APPLETON, Wis. (WFRV) – At their board meeting on Wednesday evening, Appleton’s common council voted to reinstate a controversial truancy ordinance.
“We’re certainly optimistic that the decision tonight means that more kids are going to come back to school,” said Appleton Area School District superintendent Greg Hartjes. “We are optimistic that this is going to make a big difference in the lives of many kids.”
It was standing room only at the common council meeting as both community members who supported and opposed the ordinance got one more chance to let Appleton alders know how they feel about it.
District officials said that the truancy ordinance targets students who haven’t come to school in a very long time and have cut off communication with district staff. It would allow a local judge to choose between a number of dispositions to try to compel students to come back to school.
- Order the student to participate in counseling, a supervised work program, or do community service work.
- Order the student to attend an alternative educational program.
- Revoke a student’s work permit.
- Order the student to attend school.
- A fine up to $500. School district officials have said they would recommend issuing a $250 fine.
- An order putting the student under formal or informal supervision.
School district officials said that if a student decided to return to school, they wouldn’t have to pay that fine. They would only resort to these measures if all other interventions fail.
What’s the longest government shutdown in US history? This one isn’t even close
Alder Katie Van Zeeland made several changes to the original truancy ordinance presented at the meeting.
First, she reduced the ordinance’s trial period. It will begin on Nov. 1 and continue through the end of the school year. She also added additional data points she’d like district officials to provide the city, which will help them gauge the success of the ordinance. Superintendent Hartjes said he’s not worried about the shorter trial period because he feels like the data will support that there was an immediate impact.
At the committee level last week, Van Zeeland had voted against the previous version of the truancy ordinance. Alder Denise Fenton also voted against the ordinance at the committee level, but voted yes for Van Zeeland’s amended version.
Other alders still weren’t convinced that this was the best thing for students and voted against approving the truancy ordinance.
“We often hear that if we can just get one student back to the classroom, it’s worth it, but what if we end up putting five students in a more precarious predicament or five families in a more precarious predicament because of it,” said Alder Alex Schultz.
“This is not an excessively punitive resolution; it’s not a return to truancy court,” countered Alder Martyn Smith. “The dispositions that have been selected from the state list are reasonable.”
Superintendent Hartjes said the vast majority of students who have trouble attending school respond to the wide range of interventions they have in place for students. He said if the truancy ordinance had been around last year, only about 31 students would have been eligible for it.
A district official said that this year alone there’s already been 112 high school students who have missed 50 percent or more school days this year.
Green Bay Nation: Tie goes to nobody, bye week awaits
“It seems punitive, but it is not,” said Appleton East High School teacher Corey Otis. “It’s not a tool to exclude, it’s a tool to include. Truancy is a community issue that requires a multi-disciplinary approach.”
“We have exhausted every possible resource available to these students. I can’t help but wonder if we had one more tool, if it would have made a difference,” said AASD attendance coordinator Stephanie Marta. “Could we have prevented even one more dropout?”
“I don’t know how to argue with those of you who believe that punishing children and families is the answer to this problem,” said community member and AASD employee Katie Reiser. “It’s a clear moral failure of anyone who chooses to punish a child who is struggling.”
For more information about the truancy policy and its implications, please click here.
