Why are Schools so obsessed with Childrens attendance?

[Darren2134]

Last Month, a parent told me something that really unsettled me: their child had received a letter branding him a “persistent absentee”. The kicker? If his attendance improved by 5%, he’d be invited to a party.
Let that sink in. A 5-year-old—just starting school life—is being incentivised to “try harder” to attend. But this isn’t really about motivating the child, is it? It’s a covert attempt to pressure the parent—using the child’s disappointment as leverage. The message is: Get them in, or they’ll be left out.
But who are these so-called “persistent absentees”? Often, they’re the kids who’ve been sick repeatedly—maybe with covid or other bugs. They’re the ones with unstable home lives, whose families might be struggling with poverty or mental health. Maybe the child is deeply anxious, overwhelmed by the transition to school, or dealing with SEN.
What good is a party to a child who is unwell, exhausted, or afraid? A glittery invitation doesn’t cure illness. It doesn’t magic up a bus fare. It doesn’t suddenly make school a place where a child feels safe.
This isn’t motivation—it’s manipulation. It weaponises disappointment. And it risks making vulnerable children feel ashamed, excluded, and “less than” for things utterly beyond their control.
The way we talk about attendance needs to change. Education should be accessible—but for some children, 100% attendance is simply not realistic. We should be asking why a child is struggling to attend, not punishing them for it.
We need to move away from blame and shame. Instead of pushing attendance as the end goal, how about asking how we can support children who are struggling? What would it look like if schools were funded and resourced to genuinely include all children, even those who can't always make it through the gates?
Curious what others think. Has anyone else experienced this kind of thing?

3 out of 10 parents think school is obligatory. Are you one of them?

seriously ill kids are not the problem - it's the 30 out of 100 parents

School attendance is a biggie, I hear all sides as a parent governor.

I chat to parents who have persistently absent children. Some have genuine health issues. Some outright lie to the school when they fancy having an extra day or two off because they forgot there was an INSET day and refuse to change their plans. They then get really angry when they are called out in it. Some struggle when one sibling is ill not the other, but refuse genuine offers of help with their school run from other parents they could trust.

I have noticed that parents seem more reluctant to ask other parents on the school run for help. Unsure why that is- possibly a post-covid thing.

One of mine once lost out on the top level attendance prize for a whole term because he missed 1 hour, yes 1 hour, for a genuine medical appointment which was proved and authorised. It really did have to be 100% 😅

I think it is much harder for children under 7 to achieve such good attendance rates as their immune systems are less developed and they do get ill more often. I have wondered if KS1 and KS2 could have slightly different targets to reflect that. I certainly noticed a huge difference in my eldest’s overall health once he turned 6.

The amount of parents that will have been saying roll on September. This isn't the majority of parents that let their kids bunk off school. For a start most of us have work to go too! Plus my school do home checks after the 3rd day of sickness.

They’re the ones with unstable home lives, whose families might be struggling with poverty or mental health.

These are exactly the children who need to be in school. This is what the policy was designed for; not to make money from otherwise engaged parents who take their kids out for a week’s holiday. It’s the persistent absence which is the issue, and feeds into the attainment gap further.

And I also know parents who keep one child off if the sibling is sick, etc.

The intention is to create an culture where parents send their children to school as the default, and regard it as essential and legally required (which it is) because missed days of school have a serious impact on children's progress and are very disruptive for teachers.

If the child has a chronic health issue, that is a different matter, but statistically children are safer, happier and better fed at school.

Giving a small child something to look forward to, so they want to go to school, that can only help the parents

Schools obsess about what the government makes them obsess about - i.e. the things that they are judged, measured and compared on. And (generally speaking) the more difficulties a school has in performing well in one of those things, the more extreme they are likely to be in their policies on how to improve it.

I'm not saying there aren't headteachers who are just dictatorial control freaks (there definitely are!), but mostly they aren't going to waste energy hammering kids and staff over something that won't make them get a crap Ofsted report or make their results look bad. A bad inspection can send a school into a downward spiral, haemorrhaging kids and staff.

Teachers just want to do their job and teach kids. They don't want to be making 5 year-olds miserable over a few sick days.

Fwiw I completely agree with you on everything you say in your OP. I think attendance certificates and treats are barbaric, especially in primary.

Attendance matters
for education opportunities
because structure and routine is importantly for most kids mental health
because there is an explosion of kids with mental health problems who are anxious avoiders / avoid school / avoid socialising with others and developing those important skills
because kids are screen addicted and kick off when they have to come off the screens and go to school
because parents are increasingly anti school / discipline and then moan that schools / society are failing their kids who are isolated, socially anxious, screen addicted and depressed and anxious !!!
yes, start the socialisation to school attendance matters for kids and the parents,

obviously proper illness / adversities are different to the usual flakey attendance problems

Of course.

But don’t punish them even more by not letting them go to a party. In primary school, absence is not the child’s decision. It’s illness (either regular virus or long term health conditions) or parents (either they take them on holiday, or they just can’t be arsed with school).

