AIBU to think 100% attendance awards are fundamentally unfair?

[Nijiko]

My child has severe asthma and is on immunosuppressants, so occasional school absences are just part of life for us unfortunately. Hospital appointments can only be taken in school hours, and when they catch a bug they don’t easily “bounce back” in a couple of days like many other kids do. Even a simple cold can wipe them out.

So yes, I have to keep them home a bit longer if something nasty is going round. Because they need to recover properly and risk ending up back in hospital.

But what’s upset me is the attendance awards at school.

My child has never had one and realistically never will. Not because they don’t try hard at school or because we don’t value education. But because their body is disadvantaged.

The awards were handed out last week and my child just sat there knowing, yet again, they’d never be one of the children called up. To be honest, they knew that they wouldn't before the school year even started.

And honestly? It is a slap in the face constantly for them due to something they can't control. I find that heartbreaking.

I know schools are under pressure about attendance, but I can’t help feeling these awards mostly reward children for being healthy/lucky enough not to get ill.

And I also think they encourage people to send poorly kids in. We all know families who dose them up with Calpol and hope for the best.

Our school makes us evidence every medical appointment. When I was young, if you were sick your parents were trusted advicate. Sometimes it feels like parents are treated as guilty until proven innocent if they keep an ill child off school - to protect them and other kids from getting sick.

Maybe I’m overthinking it. But I don’t really understand why children should be publicly rewarded for something other children, through absolutely no fault of their own, can literally never achieve. It feels like health discrimination. I would much rather see children rewarded for exceptional efforts in their learning.

AIBU?

A friend has messaged me this survey. It might be good to gather more information on it:

Www.clinicallyvulnerable.org

I’m not sure I agree with the idea that if an award is inaccessible to certain children then it is inherently unfair because there are other examples and where would this end? My nephew’s school does an award at the end of the year for best runner, that would never be accessible for the three children in the year in wheelchairs, so could they not do that? They also do a best public speaker award, they have a deaf child for whom that isn’t accessible, should they not do that?

I don’t think every single award has to be for every single person, as long as there are other awards celebrating other things. And I would also say as long as a huge deal isn’t being made of it as I mentioned with the ice cream situation in a local school. A piece of paper and a well done is a non issue.

So long as the award is just a certificate and it's delivered with a "well done for turning up every day" and no telling off for the kids who didn't, it's fine. It's the same as sporting awards being unattainable for kids who are not athletically blessed, or academic achievement awards, and so on.

Kids need to learn that they aren't going to be able to achieve every possible award in life. People are limited by health, upbringing, academic intelligence, social ability, and so on.

I wasn't at all artistic, so I was never going to win the art prize no matter how much I tried. But I was good at languages so my parents helped me focus on my strengths and ignore the prizes that were out of my reach. Life is not absolutely fair, and unfortunately learning this has to begin at school.

The fact that these awards encourage sick children to go to school when it would be better they stayed home is the most troubling issue imho.

Your examples are exactly why schools legally must make "reasonable adjustments" for disabled children rather than just saying “not every award is for everyone”.

With attendance awards, chronically ill children are expected to just accept exclusion from the outset because their medical needs stop them ever achieving 100%. That’s the bit I think is unfair.

I do get that, but again, is that different to a child in a wheelchair who has to accept exclusion from the “best runner” award because they will never be able to compete? Or the child with dyslexia who will never get the “best spelling” award? As long as there is no negative consequence for not getting the award, and as long as it really is an award and a well done rather than needing the 100% to be allowed to go on a school trip/get an ice cream etc

Some schools have a policy for DC only being allowed to win 1 award. My foster son is outstanding at sports. He won his county series for Aquathlon for under 16 when he was only 13, he played cricket at county level, he was cross country champion at his school and played tennis, rugby and badminton well too and swam for his town A team. He wanted to win the sports award for achievement. He won a stupid attendance award and the sports achievement award went to a boy who came 4th in cross country and had only just managed to get into B swim team and did not play in any school sports teams. Her had a few days off so no attendance award. My foster son put the attendance award in the bin on the way out and a teacher saw him and he got into trouble. There were separate effort awards for sport before anyone says effort is important too. You don't get really good without hundreds of hours of practice and coaching.

Going in every day isn’t an achievement if you are healthy! It’s just normal. I think a certificate to take home is a better reward. A cert of appreciation from the school. A bit like star of the week rubbish. My DDs primary celebrated birthdays - if you were late July or August - tough. Nothing for you! No “happy birthday” sung by the class. Schools simply don’t think - they are like lemmings. Some expert comes up with the idea and they don’t foresee the difficulties and disappointments.

I think the difference for me is that schools aren’t generally saying every child should be able to be the best runner or best speller. Because those are specific talents/skills.

100% attendance is seen as something that all children can and should achieve, when in reality some children just physically cannot.

And honestly, if schools want to encourage attendance, I think rewarding improvement or very good attendance makes far more sense than this current all-or-nothing approach that automatically excludes the chronically ill children before the year even starts.

I think everyone has different strengths and weakness's your child may get awards for spelling or maths but may not be able to achieve well in sport or attendance for whatever reason. My child however might never do well at spelling or maths but have 100% attendance and be the fastest runner in the class. Both children should be rewarded. If your school is only giving awards for attendance then YANBU however if they're rewarding a number of achievements then 100% attendance imo should be one of them, that is quite an achievement.

They’re unfair on everyone - health conditions or not. Kids (for the most part) don’t dictate their attendance. Even a family holiday would be the choice of the adult, not the child who is the one being ostracised by the (lack of) award. The awards don’t affect attendance at all, parents that don’t care about attendance figures aren’t going to be motivated by their child getting a slip of paper in assembly once a term 🤦🏻‍♀️ & those that can’t do anything about the attendance because it’s caused by illness (whether chronic or one off) can’t be influenced by a certificate either, or 100 gold coins or a trip to the moon!

