Review NZ’s School Attendance Policy to Protect Child Wellbeing
The issue
We, the undersigned parents, caregivers, educators, and community members, call for an urgent review of New Zealand’s current school attendance policy. While we support the importance of regular attendance and the value of education, the current system is causing unintended harm to children and families and does not address the real issues contributing to low attendance.
Under the current framework, “regular attendance” is defined as students being present for more than 90% of the term, and the Government has set a target that 80% of students will reach this level by 2030.
zero.govt.nz
The Ministry of Education uses four attendance categories:
• Regular attendance: over 90% (absent fewer than 5 days per term)
• Irregular absence: 80–90% (absent 5–9 days per term)
• Moderate absence: 70–80% (absent 10–14 days per term)
• Chronic absence: 70% or less (absent 15+ days per term)
These categories are based purely on days present versus days absent, regardless of whether absences are justified.
Recent changes include:
• Daily reporting and publication of attendance data from Term 1 2025
• Mandatory Attendance Management Plans for all schools from Term 1 2026
• Expanded Attendance Services to support more students and increase provider accountability
• New Education (School Attendance) Regulations 2024, requiring schools to record attendance for each half‑day and respond when students cross absence thresholds.
While these measures aim to lift attendance, they also increase pressure on families and schools, especially when context and wellbeing are not adequately considered.
Why change is needed
1. The policy does not address the real causes of absence.
Children are facing increasing levels of sickness, anxiety, and mental health challenges. The current system focuses on percentages and thresholds rather than the underlying issues affecting vulnerable students.
2. Justified absences still reduce attendance percentages.
Because attendance categories are calculated on total days present versus absent, justified absences (such as illness, mental health days, or bullying‑related absences) still lower a student’s percentage and can push them into “irregular,” “moderate,” or “chronic” absence categories.
3. Medical certificates for every illness are unrealistic.
GP practices and urgent care clinics are already under pressure, and expecting families to obtain medical proof for minor sickness is impractical and adds strain to the healthcare system.
4. Cost of living pressures are forcing families into impossible situations.
Many parents cannot afford to take time off work or seek medical care for every illness. Some feel pressured to send children to school sick, contributing to further spread of illness and more absences for other students.
5. The enforcement approach is increasing stress and mental health impacts.
Daily reporting, constant notifications, and the risk of referral to attendance or truancy services create anxiety for both children and parents. Families report feeling monitored and judged rather than supported.
6. The blanket system does not distinguish between neglect and genuine circumstances.
Families who are actively supporting their children’s education, but dealing with sickness, neurodiversity, anxiety, or bullying, are being treated the same as those who are not engaged. This is unfair and ineffective.
7. Schools are applying the policy inconsistently.
Although Attendance Management Plans are now mandatory, schools still interpret and apply thresholds and responses differently, leading to unequal treatment of families across the country.
8. The numbers look good on paper but do not reflect real life.
Attendance percentages and categories provide a simple metric, but they do not capture context, wellbeing, or justified absences. They risk creating a misleading picture of student engagement and family responsibility.
Additional concerns: exclusion, incentives, and family rights
Many schools are now using attendance percentages to determine access to awards, leadership roles, trips, school balls and other opportunities. Some NZ schools have begun using rewards like vouchers, prize draws, and treats to boost attendance, a practice reported by Stuff and reflected in school Attendance Management Plans. Parents have also shared examples of Prezzy cards being used, highlighting how incentives can sometimes put pressure on kids whose absences are due to genuine wellbeing needs.
This creates a system of coercive attendance pressure that rewards the healthy and punishes the unwell. Children with medical needs, anxiety, disabilities, or unavoidable absences are being sidelined and publicly marked as “less deserving,” despite doing nothing wrong.
Families also deserve the right to take children out of school for meaningful life experiences such as travel, cultural events, reconnecting with whānau, or important family commitments. These experiences enrich children’s lives and contribute to learning in ways that cannot be measured by attendance percentages. Families should not be penalised for providing their children with valuable real‑world learning opportunities.
A wellbeing‑focused education system should never exclude children from opportunities they have earned simply because they were sick or participating in family life.