Because in order for children to learn they need to be at school.

Attendance is such a massive driver in improving outcomes for disadvantaged/SEND children that I believe schools are absolutely right to do everything they can to ensure that children are in school.

Actually, school isn't compulsory. Education is. School is opt in, not opt out. Obviously if you opt in, you should aim for your child to attend as much as possible.

Other countries don't have this obsession with attendance figures and their kids seem to get educated so what are we doing that is so different here?

Totally agree with you op. I blame Ofsted.

Then they need to make reasonable adjustments, listen to parents who know their child is struggling instead of dismissing them, apply for additional send support/ehcna assessments then actually provide the section F provision.

We successfully negotiated an individual attendance target as ds was repeatedly labelled a persistent absentee and we had threats of fines etc from school. We went above them to the LA and negotiated that he had to aim for 80% not 97%. He has multiple medical issues and really struggles but his attainment has been unaffected so I think that’s why we were able to negotiate this.

In most cases, high attendance = better learning = better exam results = higher lifetime earnings. Consequently, schools prioritise it. Parents are failing their children if they don't make school attendance important. https://theeducationspace.co.uk/school-attendance-life-outcomes/

Parents need to learn their kids stuff as well its not all down the teachers.

I know attendance affects educational outcomes, but correlation is not causation. It must be hard to separate a low attendance rate from the causes of that attendance rate, and this muddies the waters.

A child who has low attendance and a chaotic home life, and a child with an affluent, supportive homelife who has low attendance due to a period of illness (or unapproved holiday absence) , are unlikely to be affected in the same way by their absence. This is why we should be looking at the causes of absence rather than using a blanket application of carrot and stick.

And sometimes they’re the kids that are neglected, or abused , or live in toxic and/or chaotic homes, or the parent simply can’t be bothered or is too drunk/high( there might be reasons there, but while we can work with the parents, we can’t fix them) and so on. Kids who are actually safer and better in school. We had a kid whose medical condition was managed in school but not at home, which is why she was often too poorly to attend.

I don’t agree with parties and certificates and prizes and stuff because they’re a waste of time and money that aren’t fit for purpose and don’t work, except to make some kids feel excluded.

Where is your evidence for the claims made in your second paragraph? ‘Seem to get educated’ is just a guess on your part. How much do you know about other countries’ attendance rates?

One word. Safeguarding.

I appreciate it’s not a one size fits all and there’s a lot more behind the scenes for school and families, but from a school point of view- if we don’t have eyes on the children, parents are at work… huge concerns with neglect, grooming etc.

Persistent absence is attendance below 90%, which for context, is a day off a fortnight. If you had that level of absence from work, your boss would be having a chat with you about the impact on the company, and education is the same. 90% sounds great, in terms of test results, but in terms of school attendance it’s actually really low.

There are some proven statistics out there which you can easily find with Google - basically, children who are on less than 90% over their school life have really low chances of passing their GCSEs, and are much more likely to be long-term unemployed. The government knows this, hence the drive to try and get children back in school. Children who are severely absent (attendance below 50%) have basically zero chance of achieving any qualifications.

And yes, these children are most likely to live in poverty and many have social care involvement. They are exactly the children who most need to be in school each day. Schools need to take ownership of this too - it’s on them to be as inclusive as possible, eg in terms of dress code and uniform requirements - but too many parents think it is OK for their kid to basically have a duvet day each week, or don’t have basic routines in place to make school a non-negotiable habit (I’ve known so many teenagers who have to get themselves up and out for school in the morning as their parents are still in bed - that’s just not acceptable, and it’s no wonder the kids often don’t bother going themselves).

You cannot send sick children into school
However
Keep a persistently sick child home and you apparently cannot do that either

Child with chicken pox asked for a doctors note its fucking chicken pox why would you go to the doctors? School complaints are that this same child has had time off with sickness prior and is now in danger of failing their School exams...OK? They have chicken pox not authorising their absence isn't going to change that fining them won't change that it's chicken pox and no doctor is going to want them in the surgery because they have chicken pox!

Mental health in children and teens have significantly deteriorated in recent years,

society needs to be working harder to get / keep kids in school

staying home in bed / on screens on a regular basis is bad for kids mental health and development

society / parents are not mobilising enough to tackle this huge problem

services cannot cope with supporting all the kids and in turn all the adults when this lot graduate to adulthood with their poor social skills, screen addiction, poor sleep, poor routine, poor educational attainment

parents have to have their hands forced to get the kids into school as much as possible

Surely in this case, it’s the prior absences which have caused a cumulative effect? The chickenpox alone ordinarily wouldn’t be an issue.

You only have to look at the pushback from parents to see why schools have resorted to what they have.

Out of those children some will have colds /sickness /disabilities that require time off school. And some will struggle with the one size fits all academia.
And then there will be a handful of parents who don’t value education.
But they insist on this punishment style approach for what amounts to roughly 10% of the absences but impacts on children who don’t deserve it.
And wonder why parent engagement is poor