Thursday, May 23, 2013
 

Excused absences defined (and Disneyland didn't make the cut)

The State Board of Education Wednesday adopted a statewide standard of when a student's absences from school can be considered "excused," and when districts will be required to step in and do something about habitual absenteeism.

Dozens of schools throughout the state have dismal attendance rates. Teachers at Bulkeley High School in Hartford can expect one of every four students to be absent every day. Statewide, 35 percent of students miss more than 10 school days each year and 9 percent more than 20 days. In the lower-income districts -- like Bridgeport, Hartford and New Haven -- the average number of days a student misses is 14.

"We don't know why they missed that much school," said Charlene Russell-Tucker, the state department's chief operating officer.

State law requires that a list of interventions take place when a child has four unexcused absences in a month or 10 in a school year. If students lack reliable transportation, the district must resolve the problem. If they aren't showing up because they are being bullied or because of another personal issue, it is the district's responsibility to address the issue. If the child is skipping and nothing else is working, then they can face discipline measures through the courts.

But the problem is this: These interventions are guaranteed and triggered only when students reach that threshold of unexcused absences.

On Wednesday state board members approved a uniform definition of what constitutes an excused absence to ensure that chronic absenteeism is identified early.

A student's first nine absences will be excused with a note from the parent. Absences after that will require a doctor's note or pre-approval from school officials if it's an "extraordinary educational opportunity." Religious holidays, a mandated court appearance, a death in the family or emergency will also have to be considered excused.

Asked if a trip to Disneyland would count as excused, Russell-Tucker said "That was not the intention... We want kids to be in school."

Russell-Tucker said this new definition shortens the list of what can be considered an excused absence.

A survey conducted by the Education Department of 100 districts shows that pretty much every district considers illness, a death in the family and religious observations grounds for an excused absence. Districts differ on whether excused absences should include doctor appointments, court appearances, college visits and family illness. The definition adopted by the state board Wednesday removes some of that discretion from local boards.

Comments

Submitted by Parents Can Help (not verified) on 06/27/2012 10:06 pm

You have jokes! The State Department of Education has the nerve to enforce attendance when it denies parents access to teacher evaluations and performances. Imagine a seriously low performing teacher in a class and the local and states unwillingness to intervene because they CANT intervene because Unions make the rules! Are you telling me parents MUST continue to send their kids to that class! Yeah right you have jokes! Its so disgusting the way the state treats communities of color and the poor and they get a check to do it! You create an "enabled" system and then when people want OUT of poverty you fail to educate them and deny them access to job training and other opportunities!

Submitted by Speak up on 06/28/2012 11:06 am

Don't worry the parents will lie for their kids. We had one whose parent called them in sick every day from a cruise. Or they lie and say a grandparent is sick and the kid comes back tanned with a new Universal Studios tshirt telling the kids about his great vacation. Talk about seriously low performing parents.

Submitted by BreakYourChains on 06/29/2012 10:06 am

LEARNING IS ENGAGEMENT

*sigh*

This is definitely a dilemma with more than one side. While I agree that parents should have access to teacher evaluations to help govern the process of CHOOSING proxies to educate their children, it must never be lost that parents are ultimately responsible for educating their own children. I would never WANT to out-source that function 100% to a school.

Secondly, I am amused at this: "If the child is at Disneyland there is no chance the child will learn anything..." because, in truth, children (ok, PEOPLE) learn and transform in environments which are engaging and fun. It's a HUGE, natural motivator that underpins the success of every great learning environment.

Lastly, while we're holding everybody's feet to the fire, let me encourage folks to Google "un-schooling", "Teenage Liberation Handbook", and "Summerhill". The sanity and education you preserve will either be your child's and/or your own. After a certain age we are all responsible for EDUCATING OURSELVES.

We would do better to get to know children, help them discover their passions and aptitudes and then simply ask them, "What do you want to do next," even if the answer is "play". We would do BEST to teach our children to never give up their passions and curiosity. That, sadly, is what MUCH of education, both private and public, kills.

Submitted by Speak up on 06/29/2012 12:06 pm

To breakyourchains,

Your last paragraph I agree with 100%, but with NCLB, RTT and the Common Core standard there is even less teacher autonomy than ever before. The almighty test determines everything. So do we blame the teachers or the policies?

Quote I read: education is the only industry in our nation that blames failure on the worker, not the leadership.

We are overcome with test prep, testing, and testing to test the next test. And it will be moving away from obtaining student data to being use to evaluate and get rid of teachers. Who would want to join this profession, one that is demeaned and disrespected daily by politicians and men with money, lots of money. Check this out:

http://capitalroundtable.com/masterclass/For-Profit-Education-Private-Eq...