Government plans to redefine justified vs unjustified absences
Recent legislative changes indicate that the Government intends to centralise control over what counts as a justified or unjustified absence. Under the Education and Training Act amendments, the Government has signalled that principals may lose their discretion to justify absences based on context, wellbeing, bullying, neurodiversity, or family circumstances. Instead, national rules would dictate which absences are acceptable.
This shift risks removing the flexibility schools currently have to support children compassionately. Absences that were previously considered justified may soon be classified as unjustified, pushing families into Attendance Management Plans or truancy pathways even when they are acting responsibly. A one‑size‑fits‑all definition of “justified” does not reflect the realities of children’s health, mental wellbeing, or family life.
What we are asking for
We request that the Ministry of Education:
• Conduct a full, public review of the current attendance policy and its impacts on child wellbeing and family stress
• Ensure justified absences (such as documented illness, mental health needs, and bullying‑related absences) are treated differently from unexplained or unjustified absences in thresholds and responses
• Provide clear, consistent national guidelines so schools apply attendance rules fairly and transparently
• Work with the health sector to improve access to medical care, rather than increasing reliance on medical certificates for minor illnesses
• Explicitly prioritise child wellbeing and mental health in attendance decisions and Attendance Management Plans
• Require that families are clearly notified and consulted before any referral to attendance or truancy services
• Develop a system that focuses on genuine neglect and persistent unexplained absence, rather than penalising families who are already doing their best under difficult circumstances
• Prevent schools from using attendance percentages to exclude students from events, awards, or opportunities
• Recognise family rights to meaningful time away from school for cultural, personal, or educational experiences
• Maintain school‑level discretion for justified absences so children are not harmed by rigid national rules
Our goal
We want an attendance system that:
• supports children’s learning and wellbeing
• respects families’ realities and challenges
• reflects context, not just numbers
• encourages regular attendance without causing harm
• protects children from exclusion and coercive incentive practices
• values family life, cultural experiences, and real‑world learning
• allows schools to make compassionate, context‑based decisions
If you agree that New Zealand’s current school attendance policy needs to be reviewed and improved to better protect child wellbeing and support families, please add your name to this petition.
Together, we can show that parents and communities across Aotearoa are calling for a fair, compassionate, and effective approach to school attendance.
188
The issue
We, the undersigned parents, caregivers, educators, and community members, call for an urgent review of New Zealand’s current school attendance policy. While we support the importance of regular attendance and the value of education, the current system is causing unintended harm to children and families and does not address the real issues contributing to low attendance.
Under the current framework, “regular attendance” is defined as students being present for more than 90% of the term, and the Government has set a target that 80% of students will reach this level by 2030.
zero.govt.nz
The Ministry of Education uses four attendance categories:
• Regular attendance: over 90% (absent fewer than 5 days per term)
• Irregular absence: 80–90% (absent 5–9 days per term)
• Moderate absence: 70–80% (absent 10–14 days per term)
• Chronic absence: 70% or less (absent 15+ days per term)
These categories are based purely on days present versus days absent, regardless of whether absences are justified.
Recent changes include:
• Daily reporting and publication of attendance data from Term 1 2025
• Mandatory Attendance Management Plans for all schools from Term 1 2026
• Expanded Attendance Services to support more students and increase provider accountability
• New Education (School Attendance) Regulations 2024, requiring schools to record attendance for each half‑day and respond when students cross absence thresholds.
While these measures aim to lift attendance, they also increase pressure on families and schools, especially when context and wellbeing are not adequately considered.
Why change is needed
1. The policy does not address the real causes of absence.
Children are facing increasing levels of sickness, anxiety, and mental health challenges. The current system focuses on percentages and thresholds rather than the underlying issues affecting vulnerable students.
2. Justified absences still reduce attendance percentages.
Because attendance categories are calculated on total days present versus absent, justified absences (such as illness, mental health days, or bullying‑related absences) still lower a student’s percentage and can push them into “irregular,” “moderate,” or “chronic” absence categories.
3. Medical certificates for every illness are unrealistic.
GP practices and urgent care clinics are already under pressure, and expecting families to obtain medical proof for minor sickness is impractical and adds strain to the healthcare system.
4. Cost of living pressures are forcing families into impossible situations.
Many parents cannot afford to take time off work or seek medical care for every illness. Some feel pressured to send children to school sick, contributing to further spread of illness and more absences for other students.
