Attendance policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are aged out of the school system, so this doesn't impact me. Still, I agree with others who have asked questions about this policy, especially when it comes to COVID. Has MCPSS articulated a clear policy that if you have symptoms and a positive COVID test, your kid can return to school as soon as the symptoms are better or they are fever-free, even if that's just a few days after the onset of symptoms or a positive test? Are they asking COVID positive children to return to school before day 5 (which is six days after the onset of symptoms or positive test, whichever is earlier)? While I know that Day 1 is not always going to be a Monday, if it is, then a COVID positive kid has to go to the doctor to get a note if the parent keeps them home in accordance with CDC guidance even if medical treatment isn't needed? That seems nuts. You go to the doctor for medical treatment, not notes.

You can’t be serious.

Have you seen a doctor in the last three decades? Doctor’s visits last for about 10-15 minutes and in those brief interactions, they’re either writing you a drug prescription or giving you a note to excuse you for work/school.

Again, this is not new. It’s been this way for a long time. I don’t know why people are acting brand new, or why they’re acting like a school district should allow kids to be absent from school for more than 5 days SOLELY on the word of the parents. That’s nuts!

No, it is different because, before COVID, there was no public health advice that COVID-positive people remain isolated for 5 days. The old advice was fever-free for 24 hours. And that was my question. If your kid is COVID-positive and fever-free, does MCPSS want the kid back in school, even if it's day two or three?

Yes. But they should be masked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

No one monitors this stuff. Be real.

As the kids say, "F**k around and find out" if you want to! I'm not saying the system is perfect and that there won't be people who get away with it. But just know that if you do keep your kids out in violation of the policy, you do run the risk of getting checked by the system. They might not enforce it against EVERYBODY, but I guarantee they will enforce it against SOMEBODY. And that somebody could be you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are aged out of the school system, so this doesn't impact me. Still, I agree with others who have asked questions about this policy, especially when it comes to COVID. Has MCPSS articulated a clear policy that if you have symptoms and a positive COVID test, your kid can return to school as soon as the symptoms are better or they are fever-free, even if that's just a few days after the onset of symptoms or a positive test? Are they asking COVID positive children to return to school before day 5 (which is six days after the onset of symptoms or positive test, whichever is earlier)? While I know that Day 1 is not always going to be a Monday, if it is, then a COVID positive kid has to go to the doctor to get a note if the parent keeps them home in accordance with CDC guidance even if medical treatment isn't needed? That seems nuts. You go to the doctor for medical treatment, not notes.

You can’t be serious.

Have you seen a doctor in the last three decades? Doctor’s visits last for about 10-15 minutes and in those brief interactions, they’re either writing you a drug prescription or giving you a note to excuse you for work/school.

Again, this is not new. It’s been this way for a long time. I don’t know why people are acting brand new, or why they’re acting like a school district should allow kids to be absent from school for more than 5 days SOLELY on the word of the parents. That’s nuts!

No, it is different because, before COVID, there was no public health advice that COVID-positive people remain isolated for 5 days. The old advice was fever-free for 24 hours. And that was my question. If your kid is COVID-positive and fever-free, does MCPSS want the kid back in school, even if it's day two or three?

Yes. But they should be masked.

Lol

Umkay.

Even. Lord Fauci acknowledged masking is just performative. I guess that’s where we’ve landed?

I guess I’ll call an audible on the days leading up to thanksgiving and Christmas. We can’t risk being sick before traveling to see elderly relatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are aged out of the school system, so this doesn't impact me. Still, I agree with others who have asked questions about this policy, especially when it comes to COVID. Has MCPSS articulated a clear policy that if you have symptoms and a positive COVID test, your kid can return to school as soon as the symptoms are better or they are fever-free, even if that's just a few days after the onset of symptoms or a positive test? Are they asking COVID positive children to return to school before day 5 (which is six days after the onset of symptoms or positive test, whichever is earlier)? While I know that Day 1 is not always going to be a Monday, if it is, then a COVID positive kid has to go to the doctor to get a note if the parent keeps them home in accordance with CDC guidance even if medical treatment isn't needed? That seems nuts. You go to the doctor for medical treatment, not notes.

You can’t be serious.

Have you seen a doctor in the last three decades? Doctor’s visits last for about 10-15 minutes and in those brief interactions, they’re either writing you a drug prescription or giving you a note to excuse you for work/school.

Again, this is not new. It’s been this way for a long time. I don’t know why people are acting brand new, or why they’re acting like a school district should allow kids to be absent from school for more than 5 days SOLELY on the word of the parents. That’s nuts!

No, it is different because, before COVID, there was no public health advice that COVID-positive people remain isolated for 5 days. The old advice was fever-free for 24 hours. And that was my question. If your kid is COVID-positive and fever-free, does MCPSS want the kid back in school, even if it's day two or three?

