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?

You've heard of this? Uh huh. Is that every child that gets helped? Or just a lucky few? The others presumably just get told they're not good enough and won't be included in the treat as a punishment. Grand.

but too many think school is optional and don’t know how to parent

How is this the child's fault?? Remember the OP was about a 5-year-old. Being excluded from a party. How does that 5-year-old get to go to the party? They don't. They cannot try harder, or 'buck up their ideas'. It's nothing to do with them, and yet the 'incentive' falls entirely on their shoulders. How is that fair? Or effective?

Is this really true? Wow if so - I've never come across this attitude (may be because I don't really chat to other parents on school run) but none of my friends/family or wider circle think this, I don't think. This just proves I live in a bubble perhaps.

My DC has SEN and we are late most days due to this - I have been screamed at, head-butted, punched before 8am just trying to get them out of bed. I didn't want to be late, I have to work and have meetings from 9 but other than calming them down from a meltdown I'm not sure what more I could do.

I am in tears most mornings and all teachers just reassured me that they are in school and that's the main thing. If DC1 were called into the head teachers office to explain, I'm not sure if it would help? It would certainly give them anxiety and perhaps lead to school refusal or would scare them into submission. It wasn't DC2's fault so I wouldn't expect them to explain.

Putting aside concerns about child welfare (where parents keep child off school to cover up signs of abuse etc), repeatedly missing lessons negatively affects pupils' progress. This goes on to affect their performance in tests if they don't have the depth of knowledge/ confidence to do well. Therefore the school's reputation, standing in league tables etc goes down because of something that's not really in their control. So they do what they can from their side to get children in school, attending lessons for their (the school's) own interests as well as for the pupils' good.

Ah how refreshing and sensible. Not being penalised for being ill, families properly supported and the importance of a family holiday appreciated. Common sense prevails.

But who needs any of that when we have Ofsted and can punish people with fines.

I disagree. When DS was at primary school they had no problem with us taking him out for a week to go on holiday every year. He got over 110 on all Yr 6 SATs.

Now it would be a big black mark from Ofsted so no one is allowed any time off for pretty much any reason.

If a child is missing a lot of lessons then there are likely to be quite major issues at home that need a lot of support. Making children miss parties or fining parents is not going to solve those issues.

How do you 'get them into school'?? The teachers pick them up in the morning themselves? They cure them of illness and miraculously they're healed? Adopt the children perhaps to give them a more stable home life?

You have a bee in your bonnet about 100% parties. Its not just about yearly 100% rewards tho. Surely you realise that?

And yes, EWOs do go and collect children. Not all the time, but on occasion. Why? Evidence for attendance fines - it shows this family could get the child to school, but they chose not to and school stepped up instead.

What are your suggestions?

• Rewards for 100% weekly attendance. Everyone has the opportunity to attend school for 5 days, it's not insurmountable.
• Half termly meetings with parents to discuss what are the barriers and what help do they need (less than 10% of parents invited to these turn up, in my school(
• Joined up thinking between different areas of school - attendance, SEND, behaviour, pastoral, safeguarding, curriculum.
• Options for bespoke and temporary part timetables to increase overall attendance
• Enhanced pastoral support and mentoring
• Encouraging families to accept Early Help for some whole-child multi agency support (attendance-need parents will generally only accept this when they realise they'll be fined if they don't accept it)
• Use of penalty notices and prosecution.

That last one is key in improving the attendance of the children of disengaged parents. It's not just the oenalty notice (PN) fine itself, it's the structure behind the fine.

• Schools have to (there's no choice) evidence support put in place before a PN is considered. This makes schools organise and evidence their pastoral support offer
• Use of a "Notice to Improve" letter, which is a scarey-sounding legal letter sent ahead of a PN. At least 90% of NTI letters wesend never get to a PN, because parents realise the need to improve and do
• Schools then need to evidence casework after the NTI is issued. This is when children are collected from home from time to time, or home visits done, parents face challenge for illness absences if no medical advise has been sought.
• Then if all that happens, some parents still don't expect that a PN will really be issued. But they are. Many at that point realise the need to step-up, because we start talking about second PN, prosecution and court. The issuing of a first PN has shown a big improvement in the attendance of many at my school

That said, even after all that, there are some parents who still won't stop up and make sure their children go to school wherever possible. These families will always exist. Attendance go through the motions, as do safeguarding and social care. These children are often in the behaviour system too - anti social in snd out of school, so have support for that too. Ultimately they are being failed by their parents.

Anyway, in summary @Longestgiraffe it's not just about 100% parties. Its about much, much more

Of course it's about much more than that! But the OP was about a 5-year-old being excluded from a party because his attendance want good enough. This thread is about the misguided 'incentive' of rewarding or punishing the children over something they have no control in. That's why I seem to have a bee in my bonnet about it - because that's the main point of the thread.

All the things you've talked about is about the parents. The parents. Bring all of that in by all means! But the 'incentives' punish the child.

'We need to get parents engaged and compliant with getting their kids in. We need to address the parents' decisions to going on term time holidays. We need to educate the parents in how important attendance is to attainment. I know!!!! Let's throw a party and exclude the children when their parents don't comply! Perfect!'

This thread is about the misguided 'incentive' of rewarding or punishing the children over something they have no control in.

Penalty Notices punish the parents.

The law is quite clear that attendance is the parent's responsibility, not the child's.

Schools also try to reward parents - supermarket vouchers or amazon vouchers, voucher codes for theme parks and so on. We even give discount codes for our local hairdresser and beauty salon as an attendance reward. These benefit the whole family.

You're focused on parties for 5 year olds. That's one part. There is nothing wrong with that one part. But it's part of a bigger picture. The party for primary school 100% children will not be the only thing that school do to improve their attendance.