5. The enforcement approach is increasing stress and mental health impacts.
Daily reporting, constant notifications, and the risk of referral to attendance or truancy services create anxiety for both children and parents. Families report feeling monitored and judged rather than supported.
6. The blanket system does not distinguish between neglect and genuine circumstances.
Families who are actively supporting their children’s education, but dealing with sickness, neurodiversity, anxiety, or bullying, are being treated the same as those who are not engaged. This is unfair and ineffective.
7. Schools are applying the policy inconsistently.
Although Attendance Management Plans are now mandatory, schools still interpret and apply thresholds and responses differently, leading to unequal treatment of families across the country.
8. The numbers look good on paper but do not reflect real life.
Attendance percentages and categories provide a simple metric, but they do not capture context, wellbeing, or justified absences. They risk creating a misleading picture of student engagement and family responsibility.
Additional concerns: exclusion, incentives, and family rights
Many schools are now using attendance percentages to determine access to awards, leadership roles, trips, school balls and other opportunities. Some NZ schools have begun using rewards like vouchers, prize draws, and treats to boost attendance, a practice reported by Stuff and reflected in school Attendance Management Plans. Parents have also shared examples of Prezzy cards being used, highlighting how incentives can sometimes put pressure on kids whose absences are due to genuine wellbeing needs.
This creates a system of coercive attendance pressure that rewards the healthy and punishes the unwell. Children with medical needs, anxiety, disabilities, or unavoidable absences are being sidelined and publicly marked as “less deserving,” despite doing nothing wrong.
Families also deserve the right to take children out of school for meaningful life experiences such as travel, cultural events, reconnecting with whānau, or important family commitments. These experiences enrich children’s lives and contribute to learning in ways that cannot be measured by attendance percentages. Families should not be penalised for providing their children with valuable real‑world learning opportunities.
A wellbeing‑focused education system should never exclude children from opportunities they have earned simply because they were sick or participating in family life.
Government plans to redefine justified vs unjustified absences
Recent legislative changes indicate that the Government intends to centralise control over what counts as a justified or unjustified absence. Under the Education and Training Act amendments, the Government has signalled that principals may lose their discretion to justify absences based on context, wellbeing, bullying, neurodiversity, or family circumstances. Instead, national rules would dictate which absences are acceptable.
This shift risks removing the flexibility schools currently have to support children compassionately. Absences that were previously considered justified may soon be classified as unjustified, pushing families into Attendance Management Plans or truancy pathways even when they are acting responsibly. A one‑size‑fits‑all definition of “justified” does not reflect the realities of children’s health, mental wellbeing, or family life.
What we are asking for
We request that the Ministry of Education:
• Conduct a full, public review of the current attendance policy and its impacts on child wellbeing and family stress
• Ensure justified absences (such as documented illness, mental health needs, and bullying‑related absences) are treated differently from unexplained or unjustified absences in thresholds and responses
• Provide clear, consistent national guidelines so schools apply attendance rules fairly and transparently
• Work with the health sector to improve access to medical care, rather than increasing reliance on medical certificates for minor illnesses
• Explicitly prioritise child wellbeing and mental health in attendance decisions and Attendance Management Plans
• Require that families are clearly notified and consulted before any referral to attendance or truancy services
• Develop a system that focuses on genuine neglect and persistent unexplained absence, rather than penalising families who are already doing their best under difficult circumstances
• Prevent schools from using attendance percentages to exclude students from events, awards, or opportunities
• Recognise family rights to meaningful time away from school for cultural, personal, or educational experiences
• Maintain school‑level discretion for justified absences so children are not harmed by rigid national rules
Our goal
We want an attendance system that:
• supports children’s learning and wellbeing
• respects families’ realities and challenges
• reflects context, not just numbers
• encourages regular attendance without causing harm
• protects children from exclusion and coercive incentive practices
• values family life, cultural experiences, and real‑world learning
• allows schools to make compassionate, context‑based decisions
If you agree that New Zealand’s current school attendance policy needs to be reviewed and improved to better protect child wellbeing and support families, please add your name to this petition.
Together, we can show that parents and communities across Aotearoa are calling for a fair, compassionate, and effective approach to school attendance.
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on 19 August 2026