It genuinely concerns me that the people in charge of educating children think they are a good idea.

I agree, some things aren't thought through. But this is part of a nation effort pushed by the Children's Commissioner, of all people (the one who is supposed to look after children's rights). They probably should have had an 'equality impact assessment' to consider how certain groups are impacted unfairly.

Sending ill children to school and spreading infections are both harmful, so even if they didn't consider children with health issues surely they should have considered the health risks?

One of mine has a mobility disability that requires regular hospital-based services to enable them to walk. Consultant and other appointments that could not be re-arranged for after school / school holidays (our consultant already co-operated very flexibly to ensure surgery and big procedures were timetabled for school hols) .

Dc managed really well, very high achieving at school, took part ...but the only time they said "I wish I wasn't disabled" was because they missed out on the Attendance Award and accompanying reward.

I took it up with the school and they agreed that as a reasonable adjustment in the name of equality they would discount appointments connected to a child's permanent disability or condition.

Meanwhile his friend's very competitive mother sent her Dc in with suspected Swine Flu rather than miss out on the Attendance Award and prize.

It is unfair. My DCs school thankfully do not do them, my children would never get one because they have medical appointments that they cannot dictate the times of. As PPs say it encourages ill children into school. But it is also something primary school DC have zero control of. It is up to their parents whether they make it in or not. And the ones that need targeting maybe want to get to school, but don't have the means so it is like a punishment for having bad luck in the parent department. Maybe creating rewards for children that are struggling with attendance, specific to their circumstances but the school wide attendance awards are a load of rubbish IMO.

It is great to hear that your school supported your child. But unfortunately if a child was more likely to be unwell then recognising only medical appointments doesn't resolve it.

And, it definitely feels very wrong to reward someone for spreading flu.

I agree. The problem is that Ofsted and LA are obsessed with attendance and schools have to be seen to encourage attendance. Attendance awards are an easy way to tick the box.

I think attendance awards are a poor and lazy solution to a complex problem.

There are children with medical needs who even with the best will in the world will never get 100% attendance due to their medical needs. There are children with SEN who again will never get these awards. Parents who don't value education just don't care. The awards themselves give the perfect excuse to those who CBA with their children to dose them up and send them in when unwell. Some children become obsessed with getting them and want to go to school even when they are very unwell.

In 99% of cases attendance at school is not actually in the child's control.

As someone who has worked in very deprived areas with low engagement with school, I can tell you that in order to actually improve school attendance you need to invest a lot of money, a lot of services who are actually joined up and working together and a lot of time/ energy and consistency building trust and engagement. A certificate and special mention in assembly does absolutely 0 to actually address attendance issues.

Perhaps Ofsted need to reconsider this.

It would be interesting to see if there is any evidence that it doesn't have an impact on attendance.

None of the awards given at school are ‘fair’ as such. Some rely on intelligence, sporting ability or aptitude for a particular subject for example. None of these are under the control of the child. Attendance awards are no fairer or unfairer than these and can give an opportunity for children that can’t succeed in other areas to get an award. The best thing I have read about this is this Wordpress blog by the parent of three adopted daughters, have a read and see if it changes your mind https://disidealist.wordpress.com/2020/12/06/100-attendance-certificates-why-im-100-in-favour/

Nope - still don't like them. If the school's only giving out awards for achievement and not effort then it's not doing its job. Everyone can absolutely have a shot at improvement at something, even if they can never be the fastest runner, best speller or whatever. You can't "try harder" to be well or not have a disability though.

You can adapt achievements to fit ability and make sure nobody is left out.

Plus which, it's always struck me as a bit ironic that "it's the only award they'll get" is a bit of an own goal because it doesn't exactly show the benefit of being in school all the time if it's the people who aren't there who are getting the earned rewards.

Hmmm sending your kids in when they’re sick or have been vomiting to spread their lurgee round the community isn’t a bloody achievement imo.

Kids absolutely do get punished for low attendance. Not allowed to attend proms and the like.

I don’t really think attendance is comparable to intelligence, sporting ability or academic achievement though, because those awards are recognising a skill, talent or accomplishment.

Perfect attendance is ultimately rewarding a child for never being too ill to attend school - or not have a health condition requiring regular health appointments.

And yes, for some children that may be the only award they get - but that’s why I think recognising good/improved attendance makes more sense than an all-or-nothing approach that some chronically ill children are automatically excluded from.

As someone whose daughter did get an attendance award, it was really frustrating to be invited to an awards evening, knowing they were getting an award, to hear about all these amazing kids who play tennis at county level, train before school, play grade 8 etc etc and then your child is one of a long list of names getting a certificate for turning up. Which was a given in my house, unless they were ill, which no-one has any control over.

Agree that they're just daft. It felt like we were just extra people to clap the extremely talented children.

There are kids who are ill, they can't help it.

But there are also kids/families who

• go on holiday
• have random days off just because
• stay up late and then are 'too tired'
• don't get up and get on in the morning so are late

Schools should probably reward 98% or similar and then for children with chronic conditions set them their own target. Plus rewarding 'improved' for anyone 2% or 5% higher than the previous term (or something).

@HermioneWeasley whats the achievement in being lucky to have had chicken pox when you were 2, rather than 5 and in school? What’s the achievement in not needing any medical appointments in school hours (my DD had a nasty fall at gymnastics resulting in months of physio which we couldn’t amend the times of as the kids physio at the hospital was 9-3)? What’s the achievement in not being born with a chronic health condition that requires frequent tests and treatment, often at times outside of your control? What’s the achievement in not having teeth that require braces and therefore can only attend your regular orthodontic appointments which in our area are also school hours only?