I am outraged and bloody speechless!

[catbus]

Hope I have managed to put this link in properly? Herewww.parentdish.co.uk/2009/12/15/boy-and-girl-barred-from-christmas-party-after-death-of-their-fa/

How utterly disgusting..if that were my kids school, they would be out of there in a flash.

Oh and Che, not stupid at all!

I'm pretty sure that it's also reported that the Head said something about the way in which the parent spoke to the admin person...which makes me wonder if there was a 'mistake', or whether they had taken the attitude that the mother had been rude to a member of staff and that was enough for them to stop the child attending.

Whatever their dubious reason, it absolutely stinks. I hope the Head feels thoroughly ashamed.

My DS1 has Cerebral palsy and has several appointments each term. At his old school they were giving out certs. for 100% attendance, I said it was unfair on DS1 who had ONE day off for an appointment in London at GOSH. The head went to look at the registers to make sure that he had only had the one day off for a hospital appointment and DS1 got a cert.

DD2 came home with an cert. last term for 100% attendance and she hasn't been off this term so will get another, but I am not worried about 100% attendance, if they are ill, they stay off.

This is incredible. Everytime I feel I am getting the school thing something like this makes it clear I am clueless.

Are we speaking about primary schools, aren't we?Have your primary school kids ever decided when they go or not to school? I have problems with punishing parents for kids behaviour. But punishing kids depending on their parents decision is beyond me.

No matter the reason. A prize/certificate for 100% attendance is an incredible pressure on the parents, using their kids. It depends on the parents attitude whether or not they take it seriously. It does not take into account kids at all. It is not their decision/responsibility to get on time everyday to school...

Obviously, if you apply this to kids with the need of having appointment (e.g. the examples given of CP, etc.) and you can justify it in anyway, something must be wrong in your head.

I can completely sympathise with posters who are incredulous about this on the grounds that it is unfair to children who have serious illnesses. And I would completely agree IF this was the ONLY way that schools rewarded children. But it's NOT. It's one tiny aspect of it. Are you also going to be up in arms if you DC doesn't get an award for History, or Netball, or Effort? No, of course not. But does a child choose not to be good at Netball? No. But it's OK to reward those who are? Yes, I expect it is. Please try to understand. For some children, this is the ONLY time they are EVER going to get an award for something they feel they have achieved. Please try to understand that it is important. Having taught in two schools in deprived areas (one inner city London, one rural) there are children who are supremely proud of their attendance awards. I think it is perfectly OK for schools and LEAs to reward children for this. Do we have to remove every reward system on the grounds that some children won't meet the criteria? Of course not. This is just ONE way of rewarding children.

Evitwins..etc.
The funniest thing about your last message is that you actually seem to believe that this is 'teaching' something to the kids. I am very sorry, but it is not the people who just follow the rules stupidily to get a certificate/reward who make it on life. These are the sheeps who work for the very successful who would never be arsed about the certificate and following rules like these ones.
Otherwise, what does it teach you?

1. Healthy people are lucky and get rewarded for it (well, we all know it... no need to discriminate even more)
2. My parents mistakes will be paid by me (idem)

The only thing that really maters is the school records and their position in the tables... Kids will also pay the price..

Actually is quite instructive, now I think twice about it

Thats it isn;t it, children are being punished for their parent's actions. I make the decision every day to take my kids to school on time. There are some parents who don't, and the kids are ones being punished

Che - not stupid at all.

THIS is stupid - "Sats punished children for having crap teachers " - where the heck did that come from then?

EvilTwinsStoleSantasSleig... - I agree with you (not read the article, but the discussion has mved on from that). My DS is deaf. This means he'll never get 100% attendance as he has some hospital appointments on a regular basis. It also means he'll never get a music prize, or sing solo in the school's play etc. It doesn't bother me (anymore) and it doesn't bother him (yet). He's in the school's football team, though, and that's important for him. He's found his strength.

If children learn that turning up is important, then that's fine. That might well serve them well in later life when they decide to pull themselves out of bed to go to work despite their hangover or their cold. I am not talking about children with serious illnesses.

YOUR kids may have never decided by themselves not to go to school, but there are plenty who do. Admitedly, my experience is with secondary school children, not primary, where it is far more likely that they would decide to truant.

I don't imagine that many successful adults became that way without turning up, working hard and following a few rules.

As I said before, this is one tiny way that schools can encourage children to do their best. It is in no way the only or even main way that schools reward children.

As I said, certificates are not the issue here. Of course it would be daft to award a certificate of 100% to everyone regardless.

But this was a party in a primary school.

I am all for good attendance. I am all for punctuality too. I have worked in schools where kids regularly turn up at 11am. It disruptive for the class and embarrassing for them. I was a child who took loads of time off school for no good reason. It was a disaster for me.

I even approve of competitive sports days and art prizes. Its important for children to feel they are good at something and be given the chance to feel special.

But this is different. Its horrible. The children who turn up everyday, on time have not really earned anything unless they are extraordinary.

The parents get the up, out and to school. I used to think it was me who shouldve got the blooming certificate that my kids got every year

The party thing is just too exclusive.