Maybe reread the original post which definitely includes the OPs child being invited to a party if their attendance improved by 5%

There was nothing in the original post to indicate the OP hadn't informed the school why her child hadn't been in school.

You seem to miss the point that this obsession with attendance isn't just about schools not being informed or there being no reason why the child isn't in school, medical family holiday or whatever. Is catching chicken pox a safeguarding issue? No. Is going on a family holiday a safeguarding issue? No. Is your granny dying so the family have to go to sort things out and attend funeral so five year old has to go with them a safeguarding issue? No.

If a school feels a child is abused/neglected/missing or unsupervised of course it is a safeguarding issue but don't use that as an excuse for hounding parents of a sick child or a family can only afford to holiday in school time.

No, but that is what this thread is about. The 5-year-old parties.

Punishing a child who lives in difficult circumstances or with health issues is not appropriate whatever else is going on with vouchers and discounts.

Just to illustrate statistics don't tell the full story one of my children missed well over 50% of primary school, went to grammar school, has a first class degree from a highly rated university and post grad qualifications.

The children with poor attendance and poor outcomes have almost certainly got other issues going on.

Your post read:

How do you 'get them into school'??
What are your suggestions?

This is what I was replying to @Longestgiraffe. It was your post. I quoted it and answered your question.

But because by answers are reasonable, logical, fair and rational - but oppose your POV, you seem to have deflected.

Children are not punished for low attendance. Not getting a specific reward is not punishing.

Where attendance is poor and it had been evidenced this is because parenting is lacking, the parent faces punishment (in the form of fines).

Parents of children with evidenced medical issues cannot be fined. Just those who don't parent very well.

Obligatory means compulsory. Why do you think only 30% of parents believe school is compulsory?

Legally, school actually isn’t compulsory, anyway. Education is compulsory.

But it isn't obligatory is it, the 30% are wrong.

What is it then? You tell a 5 year old who isn't allowed to go to the party that he isn't being punished, you tell the 5 year olds who sit watching their classmates on the bouncy castle or with the ice creams that they aren't being punished.

Well, there will always be outliers . Just like you can have kids with 100% attendance every school year that end up in a NMW job.

This is the exact problem with schools: taking averaged statistics and applying them in a blanket one-size-fits-all manner when by definition the children with issues with attending school regularly are outliers. The reasons for this will be vastly disparate and therefore applying “average outcomes” on an “all other factors being equal” basis will not provide a reliable indication of outcomes for a particular individual. It betrays a total lack of understanding of mathematics and statistics.

“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.”

My own anecdotal experience of this is a good demonstration that that there is no “basically zero” chance. My attendance in YR10 and YR11 was 12%. I received no “home education”. My GCSEs were all A*s and As. I have a degree and earn a high salary. My daughter recently missed over a term of school and the school’s assessment afterwards that no “catch up” was required and there were “no learning gaps”, so it’s unclear what they were planning to teach her that term if she had attended. Not much, it seems.

Schools need to focus on individuals and stop treating children like little identikit clones to which their blanket policies are relevant or appropriate. Perhaps they should consider why so many children find school traumatic and are unable to attend regularly and expend their energy and resources on addressing those issues rather than threatening the parents with prosecution for protecting and safeguarding children from the impact of the school’s failings, when it is the parents who have to pick up the pieces for the failure of schools.

Regarding your own child TheignT, there is an interesting debate happening about the effect Covid Lockdowns had on school attendance. Because there is a clear before and after in the data, covid caused school attendance to significantly nose-dive across all year groups snd demographics. And unlike most other markers, it didnt recover. That's the ultimate reason for this attendance initiative by the DfE.

If your child is post- post-grad then their primary education was before Covid. The landscape looked very different then. Mostly the severely absent student (<50%) had genuine medical reasons for this.

The real attendance issues are not these families tho. Children with evidenced medical reasons for low attendance are (unfortunately) now in a minority of severely or persistently absent students. Whereas pre-covid they would be almost all. So the dynamic of how to deal with low attendance has had to change post-covid. Its no longer about supporting those with real need to get as much out of their education as possible (like your child). It's become a focus of proving that many parents just don't parent well. We have to prove that because no patent would willingly admit it. But that's the purpose of the process.

@LittleHangleton You did quote it yes. What you didn't do was quote the beginning of the post which would have added context and remained on track with the thread. What my posts say is that incentivising the children is unfair and illogical. That's what the thread is about.

Whole post was quoted 👇

You were asking how the incentives children and the part helped, I answered that it's mot just the party, it's about far more than that. And do thr debate continues.

There is no need for this deflection from you @Longestgiraffe. I disagree with you and have voiced that, and that's OK. It's why forum boards exist.

I didn’t read beyond ‘maybe they’re off with Covid’ - were 5 years beyond that nonsense. You know the target is only 95% for schools generally? In normal circumstances that’s getting your fired from your job.

I completely agree with you. I was incredibly vocal at my children’s primary school about attendance awards, this was 10+ years ago now. My children all had excellent attendance and were only off school if they genuinely needed to be (as are most children). But my middle child was so anxious, these awards had such a huge effect on her. After she developed chicken pox and missed some school time, she was so afraid of attending the awards assembly at the end of term, she had her first panic attack on the way to the hall and (ironically) had to be sent home as she’d made herself sick. She was so worried that everyone would think she was naughty. To me that’s completely irrational, but to her it was very genuine.

Attendance awards/rewards do absolutely nothing for all the reasons you stated. The children, particularly at primary, usually have zero control over their attendance. The parents who don’t care about poor attendance aren’t going to be motivated by them and the ones that do care are going to be there if they possibly can anyway.