Wednesday, February 22, 1995
My English Nine classes are revisiting the attendance hell of last term. [By the end of the week, there will be a total of 164 recorded absences for my two English Nine sections. This is after only 13 days of the term and does not include the students who have still yet to check in. Thus, between the two classes, I’m averaging nearly thirteen absences a day.] I've just spent thirty minutes on the phone today, trying to make contact with parents of students who are already beginning to miss class at alarming rates. One parent wasn't aware that her daughter was missing class. One student answered the phone and had to translate my message for his mother. I had another student of mine translate another message to another parent. One parent informed me that her daughter had run away and the mother didn't know where the daughter was. I left an additional two messages, "reached" two non-answers, and one phone number was incorrect. One girl first period (the runaway) is already up to ten absences (and today was the eleventh day of the term); at least half a dozen students have reached half a dozen absences.
Last year, Bob Johnston, a science teacher who has been working on his administrative credential (he's the man who will be running for union site rep), created an innovative program for reducing attendance problems. Teachers fill out attendance review referrals on a student when s/he begins to miss class (at four absences, the referral goes home for a parent signature; at six, the referral goes to the office so that a parent/student/ attendance review committee conference can take place; at ten absences, the referral is returned to the office, so that the student can be removed from class or the teacher can be given the go-ahead to lower the student's grade). The attendance review committee is a rotating group of teachers and administrators who come together every day to review the referrals and student/parent conferences, and make recommendations as to the student's future in that class or on our campus. Individual teachers are called upon to serve on the team once per term, and they meet for an after-school committee session. By the end of the term, all teachers have served, meeting with as many parents as are scheduled for that particular day. Teacher buy-in has been good--here was a feeling of empowerment--and we have been beginning to see more parents on campus. Many students have been dropped from classes and there is a sense of movement in the right direction.
Fast-forward a year and now we learn that for that positive impression there is a price: because of the drop of students from roll, our school’s class-roll population last spring was artificially low... so that when the district office looked at numbers for staffing, C.H.S. came up low and without need for new teachers. When last fall arrived, however, and the truants came back for the beginning of the year, we were short-staffed (thus, the need to bring on teachers like Cindy Daniels three weeks into the new school year). The word from the mount for this term is that we will no longer be dropping non-attending students from the roll. This allows us for greater staffing next year (reduced class sizes? I'll believe it when I see it...), but it increases the "‘Fail’ problem" since non-attendees will doubtlessly fail, and it negates the concept of repercussions for actions and non-attendance.
I used to joke with Aimee and Mary that Chumash was the home of no repercussions. It wasn't funny then, and now I wonder if it is even a joke.
No comments:
Post a Comment