EvilTwinsStoleSantasSleig... Tue 15-Dec-09 21:56:02
"I can completely sympathise with posters who are incredulous about this on the grounds that it is unfair to children who have serious illnesses. And I would completely agree IF this was the ONLY way that schools rewarded children. But it's NOT. It's one tiny aspect of it. Are you also going to be up in arms if you DC doesn't get an award for History, or Netball, or Effort?"

I'd have been very happy if dd's primary school had rewarded Effort. Such as her effort to attend school when she was ill and in pain. But they never ever did. All that counted with them was 100% attendance, because that goes down well with Ofsted. If they genuinely had cared about effort, of course they could have rewarded that instead. Ds got the 100% attendance certficate- he hadn't made a bloody effort, he just woke up every morning without pain or sickness and never needed a hospital appointment. I was very cross when he was rewarded- for nothing at all. They might as well have rewarded him for having blue eyes. He wasn't making an effort. But the girl who had cystic fibrosis and still managed to get top results should have had a reward- she never did.

My point being that ds was actually a lazy little thing who never made an effort with anything, he never worked hard, he just didn't have hospital appointments or operations- just because of that little piece of luck he got rewards that other children had deserved far better.

My children have been off school sick sooooooo much this term. If people send children in with d&v - as they do - and nasty colds because they are freaking about attendance levels how is that fair on the majority or those of us with tiny babies/immuno compromised family members at home?

The whole thing is absurdly arse about face and does nothing to increase attendance figures overall imo. It just makes parents like me with 4 DC very annoyed, tired and stressed with it all.

'Please try to understand. For some children, this is the ONLY time they are EVER going to get an award for something they feel they have achieved'

Precisely the problem I have with it. I wanted my ds to know that if he was to be rewarded, he would have to get off his backside and do some work. Instead he got rewarded because I took him to school in time every morning. He didn't learn a thing about effort from that. It was not an area he had any control over whatsoever. Imo reward should be for something you can actually influence.

Eviltwins, I think most people on here have some agreement that 100% attendance is a better idea at secondary - but this is not about a secondary school, is it. it's about a primary school - where the children are not autonomous, do not make their own decisions and are less likely to understnad why they are being excluded from the "treat" and therefore more likely to view it as a punishment. I do not understand why you seem unable to appreciate that.

and tbh for a small child to be rewarded for something he hasn't done- like my ds - when other children who are working harder than him are missing out, is not educational at all; it teaches all the wrong things

the message he took away was, "it doesn't matter what I actually do, as long as I keep my head down and am not one of those disabled children"

how do you think he reacted when he was then diagnosed with the same condition a year later? he'd already learnt that good boys are the ones who don't have medical problems and that the work you actually do is less important than just being normal

"he'd already learnt that good boys are the ones who don't have medical problems and that the work you actually do is less important than just being normal"??? Really. I fail to see how a child gets that idea independently from getting an award for 100% attendance.

I have said from the beginning that my experience is secondary, and that I think that this system works in the kind of secondary school where children are likely to truant.

I fully accept that it is less appropriate in a primary school, and do appreciate and understand that it's a blow to children who, through absolutely no fault of their own, cannot achieve 100% attendance.

But there are plenty of aspects of school life - both primary and secondary, where not everyone is going to have an equal chance to take part, succeed or be rewarded. I don't actually think there's anything fundamentally wrong with children learning to deal with disappointment from an early age. AS LONG AS the school has ways of rewarding other things. And, for the record, I think that rewarding children for effort when they're at school IS far more important than rewarding children for turning up every day.

There a re many many small worthwhile ways to reward a child.

Giving a certificate or treat for 100% performance is worthless and so is not one of them.

Not worthless to the child. Try telling one who's just been given a certificate that it's worthless. Bet they'd be thrilled.

EvilTwinsStoleSantasSleig... Wed 16-Dec-09 16:51:17
"he'd already learnt that good boys are the ones who don't have medical problems and that the work you actually do is less important than just being normal"??? Really. I fail to see how a child gets that idea independently from getting an award for 100% attendance."

Because he knew there would be no similar rewards if he actually started working hard and, say, improved his grades with a whole level in half a year.

Because there were no rewards connected to either hard work or actual achievement or anything else that was actually his responsibility: all that mattered was that Mummy got him into school on time.

Because the headmaster used to give long assemblies where he spoke at length about how displeased the school would be if anyone's attendance fell below a certain percentage- and never ever said that they wouldn't be displeased if there was a genuine reason.

When ds was diagnosed with a chronic medical condition, his reaction was "they'll be angry with me now, won't they?"

Now if the thought had ever crossed his mind that they'll be angry if I wool gather in class or don't do extra reading, I would have had absolutely no problem with that. But the school's take on attendance had left him with the impression that this was the one thing they would be angry about.

cory - I'm sorry to hear that. Sounds like that particular school is dealing with the attendance issue in a very insensitive way. I maintain that it works in secondary schools, but do concede that it is inappropriate in primaries where doing your best should be given far more weight.