Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attendance Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses attendance rules and a failed motion to erase child‑performers clause
Summary
Committee members debated clarifying a 3‑consecutive‑day rule and a 9‑day semester cap, a teacher visitor cited HB 391’s effect on evaluations, and a motion to remove a child‑performers clause received no second and did not advance in committee.
The policy review committee discussed proposed clarifications to the district’s attendance policy, including how to count consecutive absences and whether to state an absolute 9‑day limit for a semester.
A committee member asked whether the policy should explicitly say that three consecutive days count toward a 9‑day semester maximum. Several members said attendance has improved at larger schools since administrators communicated expectations to parents; one member cited an extreme example of a kindergarten student missing 54 days last year.
During public comment, Jordan Thomas, a teacher, said regular attendance is essential to instruction and noted that, under HB 391 as she described it, students with 10 or more absences in a semester cannot be counted toward a teacher’s evaluation, which she said makes attendance enforcement important for both students and educators.
On a separate agenda item, a committee member moved to remove the child‑performers clause (which allows child performers up to 20 excused days), but the motion received no second and therefore did not advance in committee. The chair confirmed that other attendance items will remain as currently written and that any substantial policy changes would return to the full board for consideration.
The committee then continued to the social‑media policy item and later forwarded a recommendation on EFAB to the full board.