Yes. But they should be masked.

Lol

Umkay.

Even. Lord Fauci acknowledged masking is just performative. I guess that’s where we’ve landed?

I guess I’ll call an audible on the days leading up to thanksgiving and Christmas. We can’t risk being sick before traveling to see elderly relatives.

Source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

Ok, but its never happened. Can you show us cases where the parents have been arrested in MCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

Ok, but its never happened. Can you show us cases where the parents have been arrested in MCPS?

Not arrested, but the mom of one of my kid's classmates had an officer visit her home to discuss truancy. It was made clear that there would be escalating consequences if their kid didn't start showing up more regularly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

Ok, but its never happened. Can you show us cases where the parents have been arrested in MCPS?

Not arrested, but the mom of one of my kid's classmates had an officer visit her home to discuss truancy. It was made clear that there would be escalating consequences if their kid didn't start showing up more regularly.

Yup! Arrest is the last resort. But they will be on your tail once your kid is flagged as chronically absent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

Which school?

And were the kids from affluent families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

Which school?

And were the kids from affluent families?

DCC high school. Kids weren’t from affluent families, but some were average middle class. Some of them might have been low-income, but the I don’t know each kid’s individual story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

Which school?

And were the kids from affluent families?

DCC high school. Kids weren’t from affluent families, but some were average middle class. Some of them might have been low-income, but the I don’t know each kid’s individual story.

White?

Latino?

Black?

Asian?

Was it Kennedy? The data provided compared Kennedy a few decades ago to now, and that area had a dramatic shift in demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

Which school?

And were the kids from affluent families?

DCC high school. Kids weren’t from affluent families, but some were average middle class. Some of them might have been low-income, but the I don’t know each kid’s individual story.

White?

Latino?

Black?

Asian?

Was it Kennedy? The data provided compared Kennedy a few decades ago to now, and that area had a dramatic shift in demographics.

Yes. It was Kennedy and yes, it was a mixture of black and Latin kids.

But how does this change the conversation about whether or not there are consequences for truancy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does it motivate parents? If it’s a hassle to re-enroll, won’t they just let Junior move on without school

The second goal you mention is just about getting around publishing unpleasant data. That can’t be a stated goal.

I’m still confused.

Do you really think a child who is unenrolled from school and not reenrolled elsewhere won’t have consequences?

You’re either too ignorant to engage in the conversation and need to educate yourself before you ask questions so they can be rooted in some foundational level of understanding, or you’re playing dumb to question the policy in a passive way.

I am trying to educate myself. I’ve researched the MD state rules on expulsions, the MCPS attendance policy, and asked here. What education would be useful? What consequences does a family or child face from being unenrolled?

Several posters in this thread spelled it out for you. Even in numbered bullet form. READ.

You should educate yourself. According to Maryland law. Only parents with children aged 15 or younger can be held responsible for not enrolling their children in school. Again, I fail to understand how this policy achieves any goals. Except making data look better, perhaps?

Legal Consequences
Any person with legal custody or care and control of a child who 5 years old or older and under 16, who fails to see that the child attends school or receives instruction as required by Maryland law, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://www.peoples-law.org/truancy

I believe past 16, they will put an ankle monitor on the kid and they’ll be tracked by the truancy officers.

So I think from 16-18, more of the consequences for not going to school starts to fall on the kids themselves and not just the parents, but there are consequences. I know this because there were a few truant kids in my kids’ high school who had the monitors on due to excessive skipping.

Which school?

And were the kids from affluent families?

DCC high school. Kids weren’t from affluent families, but some were average middle class. Some of them might have been low-income, but the I don’t know each kid’s individual story.

White?

Latino?

Black?

Asian?

Was it Kennedy? The data provided compared Kennedy a few decades ago to now, and that area had a dramatic shift in demographics.

Yes. It was Kennedy and yes, it was a mixture of black and Latin kids.

But how does this change the conversation about whether or not there are consequences for truancy?

Since I went down a research rabbit hole, it’s obvious to me that shifting demographics are fueling new issues or exacerbating issues that used to impact a tiny subset…yet mcps is (unsurprisingly) taking a widespread approach that will (let’s face it) unnecessarily worry the good parents while the checked out parents simply won’t care.

It’s not surprising that certain kids at Kennedy are on ankle monitors. Some of the Latino kids don’t even have parents in the country. They are here to work and send money home. Why should mcps perseverate over serving these kids if they have zero interest in school? I hope they actually take the bold step of kicking them out of school if they create problems or rarely show up.

This is a big issue in certain schools…and we know why. But instead of hammering the nail, mcps has opted to use a sledgehammer.