Do you think a school should do this?

[KAMLEM]

SO then what do you propose. Giving ice cream to just a few?? That is mean to make a few get some and other don't

What???

 

[JVL1018]

Everyone should get ice cream. That is a ridiculous rule.
My daughter's best friend actually got sick in school during the test, so she missed half the test that day and the following(last) day of testing. It ended up she had strep.
So her class wouldn't get a treat because she threw up during class? Way to make her feel even worse about what happened.
I'd be complaining until the prinicpal changed his mind..and if he wouldn't, I'd be treating my kids' class to ice cream at lunch time, myself- just to make a point.

 

[Rora]

I think this policy is unfair and will only create hard feelings among the students once the teacher explains to the class why they don't get ice-cream.

If I were you, I would round up a group of parents and go talk to the principal.

I'm an elementary school teacher and I know all about the powers of persuasion that parents can have!!

 

[disykat]

I feel so sorry for any poor kids who were actually sick and had to stay home. Their whole class will blame them for missing ice cream.

I have no problem with having only the kids who are present for all four days get ice cream. But an entire class missing because of one sick kid just means that poor kid is in for some bullying.

Missing ice cream because you missed a day = no big deal.
Having your classmates harass YOU because THEY didn't get ice cream = Big deal!

If, as a parent, I found out my child was going to be responsible for his whole class missing ice cream because I was responsible and kept him home, I'd be livid. If only my child missed ice cream, I'd tell them "oh well, that's the breaks."

 

["Got Disney"]

if the kids knew it ahead of time, then they already know they aren't getting a treat. that's how it goes!

If the kids new what ahead of time? That if they did not show that the whole class would be penalized for it?

SO then what do you propose. Giving ice cream to just a few?? That is mean to make a few get some and other don't

this is backwards from what you said first...I'm confussed?

Did you hear this information from the principal, or other parents? If the principal did in fact tell you that only classes with 100% attendance would be rewarded then I would state my displeasure to her. If the parents are the ones who are giving you this information, I would call the principal and get her side of the story. If it is true, I would once again state my displeasure.

If the information is correct and the class had to 100% attendance then I think the principal is in the wrong.

eta: As a teacher I would also state my displeasure. I would also be buying ice cream for those in my class who did show effort but didn't get the treat from the principal because of the stipulation. Remember, the school isn't doing this, the principal is.

first from a couple of parents so I thought it did not sound right so I called and e-mailed the principle back and she did not call or anything. So I went to Brenda the front office and asked and she said it was so and she asked the principle to confirm and the principle said yes that it was true.

We have state testing this week. In our school, every student who has perfect attendance during testing will receive a treat on Friday.

Honestly, the objective is to get kids to school during testing (which is mandated by the state and the number absent can affect your situation). The reward only works if you reward everyone who comes. Otherwise, once a class has a student absent (for example, the first day of testing), the others know they won't get the reward so the encouragement no longer works for them.

As it should be.

have you talked with the principal about this? I can see rewarding every child who had 100% attendance. If this is CRCT or Iowa testing, the school is penalized for those children who do not complete all the tests(and you'd be surprised how many do not.)

I think I'd get clarification from the principal and if this in indeed what he/she said, express your thoughts on it.It is punitive toward the students who DID complete testing just because other kids weren't there for whatever reason. You can do this in a non-confrontational way, without threats. If the principal refuses to back down, THEN you can reasonably walk away and refuse to participate. Good luck!

I did clarify it. Right before i posted this thread. She was informed about some of the parents that refused to volunteer because of it and she said...fine to tell me(she was talking to Brenda) to forget about the volunteers than. She will handle it herself. The Principle is not a pleasant person to work with.

She has been informed that I will not be there because I do not approve.

Testing is stressful for everyone. How about the whole school celebrates and EVERYONE gets an ice cream!

Let me make sure I get this.....the treat isn't for doing well on the testing, just for showing up and being there? And if one kid in the class was out sick, then the class gets nothing? So they are wanting to reward people for just being there, not for anything they actually bring to the table or the scores they get? I find that lame. If you want to reward them for sitting still and taking tests they had to take fine. But it should be done school wide.

You got it!

I mean think about it. This is a school of 1500 students ...6th, 7th and 8th graders. You have kids that get sick, parents where life just gets in the way for one reason or the other. We have large class rooms.....so you tell me what are the chances of having all students show up.

To penalize a WHOLE CLASS for one student not showing up...Oh by the way this also includes if anyone is late for testing...not just absent. Than the rest suffer.

 

[dismom2]

I think it's really unfair, too. Don't people think things through before they come up with these 'rules'? I've always disagreed with the idea that a whole class has to suffer because of something one or a couple people did. And if they are including sick kids in this scenerio, that is totally wrong to punish the entire class when the sick person couldn't help being sick.

