Stamford Public Schools has enforced a brand new attendance policy for the 2016-2017 school year. The changes in this policy are unreasonable, as sometimes students have important reasons to be absent, but may not have the chance to appeal those absences if the board does not agree.

In the past, students were given seven general absences a quarter. If a student exceeded the quarterly allowance, or 28 for a full year, they had a chance to exempt these absences with documented notes for them. Now, students are only allowed 10 absences in a semester course, or 20 for a full year. This is a drastic change, as an entire week is cut off from the total, which is quite different from what the upperclassmen are used to. Sometimes we have personal situations that may not be considered appealable. As a student, it’s not always our fault, or choice, to be absent.This is going to negatively affect attendance numbers as some students are accustomed to using seven absences for family reasons, college visits, or even just sick days. Now that it’s only 10 a semester rather than 14, students will have trouble complying to these numbers and may exceed them.

Exempt, appealable, and unappealable absences have also changed. Now, only certain ones can be disregarded with a note.This has changed as there are certain situations that are not exempt anymore where in the past they may have been. For example, now college visits, appointments with guidance or social workers, short term illnesses and unscheduled visits to the nurse are not exempt. They need to be appealed in order to be disregarded. However, these are all important and legitimate reasons to miss school. The new policy does not agree though. This change is unreasonable, as students aren’t always trying to get out of class; sometimes we actually need to visit the nurse or stay home sick.

We all have days where we wake up sick, then feel better a day later. These “short term illnesses” should be exempt, not just appealable. If the appeals board does not agree to appeal it, it’s unfair as it’s a situation we can’t control. Unless a student is “playing hooky” and completely avoiding class, the above situations should be just as equal as the other excuses on the exempt list.

The one final change to the attendance policy that should be addressed is the rule behind tardies. As of this school year, students are now marked absent after being 15 minutes late to class, rather than the 20 minutes late in previous years. Either way, it’s uncalled for to consider a student absent if they attended a majority of the class. Missing 15 minutes of a 50 minute class is not the same as skipping a 50 minute class. There must be more effective ways to enforce attendance, rather than penalizing people for missing less than half of the class. At least they made an effort to come, and should only be counted tardy rather than completely absent if they still make up the work.

The new attendance policy may or may not succeed in improving Stamford’s attendance numbers. Personally though, I believe some of the changes are unfair. Yes, it should be a priority and requirement to be in school at all times, but under certain circumstances students do have legitimate reasons as to why they can’t make it and shouldn’t be penalized every time.