this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
6 points (87.5% liked)
NZ Politics
563 readers
1 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!
This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi
This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick
Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It doesnt have to be large amounts of complete non attendance. Regular attendance is defined as attending for more than 90 per cent of the term. Terms are about 10 weeks so 50 days, to be counted in the non attendance figures you have to miss five days in a term. A couple of illnesses can easily knock kids under that, not that there aren't more long term absences for other reasons as well.
On illness, term 2 2022 is the middle of our biggest covid outbreak when omicron got in and all the rules were being relaxed. Attendance has gone up again since then but is still lower than pre covid. Seems cynical that Seymour would pick this period as the end point when these stats were being collected until term 3 last year.
Right, so it's not 40% attendance, it's 40% failed to meet 90% attendance.
Very confusing.
Yeah exactly. I think it gets interpreted, and unfortunately misrepresented by some, as a rate of long-term truancy when it's actually that, plus a whole bunch of other things, many of which are perfectly reasonable.
It's definitely a very poor way to present the data.
Seymour is a dishonest prick so of course he would do the most dishonest thing possible.