Aibu to think this is Discriminating at its best?

[pumpkinsweetie]

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.

I actually think it's a good idea, encourages children to go to school and not "do a sicky".

How many 6 year olds do you know who can decide to have a duvet day and their parents go along with it?

There's another thread on this here.

Luckily my dc haven't needed a doctors appointment since becoming an academy, but if they do i have to make it out of school hours as if they don't get a prescription im pretty stuffed as my gp doesn't give children sick notes for minor ailments.
Touch wood they haven't required a day off yet either, but i have been sent a very sarcastic letter about the 3 days my child had off in december, before it even became an academy!

I work in a primary school and it's obvious to the staff which children can manipulate their parents into a duvet day.

One little lad, whose mum couldn't be arsed to get up and get him to school on time, took to having the alarm in his room and then woke everyone else in the family. THis lad has gone from often being late to never being late as he took control. He's seven.

Yanbu that is crap and marksthwe children out in a horrible way!

My ds2 would have not been allowed as he had norovirus and was off over a week and then as he was recovering from that he got the flu, he almost ended upon hospital he was so poorly.

3yr olds doing even have to go to school anyway ffs,its preschool/nursery and not compulsory!

This is dreadful! What if a child has had to spend a week in hospital having an operation? Or a child with cancer??? I hope you complain, I know attendance is an issue in some schools but this just isn't fair on children who can do little about it. Surely this rule assumes that illnesses are just the children being mard?

What about those that are actually ill though jungletoes, the parents you describe are not typical they are the minority. I don't believe actual sick children should be punished due to the minority that cba.

I was at primary school in the '70s when humiliation was routinely employed to 'manage' children/students. There were red tokens for 'good' behaviour (ie, being naturally academic or talented/having a stable homelife), blue for 'bad' (behavioural issues/being 'thick') and 'yellow' for lateness. Even back then, I used to feel sad for the children of certain families who were always late due to parents who couldn't be bothered/weren't able to get them to school on time - they were also routinely scruffy, lice ridden and coatless. Nevertheless, upon their (late) arrival, they would be issued with a yellow token, which they then had to pin to their 'house' token chart to the sighs and jeers of their fellow housemates whose good behaviour (red tokens) had just been rendered void.
How sad that such divide and rule tactics are being reintroduced :(

...and of course we have to remember that Ofsted will come down on a school mightily heavily if their attendance/lateness is poor.

I don't really agree with rewarding children for something they have no control over like being ill. It's not really an achievement is it, just luck!

Reward them for working hard or being kind, much more relevant I think.

I don't see how making a kid who's got a long term illness or had a nasty bout of flu stand out like a sore thumb all day is a good idea. I certainly wouldn't be happy with kids who are obviously quite ill feeling they must to go into school to avoid being humiliated at the end of term!

I think that's really sad, jungle, that you feel it's within the power of young children to either get into school despite their parents disinterest or to manipulate their parents therefore dictating their own attendance levels.

Particularly sad as you work in a school. I'd be staggered to find any of my colleagues felt that way.

But why shouldn't kids that have managed 100% attendance not be rewarded, I think that's quite an achievement. FWIW when my kids haven't managed it, due to being genuinely unwell, they've not been bothered about not getting a certificate. It does however make my 11yr old question whether she is well enough or not to go to school.

McBalls some kids take time off for a "sniffle", you cannot learn if you're sat at home watching tv.

I'm not sure they could do much if you sent them in non- uniform that day regardless.
I hope the staff are also part of the scheme!

no it isn't an acheivement to get 100% attendance. it is what is expected. it would be an achievement to get 100% attendance if they have faced some great difficulty that makes attending daily less likely. being there for all the days you are expected isn't reward worthy.

If a child is unfortunate enough to have parents who let them 'pull sickies' then routine humiliation in front of their peers is probably the last thing they need. Support and extra care to ensure they're not disadvantaged by their parents lack of care for their education would probably be more helpful.

YANBU, it is totally wrong to reward children in this way knowing it will deliberately single out others as not coming up to standard.

[buangry]

Jungle - no, the children don't 'take' the time off. The parent decides. That's the point.

Don't think anyone is disagreeing that some children are often off school unnecessarily.

But why shouldn't kids that have managed 100% attendance not be rewarded

Maybe because it is about as logical as rewarding those who have wealthy parents or those whose mothers join the PTA.

If you look into this policy nobody can show that it significantly affects attendance figures and it is implemented simply so that head teachers can be seen to be doing something.

There is, however a great deal of anecdotal evidence of the negative effect this policy can have on the emotional well-being of children who with chronic illnesses and disabilities who feel singled out and criticised.

Part of being at school is developing an immune system, it's one of the main benefits over home school.

One little lad, whose mum couldn't be arsed to get up and get him to school on time, took to having the alarm in his room and then woke everyone else in the family. THis lad has gone from often being late to never being late as he took control. He's seven.

Hardly the norm and far more to do with the deficiencies in his care at home than some ridiculous attendance certificate.

I would send my under performing child (who never gets over 80% attendance) in none school uniform on this day. If they tried to exclude them I'd DDA their arses to the board of Governors.

It IS Disability Discrimination for those children who are medically unwell enough to not have 96% attendance. To those who children who do achieve 96% attendance - well done, consider yourself lucky enough to be so healthy. Don't expect rewards on top just for showing your face.

Finally, if there are children with feckless parents who can choose whether they attend or not for whimsical reasons, then this will just highlight the parents inadequacies, but realistically they aren't likely to care or change - because they are feckless in the first place.

I hate the assumption that children who don't attend are poorly cared for - in our case my child is cared for - in hospital because that is the treatment required to maintain my DC's care. Last time I checked with the hospital this was good parenting - not poor parenting.

Tbf attendance is fully down to the parents as they are the decider in a situation where their child is ill. A child has no control over whether they are in school or not at the age range i mentioned and neither do most parents have a choice if their child is severely ill or has been throwing up all night and day.

Unfortunately its natural for there to be children off as there are always illnesses circulating, it cant be helped. To reward a child for being superhuman and not getting ill i think is rather stupid as it teaches them nothing about real life circumstances. We get ill, its life.

Ofsted rely too much on attendance figures and not on what actually matters. Yes attendance is important but surely there should be room for illness and those with long term illness.
Schools cannot penalise in an attempt to gain figures as its the teachers that will eventually end up ill which cant be good either.

X-posts with Tiggy (who speaks sense )