To write back in defence to Head?

[kkrpainmum]

So the school my kiddies go to has a new Head Teacher this year. It is a small, gentle primary school that has always been very nuturing, but I, together with many other parents are finding the new Head difficult. My DD is a bright happy child who does well academically, sports wise etc. at school. At the very beginning of term, she picked up a diarrhoea bug and poor thing was very sick with it and was off school for just over a week (school policy being 48 hours after the last diarrhoea or vomit). I spoke to school daily to keep them in the loop and also requested for work to be sent home - but none came.

Last week I recieved THE most extraordinary letter from the new Head saying shed been reviewing attendance and DD attendance for the first half of term was 76% ( 7 out of 60 something days) and the government recommendation was 95% to ensure she was keeping up academically. She said in a very threatening tone that she personally would be keeping an eye on DDs attendance henceforth and if it was not up to scratch DH and I would be hauled in to defend ourselves to her AND the school homelink worker (with vague further threats)!!!

I think the thing that has riled me the most is that when DD was ill I actually went in and talked to the Head about it because I was so worried about DD.

It's not as if we had gone on holiday or I just felt like keeping DD at home for shits and giggles, or that the Head didnt know about WHY Dd was off - she was genuinely very sick.

AIBU if I were to write a pretty strongly worded letter in defense telling this new Head where to stick it? Am positively raging, or is this normal practise? The old Head teacher would never ever have done anything like this when a child was ill, so AIBU because essentially we've been spoiled and this type of letter is normal practise regardless of the reason for absence?

[MimsyFluff]

I had a phone call from our new head when DD1 had CP and was off for a week. Threatening to fine me and take me to court if I didn't take her to the doctors I replied professionally to tell her to do one. A week off at the beginning of the school year yes attendance percentage is going to be low but she caught them at school and was sent home at 1pm (just after 2nd attendance) her arms covered in CP that apparently I sent her to school with I replied after pointing out how dangerous it is to take CP to the GP "so you knew she had CP all morning and left her at school so she could have her 2nd attendance mark?"

[Lovelyskin]

It will be a randomly generated letter, I've had them and they go in the bin.

It is 76% because it's a proportion of the sessions available which is low early in the year.

If you then had 7 days off every half term, it would stay at 76%, but if you then go back up to normal attendance, then you may not even be under the 95% magic number anyway.

What a waste of time and energy though! Children in particular are susceptible in crowded schools to viruses, flu and sickness bugs and it's a shame that the government has pressured schools so much about something which to a large extent is out of everyone's control, or even worse, encourages them to come in when they are sick and share their bugs further.

I am not sure if it has had any effect on intractable absences caused by real issues, poor parenting, missing large chunks of schooling for no real reason which was the reason it was introduced in the first place.

[roundaboutthetown]

If the only absence was 7 days in the first half of term, fully explained at the time for a child with an otherwise good record of attendance in a small primary school... then there is absolutely no excuse for such a letter to go out. It's marginally less unacceptable in a huge secondary, but the head of a small primary school who has had extensive conversations about exactly that absence with the parents concerned has no justification whatsoever for allowing that letter to go out. I would feel strongly inclined to point that out to them.

[Herecomedanotherone]

I work in a school and had the lovely d&v bug that is going around at the moment. It started on the Monday night and lasted until the early hours of Thursday morning. We have to call in every day and when I called in on Thursday morning I was told very firmly to stay away until 48 hoes after the last incident, so that took me to Saturday morning, in effect I was actually able to return to work on the Monday almost a week after the first incidence. I can easily believe that a child could have been off for that length of time or longer.

As for the letter I'd definitely respond, not aggressively, more disappointed that despite you speaking to the head at the time, they still felt it appropriate to send this.

[mouldycheesefan]

It's an automatic letter. Don't take it personally. Schools have to do this, in reality in cases like yours most heads would prefer not to but they don't have a choice.

[HumphreyCobblers]

I don't think it is an acceptable tone, even from an automatically generated letter. I don't see why people think it is appropriate for a parent to receive such a letter from a school, when they have not done anything other that behave responsibly regarding their child and the health of all the other children in the school.

No school I have ever worked in has thought it necessary to send such a letter. Percentages generated so early in the term are obviously not representative of an entire sickness record, and should not be taken as evidence of transgression, especially from ONE illness. It makes schools look stupid and aggressive.

I think policy should be changed in such cases.

[roundaboutthetown]

Rubbish that schools do not have a choice. If a school has evidence that an absence was justified, it does not need to send out a letter pretending otherwise. If Ofsted questions it, it can shove the true evidence in their face, not a copy of a pointless letter which proves either that the school doesn't know the children and parents it works with and therefore is unlikely to be meeting their needs in other respects, too, or that it is trying to fob Ofsted off, which is a waste of everyone's time. Punishing communicative parents is no way to run a school.

[WouldHave]

I wish people would stop saying schools are forced to do this. They aren't. They have to show they are targeting attendance, but that doesn't mean they have to send out aggressive and threatening letters. Sensible schools, for instance, wouldn't dream of sending out such letters to the parents of children with leukaemia or similar known problems. In OP's case, they could perfectly reasonably have made a note on the file that OP had been in to see the head whilst the illness was going on, that her child had previously had a good attendance record, that the 76% figure is skewed by the fact that it only relates to half a term and no further action is required at this stage. If they showed good practice like that Ofsted could not criticise them.

[Girlwhowearsglasses]

I don't think 'automated' is an excuse!

I would write back in the time that you are assuming that they are on side and have generated a letter. Fuming silently won't help anyone else: explain that you would like them to be more case-by-case in their required responses - and also as someone upthread suggested, ask for a reply clarifying their infection control strategies and policies.

