I am fully aware that this post might be a bit controversial, but please read it in its entirety before judging me.
It seems to me that the obsession that schools have with improving attendance at the moment is misguided at best and self serving at worst. Whilst regular attendance is of course what are looking for, I don't understand why are we spending so much time and energy trying to get attendance to 'above average' levels when that effort would be much better spent elsewhere.
For a child, 94% attendance means missing about 8 days school over the course of the year. Younger children in particular are often ill and although the expectation on teachers is super high now we haven't quite got to the point where we are expected to provide a medical service. Sending letters and threatening families if attendance drops below 90% is not what we should be doing and the hard line on holidays in term time is a case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Surely there is room for nuance and for building in some flexibility in terms of authorising term time absences? We risk ruining relationships with some of our hardest to reach families if we continue with the current approach and if a child missing a few days school at primary level is the difference between them succeeding and failing we need to take a long hard look at our practice.
I can't help thinking that schools are focusing on this measurable issue so that they can pat themselves on the backs when attendance improves, rather than focusing on the bigger, and more important issues. Obviously we need to step in for the small number of families where concerns arise, but the amount of time spent on addressing low level attendance issues in schools is ridiculous.
I am a firm believer in picking my battles, and attendance, as long as it is not a significant concern, should not be our primary focus in schools.
Comments
Post a Comment