As Woodbridge High continues to roll out its new tardy sweep policy during the 2025 school year, students have begun questioning whether the system truly improves attendance or results in extended stress and dread among students amid their schoolwork. Implemented at Woodbridge High to address a growing number of tardies, the policy was introduced in the middle of the fall semester of 2025 on Oct. 26 as an effort to promote punctuality and create consistent enforcement of proper punishment for tardy students. However, despite its seemingly good-natured intentions, some students have argued that the policy unfairly punishes not only students who make genuine efforts to arrive on time, but also damages student-staff relationships, raising concern over whether the new policy and its benefits truly overcome its negative outcomes.
The view that tardy sweeps are ineffective and create problems for students is shared by sophomore Mark Corrigan and junior Will Chen, both of whom say the policy unfairly impacts students who are making an effort to attend class on time.
Corrigan described being tardy swept for arriving only seconds after the bell in the morning, asking, “Why was I tardy swept for just being late by like 20 seconds?”
His experience reflects a common concern among students that the policy treats an unavoidable tardy the same as repeated tardiness among chronically late students, which students view as unfair and discouraging rather than helpful or corrective toward their education.
Students also say tardy sweeps have damaged trust between staff and students. Corrigan said that being denied entry into class made him feel “betrayed… upset and embarrassed,” which could be discouraging to other students, suggesting that strict enforcement weakens relationships that are important for fostering a proper and supportive learning environment throughout high school.
Chen shared a similar sentiment regarding the ineffectiveness of tardy sweeps because they fail to influence both chronically late students and those who always arrive on time. Chen argued, “The people who care will show up on time, and the people who don’t care won’t change,” adding that detention is not seen as a real punishment.
He described the policy as more symbolic such as an attempt to fix attendance rather than a meaningful solution.
However, teachers such as English teacher Kristina Maki acknowledge the flaws, need for consistency, and areas for improvement within the newly implemented tardy system. Maki explained that tardy sweeps policy was designed to improve attendance and accountability while also removing teacher bias when issuing tardies.
Maki also admitted the policy can cause “anxiety that’s undue,” especially when combined with dramatic music that creates an irregular and stressful environment as thousands of students rush to class. She suggested a consistent and daily routine that improves attendance while reducing stress, saying such a routine “would probably help students and staff feel less anxious about the procedures and be able to have a better routine in general.”
While tardy sweeps were designed to improve attendance rates throughout Woodbridge High, contrasting student experiences and staff feedback suggest that the policy, rather than fixing problems, actually introduces new ones without solving the original issues. As staff and administrators continue to evaluate the system, many students believe a more lenient and communicative approach would better address widespread tardiness by targeting consistently late students while supporting the learning of all.