You could do the 'kill with kindness' thing and act as one who wants to help the new head improve the schools response to Thai kind of thing.

Would piss me off something chronic though!

[PerspicaciaTick]

If your DD was too sick to be at school why were you asking for work to be sent home for her? It's primary school - a bit of reading together and some puzzles and board games if she felt up to it, would be more than enough for a poorly child for a week.

And 76% attendance over 60 days is 15 days off, three weeks (Mon-Fri) - it isn't the week of sickness that is causing concerns, it is the other two missing weeks.

[WouldHave]

Perspicacia, we've done the maths upthread, 76% in half a term is definitely seven school days. 60 school days is twelve weeks.

Plus it's perfectly reasonable to expect a child to be able to do a little work during the convalescent period, particularly when you're just sitting out the required 48 hours after the last episode.

[bungmean]

Pink

D&V can last weeks. You've clearly never had campylobacter, or salmonella, or cryptosporidium, or giardia, or shigella.

Or in fact a good old fashioned viral gastroenteritis, which can drag on.

Add the 48 hours post-symptoms into the mix and you can be off for a while.

Lots of love, A Microbiologist.

[SapphireStrange]

There's no point writing back.

Yes there is. If someone writes and points out –politely – a) that different children may and do have different illness situation, which are better dealt with case by case than by a boilerplate letter or policy and b) that the tone of this letter is unnecessarily accusatory and threatening, they might look again at their letters and redraft them to be less likely to get parents' backs up.

[WorraLiberty]

The school obviously has a problem with poor attendance, so the Head will be contacting all parents whose children have had a fair bit of time off.

As others have said, it's standard practice.

Write to the Head if it makes you feel better to put your side of things across, but don't expect it to make any difference to their now stricter attendance policy.

Whatever you do though, cut out the emotional language when you write.

She said in a very threatening tone that she personally would be keeping an eye on DDs attendance henceforth and if it was not up to scratch DH and I would be hauled in to defend ourselves to her AND the school homelink worker (with vague further threats)!!!

There were no 'threats' in that letter, just facts and no-one used the phrase 'hauled in', did they?

It's not personal, it's a pain in the arse but it's about whole school attendance being improved.

[EZA15]

I've not read the whole thread so sorry if I've missed something, but I'd love to know the Head Teachers response.

[harverina]

It's a small primary school - so while the letters are probably generated by an admin worker, if I was the HT I would like an opportunity to see who was getting letters so that I could either amend them or have a quiet word with the parents in cases where there has been illness or factors outwith their control that have affected attendance. It would have taken her a lot of time. Which makes me think she just wants to make a stand.

I would send a polite letter saying that you understand that good attendance at school is important and just highlight that the 7 days absence were due to illness which you notified the school about. Also mention that you asked for work to be sent home for when your DD was feeling better but unable to go back to school due to the 48 hour policy.

Even if it's just for the file.

[MatchyMatcha]

These often horrifically worded letters are standard. Parents have even received them when children are terminally ill, and in tragic cases have already died. No school is so big not to address this issue on an individual basis. This issue comes up again and again. Email so as to ensure a record of receipt. It's so detrimental to a good parent school relationship.

[roundaboutthetown]

You do not improve attendance in a school by writing unnecessary letters to parents who are not causing the general absence problem. What you achieve by scatterbombing aggressive letters is a bad reputation as a headteacher and a mass of parents advising each other to bin such letters without paying them any attention.

[Lovelyskin]

You do not improve attendance in a school by writing unnecessary letters to parents who are not causing the general absence problem I suspect these aren't written for this reason, but so that the school can say that they notified you of the problem, so that if it ever gets to court, which rare cases of persistent absence do, then they can show they notified you and warned you of the consequences long ago.

Our LA (in the old days a few years ago) used to send the letters out themselves, all with the threat of the truancy officer, and the school used to apologise and tell us how not to get fined if unauthorized.

[roundaboutthetown]

The school has no need whatsoever to notify a parent whose child has had good attendance at the school for years that for one half term only, their child's attendance has been below 95% due to what the school knows was a d&v bug.

[kkrpainmum]

Well thank you to everyone for your responses. Fyi, I only asked her teacher three days before she came back to school because she was feeling a lot better and the diarrhoea at that time was slowing considerably, and she was the one who asked me to ask because she was worried about missing out. I am very very aware how over worked teachers are, and also aware that primary school children are best to recuperate without worrying about sums.
In answer to someone else's post, if you had read my original question, the Head is new this academic year, my kids all go to the same school, the old Head was a very gentle, kind, living person who would never have sent out a letter like this. Even if she had to remind a family about attendance it would have been done verbally and kindly, so no, I didn't know this type of thing was happening all over the country. It is a small school and I personally feel that the letter should have been more understanding and personal.
Also, Head signed it in blue pen, so even if it was written by office, she would have okayed it.
I am going to write but write objectively as I want it on record that she was aware of it and as someone fantastically suggested, get clarification of their policies in writing.
Thanks to all.

[kkrpainmum]

Not "living person" 😨 I meant caring - don't know how my bloody autocorrect made that mistake!!! Sorry 😆

[LifeLong13]

Ask her if she feels 60 days is enough to speculate attendance data? I can tell you now it's not.

[LikeBigBotsAndICannotLie]

Nope, not being unreasonable. I got one of these letters after my DD broke her arm and was off for weeks. I had given a written letter, GP and hospital report too, so to find out my daughter was being discussed in meetings and all these cheeky letters started enraged me. I called the school first to see if it was sytem generated, it wasn't. So for the first time ever, I went into the school and had it out with the head. It was like that scene in Uncle Buck, minus the mole on the face