First and foremost in setting a student up for success is ensuring they’re attending school — but many schools are struggling with climbing absenteeism rates. A growing body of literature suggests chronic absenteeism is an enormous problem. So what can districts and parents do to stop it?
Thankfully, there is also a growing body of literature providing a trove of helpful suggestions to curb this alarming trend.
Co-authored by Penn GSE associate professor Michael Gottfried and the Annenberg Institute at Brown University’s Lindsay Page and Danielle Edwards, the evidence brief, “District Strategies to Reduce Student Absenteeism,” takes aim at the growing problem of absenteeism. Meticulously researched and cited, it breaks down the issue of absenteeism and introduces a three-tier strategy for administrators, teachers, and parents to employ.
The brief is part of the Annenberg Institute’s EdResearch for Recovery initiative, designed to provide schools with the data and evidence they need to navigate recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Understanding Absenteeism
Though it can vary from district to district, the brief notes many states and school districts define chronic absenteeism as missing 10% or more of days throughout the school year. The reasons for absence can vary, but among the most frequent are transportation difficulties, student health, school climate, mobility, and poverty.
According to the brief, while missing school negatively impacts students from all demographics and socioeconomic backgrounds, that impact is even more substantial for those who are low-performing, low-income, or English learner students.
And while absenteeism has always been an issue in one form or another, the authors report the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the situation. Between the virtual learning environment, increased concerns over mental and physical health, and difficulty accessing reliable transportation, student absences have been on the rise — and driving those numbers down will be important as districts work to overcome the damage of the past two years.
“Absences decrease students’ test scores, course grades, and on-time graduation,” the authors wrote. “Missing school regularly also reduces students’ self-efficacy, eagerness to learn, and social engagement. Students in classes with higher percentages of chronically absent students have lower test scores.”
The Three-Tier Strategy
In the second portion of the brief, Gottfried, Page, and Edwards lay out a three-tier plan to combat absenteeism on multiple levels. Each strategy is bolstered by concrete examples of ways administrators, teachers, and parents can help students — along with supportive evidence.
The first and most broad tier, designed to reach every student with preventative measures, tries to deal directly with the most frequent causes of absenteeism. It suggests, among many other things:
The second tier focuses on those students who are at risk or displaying signs of absenteeism. It includes:
Finally, the third tier gives concerned parties the strategies they need to respond to chronic absence with coordinated support. This includes:
Strategies that Should Be Avoided
In the brief, Gottfried, Page, and Edwards also provide a glimpse at strategies that have been proven ineffective in fighting absenteeism. For example, creating an expectation of perfect attendance — through, say, perfect attendance incentives — often leads to increases in absenteeism. Schools should also avoid employing punitive measures, as the existing literature has found schools which focus on solving absenteeism rather than punishing it experience better results.
And while schools should explore public partnerships as outlined in the third-tier strategies, they should also be careful in that approach — as some external organizations can needlessly overcomplicate things.
“Partnering with external organizations can be helpful, particularly for serving students facing complex challenges such as health needs,” the authors wrote. “But it can also increase the number of people and offices involved and make it harder for schools themselves to do the work.”