John MacDonald: What I would do if I was running the new truancy service

Well done to the Government for making all the right noises about dealing with truancy.  

It’s going to spend $140 million over the next four years with one aim: getting more kids to turn up at school regularly.  

It’s looking good. But I’m wanting to see some more creative approaches than what’s been talked about up until now, and I've got some ideas.  

Most of the $140 million ($123 million) is going to go into setting-up what the Government is calling an “attendance service”. So sounds a bit like the old truancy service.  

But what I’m hoping is that it's going to be prepared for this new service to be a bit creative on it, and not go down the old route of stick and no carrot.  

In fact, I’m hoping there’ll be no stick, because I don’t think punishing parents, for example, is the solution.   

So I’ve got two things I would do if I was running this new service. Which might sound like a weird way of going about it, and, if I’m honest, these ideas generally go against how I've thought about school for the whole time I’ve been a parent. But here goes.   

If I was in charge of the new school attendance service, I would start by looking around the world to see what has worked already. And I would try to get schools here on board with something they trialled at a school in the UK that actually got some results.   

Starting the school day later.   

This was at a high school, and what they did is they gave 800 students a late start. They didn't start classes until 10am, and absenteeism went down by 27%.  

So that’s one thing I’d do. But I would go a bit further than that and I’d try to get schools on board with starting at around 11:30am. You’d probably have to limit it to high schools for all sorts of practical reasons, like parents and caregivers needing to get to work and all that. 

And I’d make it an 11:30 start because we saw after the earthquakes how much better teenagers whose high schools had to share campuses and were only physically at school for half the day did in their NCEA results. 

I know it’s very easy to say or think that kids who wag school are all the same. That they’re no hopers, or that their parents are no hopers. But we need to think about some of the practical reasons why kids aren’t turning up as often as we think they should, or not at all.  

And if teenagers, especially, need to sleep in —as we know they do— then let them, knowing that they have to be at school later in the morning.  

The other thing I would do if I was running this new truancy agency is I would encourage schools not to be so hellbent on insisting kids having to be in the actual classroom. 

Which probably sounds like a weird approach for someone given the job of getting more kids turning up at school, but I think we need to decide whether we’re going to focus on attendance or participation. They’re two different things and, if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll probably agree that participating in the education system in some way, shape or form is far more important —far better— than just turning up and attending.  

So it’s attendance versus participation.     

As a parent, I always wanted my kids physically at school because I think they learn a lot about dealing with people actually being there. But if you’ve got a child who just can’t cope with that —for whatever reason— then why shouldn’t they be able to participate in the education system by working from home?  

Why should they be labelled a truant? Shouldn't we do what we can to make sure they get an education? That they participate? Of course we should. 

And if the best way or the most appropriate way for them to get that education seems a bit weird to some of us —those of us who think you can only be educated at a school with

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
Well done to the government. Well done to the government
for making all the right noises this morning about dealing
with truancy. Associate Education Minister David Seymour. He has announced
that it's going to spend one hundred and forty million
bucks over the next four years, with one aim getting
more kids to turn up at school regularly. Now we
will wait and see, let's wait and see. But for

(00:36):
now the Associate Minister doesn't seem to be banging the
drum about finding parents whose kids don't go to school.
But we'll see leopard and their spots and all of that.
But you know, at first blush it's looking good. But
I'm wanted to see some more creative approaches than what's
been talked about up until now to deal with truancy.

(00:59):
And I've got a couple of ideas which I'll get to.
So one hundred and forty million bucks all up, most
of it over four years, and most of it one
hundred and twenty three million dollars is going to go
into setting up what the government's calling an attendance service.
Sounds like the old truancy service to me was it
even called the truancy Service. But that's the kind of
thing it's going to be. Maybe what I'm hoping though,

(01:24):
is that the government is going to be prepared for
this new service to be a bit creative on it
and not go down the old route or stick and
no carrot. In fact, I'm hoping that the government's going
to be prepared for the no stick, because I don't
think punishing parents, for example, is a solution to truancy.

(01:47):
So I've got two things I would do if I
was running this new outfit, which might sound a sound
like a weird way of going about it, and if
I'm honest, these ideas they generally go against how I've
thought about school, my approach to school for the whole
time i've been a parent. But here goes. If I

(02:08):
was in charge of this new agency, I would start
by looking around the world to see what has worked already,
and I would try to get schools on board with
something that they trialed at a school in the UK
that actually got some results starting the school day later.
This was at a high school in northam Tinnesite, and

(02:31):
what they did is they gave eight hundred high school
students a late start. They didn't start until ten in
the morning. I guess guess what happened. Absenteeism went down
by twenty seven percent. So that's one thing I would do.
But I'd go a bit further than that. I would
I'd try to get schools on board with starting at
around eleven thirty. And he'd probably have to limit to

(02:51):
high schools for all sorts of practical reasons. In my
parents and caregivers needed to get to work and all
of that. And I would make it an eleven thirty
start because of what we saw after the earthquakes, and
how much better teenagers whose high schools had to share
care hampuses, and because of that we're only physically at
school for half the day, how much better they did
in Nceea. It blew everyone, blew everybody away at the time.

(03:16):
I remember, And I know it's very easy to say
or to think that kids who don't turn up at school,
that they're all the same, that they're no hopers, or
it's easy to think that all of their parents and
no hopers. But we need to think about some of
the practical reasons why kids aren't turning up as often
as we think they should, or not at all. And
if teenagers, especially if they need to sleep in we

(03:39):
know they do, then let them knowing that they just
have to be at school later in the morning at
eleven thirty. That's the first thing I'd do. The other
thing I would do if I was running this NEU
truancy agency is I would encourage schools not to be
so hell bent on insisting kids having to be in
the actual classroom, which probably sounds a very weird thing
to do for someone given the job of getting more

(04:01):
kids involved in school. But I think we need to
decide whether we're going to focus on attendants or participation.
They're two very different things, and if we are honest
with ourselves, we will probably agree that participating in the
education system in some way, shape or form is far

(04:22):
more important, far better than just turning up and attending,
So its attendance versus participation, and participation wins hands down.
For me as a parent, I would always want my
kids to go to school. That's how I was right
from the start right to the end, because I think

(04:43):
kids learn a lot about dealing with other people from
being at school. But if you've got a child who
just can't cope with that or whatever reason it is,
then why shouldn't they be able to participate in the
education system by working from home? Why should they be
labeled a truant? You know, shouldn't we do what we
can to make sure they get an education that they participate.

(05:05):
Of course we should. And if the best way or
the most appropriate way for them to get that education
seems a bit weird to you and me to those
of us who might think that you can only be
educated at a school with everybody else by attending by
turning up. If we think that, then we just have
to get over ourselves and accept that people learn in
different ways.

Speaker 1 (05:25):
For more from Category Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks It'd be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio