

[mumnosbest]

Only children with 100% attendence are allowed to the school Halloween party. DS has a recurrent illness (every 3 months or so). He had 1 day off this term, after his teacher said he was struggling and needed a day to rest up, then he was up all that night and I agreed with her. DS wanted to go to school but was in no fit state and now blames me that he can't go to the party :(

I knowthere is an issue with poor attendence at the school and you can't have 1 rule for 1 and another for others but... Maybe 99% would be fairer as surely a lot of DCs miss 1 day through genuine illness. If this rewarding attendence is going to be a half-termly event DS will probably miss out on half of them as he will be ill again in about 3 months! (FingersX it's on a weekend).

AIBU (I am feeling very U and ranty this morning)?

Well i took a letter in at lunch and heard nothing. I've just picked ds up from an after school club and still nothing, no note in diary. He came home and said "all my friends are going cos they're never ill" :(

That is a ridiculous rule. If my DSs's school had the same rule, they'd have been denied the treat because they took a day off to attend their Daddy's funeral!

I'd be asking the Head if only staff with 100% attendance are allowed to go to any staff 'end of term' nights out.

It´s just unbelievable that anyone would even think of this-let alone implement it!

Can you go in at lunch & take him to the party?

Can it really be legal to do this?

Is the headteacher really unconfident? It strikes me as the kind of thing that someone who is worried that they are failing might do.

I'd like to know the opinions of MN teachers on this subject.

I am fuming for you and your DS Op. it is not only ridiculous it is actually nasty. Yes life can be unfair, but is beyond the pale that this horrible injustice is being perpetrated in the name of fecking attendance records.

Surely is illegal as it discriminates against those whohave disabilities

I'm a primary teacher and think that is really shocking! If I were you I would speak to the Head - politely, but bluntly - and if you are not satisfied with his/her reaction (which would have to be an apology and a promise of an immediate change in policy) then write to the governors and the LA.

It turns my stomach to think of a child who already has to struggle with regular bouts of illness, and all the social and educational difficulties that causes, being excluded and punished in this way. Indefensible.

Thanks for your input Greensleeves

That's terrible. DC's school does certificates for a term of 100% attendance but not many children get them and there are always other certificates to be earned for other things. I'm quite happy with that. DS1 (year 2) has never got one because of general illnesses and DS2 (year R) has about 30% attendance so far this year due to a medical condition.

A certificate for 100% attendance is fine but being left out of a party is wrong.

meryl the head is the complete opposite so probably will completely ignore my letter anyway.
As so many of you have said there are lots of genuine unavoidable reasons for absence. One per term really isn't that bad.

meryl the head is the complete opposite so probably will completely ignore my letter anyway.
As so many of you have said there are lots of genuine unavoidable reasons for absence. One per term really isn't that bad.

I hate the attendance rewards, especially for primary school children.

Children who are ill should NOT be at school, they should stay home and get better - and also not infect everyone else.

Primary school children are rarely responsible for their own attendance - so really children shouldn't be penalised for something outside of their control.

I'm really not sure on this one.

I feel 100% attendance should be rewarded, I really do.

However I can see how those who have had some sick days will feel they have been penalised (though, in my view they have not).

I wonder whether it might be more fair acceptable if maybe the focus was on punctuality?

Can of worms!

That was meant to be fair

complexnumber - Why do you feel that 100% attendance should be rewarded for primary school children? What merits or achievements do you feel the children should be rewarded for - in other words what have the children actually done themselves that should be rewarded in terms of coming to school every day?

Punctuality is not appropriate either imo; often children who are primary school have little control over this.

I just cannot get my head round the idea that you are rewarding people for being lucky enough to escape illnesses - as noted earlier up the thread. It is utterly bizarre. It is a merit system entirely out of the children's control. How can that be motivating in any way. What is the stated objective of this policy Op? How has the head teacher framed this in their own mind?

I know we have a big issue with attendanc. It was flagged up by ofsted. I think the heads idea is that she will guilt trip some parents into sending their dc to school. Excuses parents have honestly used are 'i was too hungover', 'the baby had me up all night', we had the docs/dentist (all day?), 'the alarm didnt go off', 'theyve got a cough'. However half these parents wont care that their dc are missing out.
A few years ago (different head) we used to give out thankyou letters for 100% to thank parents for making every effort to get dcs to school. I think these were appreciated and more appropriate.

I think at primary all attendance and punctuality concerns should be dealt with between teachers and parents. The children shouldn't be involved unless it is identified by the teacher/parent that the child is themselves contributing to it - and then it is a different matter and should be targetted in the same way other issues may be targetted.

So if a child is lagging in attendance - think our LEA target is 90%??? - then parents should be contacted and spoken with, reasons behind it noted, any issues discussed and targets set. Same goes for punctuality.

Yes mumnosbest that makes much more sense - to focus on the parents. So your head is essentially throwing the baby out with the bath water and lumping all absences together - genuine and not. At any rate, even in cases where absences may not be genuine due to parent hangover or what have you, why should those children learn that they are going to be penalised from age 5 for the failings of their parents...sorry you have had no response to your letter..still time I guess.