 

[DawnCt1]

I don't find the rule to be that unfair at all. It incentive for the kids to be there. They all knew as a group

I see a lot wrong with it. It punishes the kids that showed up and did what they were supposed to do. It sets up the kid, who may have had a legitimate reason to be absent, to be bullied. Wrong all the way around.

 

[Piecey]

I see a lot wrong with it. It punishes the kids that showed up and did what they were supposed to do. It sets up the kid, who may have had a legitimate reason to be absent, to be bullied. Wrong all the way around.

Exactly.
I missed a day of standardized testing my senior year to go to my grandfather's funeral.
The principal, thinking he was clever, pulled me out of class when I got back the next day and said "Your file has you excused for your grandfather's death in December. I need documentation or you won't be allowed to graduate."
I called my dad who was LIVID.
Both my grandfather's died that year. Mom's dad Christmas morning, Dad's in March.
He was more than pleased to come show my principal "documentation"

Sometimes principals need to think before they set rules like this. Would it have been fair to fault my entire class for the fact that my grandfather died? Really? No.

 

["Got Disney"]

To me even if she were to excuse the students that were sick but still punished the whole class for one student that decided that he/she was not going in that day...it is still wrong.

As for if all the teachers mentioned it I am not sure because my son still does not remember being told this. These are teens/tweens who have jello for brains. Telling them something on one day may be forgotten the next.

But still this kind of rule has a big feeling of being off balance for me. And dont forget we are talking ages 10-14 ......not 18 y.o

 

[MM27]

If the reward/treat is for testing, it should be for all the kids that worked hard on the test days. If there was a student that refused to work or didn't take it seriously, then sure I'd make them miss out. To punish an entire class (38?? Really?? ) because one student was absent is crazy.

My sister's school is doing a raffle for I-Pods and Six Flags tickets to kids that have perfect attendance during testing. You only get a ticket for the raffle if you are on time and there each of the 4 days.

 

[C.Ann]

So if a child was sick and the parents were following the guidelines given by the government for swine flu and KEPT THEM HOME. The whole class doesn't get a treat?
.

That was my very first thought.. In a case such as that, the child has to stay home..

He gets the dunce cap.

You did the right thing and I agree with your "dunce cap" nomination..

I see a lot wrong with it. It punishes the kids that showed up and did what they were supposed to do. It sets up the kid, who may have had a legitimate reason to be absent, to be bullied. Wrong all the way around.

Geez, Dawn - I agree with you again.. LOL


As for perfect attendance rewards, they can be given to children individually - at the end of the year - as many schools do.. To punish a child and an entire class because someone was sick and their parents were responsible enough to keep them home, is wrong on so many levels I can't even list them all!

 

[sbell111]

I think that many people in this thread are overreacting. It is important to note that no child is being punished. Some classes are being rewarded, but no one is getting punished.

 

[gina2000]

Totally unacceptable rule. That sort of reward only works in a situation where peer pressure can be successfully exerted . A student could be out for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with truancy (which is why I assume the rule was created). The rest of the class cannot control behavior outside the classroom especially if extenuating circumstances are involved.

 

[C.Ann]

I think that many people in this thread are overreacting. It is important to note that no child is being punished. Some classes are being rewarded, but no one is getting punished.

----------------

I'm confused.. How can "no one be getting punished" when an entire class (or classes) or being excluded because one child was absent?

 

[HeatherC]

I wouldn't even waste time worrying about it. I would make a call directly to the Superintendent's office.

That is ridiculous.

 

[luvsJack]

Its not fair. I never agree with the punishment or rewarding of an entire class for anything (unless it is really and truly a class effort) Like someone said, you cannot control what the other kids choose to do; whether its being at school or behaving during class or whatever.

 

[MM27]

I think that many people in this thread are overreacting. It is important to note that no child is being punished. Some classes are being rewarded, but no one is getting punished.

While they're not being punished, the kids that showed up every day are losing out on a reward that they should be getting. If they are promoting it as an attendance award, it should be given to any student that had perfect attendance during the testing.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

I don't find the rule to be that unfair at all. It incentive for the kids to be there. They all knew as a group

My son missed the second day of testing last year because he had scabies. They tried to make him miss a rock climbing field trip they had scheduled for "make up" day as an incentive for kids to finish on time.

I asked them if they really wanted to give me an incentive to send my highly contagious kid to school on day 2 of testing (I work in a school, and I know that having large numbers of kids out because of scabies would have been a hug challenge). They figured out a way for him to make up the testing and not miss the trip.

 

[disneyjunkie]

I wouldn't even waste time worrying about it. I would make a call directly to the Superintendent's office.

That is ridiculous.

You would call the superintendent about ice cream???

OP are the classes really that large? If so, the parents should be up in arms about class size, not ice cream.

 

[disykat]

Some people are missing the point. It's NOT about the ice cream! It's about setting up some poor kid whose parents kept him/her home due to illness to be the scapegoat for a prize his peers may have valued.

I would not care at all if my child didn't get ice cream. I would care if he was set up by an adult to be harassed by his peers for something that was out of his control.