The bureaucracy tracking school attendance doesn't work

System ineffective, outdated, costly, says Bernadette Cody.

On May 26, I received an email from the principal of my children's school stating that she was obligated to contact the Attendance Board at the Ministry of Education regarding my children's absences from school because they had surpassed more than 10 per cent (18 days) this year.

Summer break starts in June, so, of course, I felt blindsided. This battle may be about attendance, but the conflict is about the system that governs it.

What is an absence? Well, I received two documents along with the email, each of my children's attendance records. In these records, under Absent Codes there is “A” for absent;

“C” for COVID absence; “F” for excursion; “S” for suspension; “B” for RDV (meaning rendezvous); “N” for non-motivated; “M” for malade (which means ill) and, “E” for Excused/motivated, and next to Late Codes there is “L” for Late.

A student prevented from attending school due to mandatory isolation should never be marked “absent.”

The attendance records for my children completely misrepresent the fact of the matter, which is that my children have been sick — plenty. Yet, there aren't any “M” or “C” code absences indicated therein. For “Attendance Notes” in their records, some days have them and others do not.

In one attendance note, they indicated “un seul appareil à la maison qui n'est pas disponible car maman suit des course en ligne,” which roughly translates to, “we are including information about the child's mother, even though it is none of our damn business.”

What is the point of having Absent Codes if the only one ever used is “A” for absent?

These grossly inaccurate records are to be

So, the Attendance Board exists so that parents burn at the stake ...

sent to the Ministry of Education's Attendance Board, which can then be brought before the Court of Queen's Bench. So, the Attendance Board exists so that parents burn at the stake, #sorrynotsorry. The Attendance Board is a quasi-judicial system that can have serious ramifications for parents, and to trust in our public institutions.

Is a school principal obligated to contact the ministry? The short answer is, no.

The Attendance Board's webpage states that: “A school authority may refer a student with a pattern of chronic absenteeism to the Attendance Board if their efforts to improve attendance and re-engage the student in learning have been unsuccessful.

“Where chronic absenteeism cannot be resolved locally, public school authorities may refer the matter to the Attendance Board.”

Not only is this Board extremely costly to taxpayers (over $1M per year), but some school divisions in Alberta have specifically chosen not to make these referrals — why is that?

The previous minister of education David Eggen in 2017 said that “the current model involving a provincial attendance board is not effective and doesn't get to the root causes of why kids aren't in class.”

Moreover, the Attendance Board's School Reference Guide for Student Attendance has not been updated since 2015. The Attendance Board is legislated under section 45 of the Education Act, which is current as of April 7, 2022, of which no regulations or amendments in the Act reflect the current era of policy spearheaded in the name of COVID-19.

The system is regarded as ineffective by leadership, costly to taxpayers, and is seriously outdated.

I hope for an end to the battle between parents and administrators and a return to the vibrant hallways of our schools within which meaningful and lasting bonds grow.

Lastly, I would like to thank all the teachers and administrators that are working hard to keep our children in school and making their best effort to positively affect the lives of our children in Alberta.