Comments on: No child left behind (except for those that are) http://www.iqtrainwrecks.com/2009/06/08/no-child-left-behind-except-for-those-that-are/ A Website Dedicated to Information/Data Quality Disasters from Around the World Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:27:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Tiel Aisha Ansari http://www.iqtrainwrecks.com/2009/06/08/no-child-left-behind-except-for-those-that-are/comment-page-1/#comment-1750 Tiel Aisha Ansari Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:27:57 +0000 http://www.iqtrainwrecks.com/?p=202#comment-1750 "Inconsistencies exist in other data, for example students who were reported “removed for non-attendance” but had zero absent days recorded against them." This could happen. In Oregon, we have a legal requirement to withdraw students who've been absent 10 consecutive days-- however, we're supposed to back-date the withdrawal to the first day of absence, so that the state doesn't pay us for the absent days. So, if a student had perfect attendance, and then stopped coming to school and was withdrawn after 10 days, the attendance record would show no absences but the withdrawal reason would correctly be "removed for non-attendance." “Inconsistencies exist in other data, for example students who were reported “removed for non-attendance” but had zero absent days recorded against them.”

This could happen. In Oregon, we have a legal requirement to withdraw students who’ve been absent 10 consecutive days– however, we’re supposed to back-date the withdrawal to the first day of absence, so that the state doesn’t pay us for the absent days.

So, if a student had perfect attendance, and then stopped coming to school and was withdrawn after 10 days, the attendance record would show no absences but the withdrawal reason would correctly be “removed for non-attendance.”

]]>