To disagree with attendance awards

[LittleMissUpset]

DS2 came home from school with some chocolate and a certificate DS1 didn't because he had a CAMHS appointment and is now awaiting assessment for ASD, therefore didn't get the attendance award.

I explained to DS1 that school are measured on attendance and they are just trying to encourage the children, but it's not his fault and it's unfair so I will buy him some chocolate too.

It really is unfair, as even if children are off ill it's not their fault.

AIBU to disagree with attendance awards?

Its certainly unfair if they don't make allowance for illness and medical appointments.

Not at all unreasonable. It stresses out the conscientious, and punishes those who have already been punished.

YANBU. I agree with you.

I disagree with them too. It's generally not a child's decision to stay at home, it's the parent who makes the call based on being actually a parent and parenting. All kids should obviously be at home if contagious, sick, etc. And a parent makes that decision in the best interests of the child.
Why are we rewarding children for ether having good genes and less likely to get sick or for having parents who send them in anyway even if they are ill? 🙄😏

Ds will never get 100% attendance - but he is there all the time he can be, and possibly some times he shouldn't really be.

He can't help having a chronic illness and being under 10 different medical teams!

I do see the point about medical reasons, but it's not really a punishment not to be rewarded, is it? Students with 100% attendance are almost certain to have gone on to school when they were borderline unwell (not vomiting bugs but minor things) but wanted to go in, and they are being given special attention for their commitment.

Or special attention for spreading their germs to others...

Even if they changed them to awards for no unauthorised absence, this would still not be fair on some children. Those with parents who don't bother to take them to school because they are pissed/stoned/hung over, for example. Or those whose parents decide to have a term time holiday - the children would be punished for the parents' decision.

Or those children who are carers for their ill or disabled parent/s - they should not be punished for having chosen to look after their loved one.

You know full well when kids get the 100% attendance they've been sent in poorly a good few times

All 100 per cent attendance rewards are is a way to reward the kids for coming in. They don't measure ability or behaviour or performance - a useless certificate.

Sirzy: Definitely one way of looking at it 😂

But since school attendance is one of the most powerful predictors of attainment, I think this isn't going away any time soon. Students should be rewarded for their resilience, ie not having regular duvet days or succumbing to the slightest cold!

"You know full well when kids get the 100% attendance they've been sent in poorly a good few times"

Not necessarily, sonlypuppyfat - some children really are lucky enough not to get ill - but it is only luck, and the children who do get ill shouldn't be penalised for being unlucky.

Trifle - but what if they're a top performing student? If they aren't handing out certificates for academic performance too what's the point of any at all?

YANBU and I have complained about these awards to the school.

There is a pupil in my child's class who has a high level of absence which draws some grumbling from the pupils because apart from the personal attendance awards, they have a class one which they 'never win' because of this one pupil. I thought it was unfair and that the class award was singling out one child for attention. The school were polite but unmoved about ditching the concept

DailyFail1: Like I said, rewarding commitment. I'm not saying it's a perfect system. For me its pros outweigh its cons.

I think a Cancer suffer getting top SAT results definitely shows commitment. As does the kid of the drunk who gets 11 A stars on a 30% attendance like I did.

I'm glad you find the idea of children spreading germs to vulnerable peers just so they can get a reward funny trifle!

"Students should be rewarded for their resilience, ie not having regular duvet days or succumbing to the slightest cold!"

If I kept DS home every time he had a cold he'd be off more often than he was in school, and it would be my choice not his as he loves going.

He's only been off a couple of times this year, and that was because his temp went over 40. Not sure what help any extra resilience would have been!

Sirzy: Sorry I don't tend to get hysterical over colds, Sirzy. Working in a school makes me fairly pragmatic about the fact that most germs are transmitted when people are asymptomatic, and most young people will get a bit of a cold at some point. I think you need to chill out.

YANBU. It's not actually rewarding commitment or anything else that a child has any control over. Surely a young child goes to school if their parents take them. Some kids get ill more than others or need to attend appointments for various reasons. Why on earth would you reward a child because they happen to be less susceptible to bugs or don't need braces or to have assessments. You might as well reward them for being the tallest/shortest.

havingabadhairday: I know it's not completely fair. I didn't say it was. What it does is make a shining example out of attendance, so people like your son see its value - and how wonderful it is that he does.

It's a good life lesson. When at work, many companies reward attendance, either officially or unofficially. The person who is always off sick is less likely to be considered for promotion than the person who always struggles into work, assuming they are more-or-less equally capable. Many companies will deduct money for an employee being late or missing a day, regardless of how "legitimate" their reason is. And it is routine for references and job applications to ask how many days sick the applicant has taken in the past year. There is the "Bradford Factor" too - this is used to measure absence in a uniform way. It doesn't necessarily matter how good the reason for absence was, the fact that someone is absent at all is the problem.

So I think that a school rewarding attendance is fair enough. It may seem unfair to the child, especially since they may have no choice over whether they miss school for the appointment their parents have made, but that too is a good life lesson - life isn't always fair. The school may also be thinking that by not rewarding the children who have been absence, it will create upset and argument when they get home. This will turn into "pester power" and mean the parents think twice before allowing their child to miss school in future.

Trifle but how is it rewarding commitment? You're rewarding the child for getting ill less or not needing to attend appointments. That's good fortune not commitment.

I wonder if there's a better way to do it - giving attendance certificates based on individual targets (it's not like individual targets are a novelty in education).

So fully fit Freddie with prompt parents has a target of 97%; Julia with frequent hospital stays has a target of 80%; school refuser Alex has a target of 60%. In addition, any child who gets better attendance this year than last year gets a certificate.

HaveNoSocks: You're not rewarding every child who is committed. You are rewarding those who are both committed and lucky. Not a perfect system but it has its plus points. And I don't think the absence of reward is punishment, so I tend not to get too worked up about it. Some kids who get attendance awards will go through school never winning anything else - hardly fair either for many reasons.