research on the importance of school attendance

Why Is School Attendance Important? The Effects of Chronic Absenteeism

Chronic absenteeism is pervasive: as many as one in six students in the United States miss enough school to be considered chronically absent, according to the US Department of Education. The negative effects of absenteeism on a student’s education can be profound, and they often carry into adulthood.

The harmful impact of chronic absenteeism threatens all students, but the risks are not borne equally. Students of color, students who live in poverty, and students with chronic health conditions or disabilities all experience disproportionately high absence rates.

Examining the causes of absenteeism and the effects it has on school performance, and ultimately life outcomes, provides a deeper understanding of why school attendance is so important.

Why Is School Attendance Important?

School attendance is a powerful predictor of student outcomes. In fact, irregular attendance can be a better predictor of whether students will drop out of school before graduation than test scores, according to the US Department of Education.

The correlation between attendance and dropout rates has important ramifications that go beyond the classroom. Compared to their peers who graduate, students who fail to complete their high school education are more likely to live in poverty, suffer poor health, and become involved in the criminal justice system.

Defining and Assessing Chronic Absenteeism in Schools

Chronic absenteeism is widely defined as missing 10 percent or more of a school year. Schools generally recognize three categories of absences:

• Excused absences are those with a valid reason and that have been communicated to the school by a parent. Student illness or other medical conditions are the most common types of excused absence; other reasons include religious observances, medical appointments, and family emergencies.
• Unexcused absences, or truancy , occur when students miss school without a valid reason. Examples include deliberately skipping school as well as missing school for reasons deemed invalid by the school, such as oversleeping or missing the bus.
• Disciplinary absences are a result of school suspension.

While these categories of absences are relatively consistent from one institution to another, school attendance policies and practices vary. For example, some school policies make little or no distinction between excused and unexcused absences. Similarly, school suspensions may be counted as absences by some school districts but not by others.

Such discrepancies speak to the challenge of collecting accurate and consistent attendance data, which is critical for education researchers and policymakers. Two sources of US public school attendance data––the Civil Rights Data Collection and attendance reporting under the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015––merit closer examination.

Civil Rights Data Collection

Arguably the most important study of absenteeism data collected in the US was the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), a biennial report from the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) division. The first CRDC study to collect absenteeism data was conducted during the 2013-2014 school year and released in 2016. It marked the first national study of chronic absences and provided hard evidence of the negative effects of chronic absenteeism.

Chronic absenteeism data is no longer collected by OCR (the Education Department continues to collect absence data through its EdFacts Division), but information collected about absences as part of the 2018 CRDC (2015-2016 school year data) continues to serve as a valuable resource for researchers and policymakers studying absenteeism.

The shift from OCR-collected data to EdFacts also marked an important change to attendance data: the definition of chronic absenteeism went from missing at least 15 days of school in a year to missing 10 percent or more of a school year. This change helps to standardize the metric used by federal, state, and local education authorities.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015, a reauthorization of the landmark Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, included important requirements for school absenteeism reporting. The law requires all states to include chronic absence data in their school report cards.

It also requires states to select five metrics by which to measure performance in their schools; four of the performance indicators must be focused on academic achievement, but the fifth is a nonacademic metric. Chronic absenteeism was chosen as the nonacademic indicator by 36 states and the District of Columbia.

Such a broad adoption of absenteeism as a performance indicator reflects growing recognition of the importance of attendance. It also lays the groundwork for addressing the problem. ESSA state plans include strategies for using federal funds to improve attendance through such measures as improved health services, greater family engagement, and teacher training.

School Attendance Facts

Even a cursory look at national attendance data reveals that the problem is widespread. The following attendance facts come from the CRDC that was released in 2018:

• More than seven million students in the US––16 percent of the student population––missed 15 or more days of school.
• Approximately 800 school districts reported more than 30 percent of their students missed at least three weeks of school.
• Chronic absenteeism rates are highest in high schools, where about one in five students is chronically absent.
• More than 20 percent of students were chronically absent in six states (Alaska, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington) and the District of Columbia.
• Every state had schools that reported 10 percent or more of students as chronically absent.

Attendance Inequalities

A survey of national absenteeism data also highlights inequalities across school districts and among students. Many of the factors that are known to contribute to chronic absenteeism––limited transportation, poor health, lack of safety––are more prevalent in marginalized communities and areas of poverty.

The 2018 CRDC shows significant differences in the rates of absenteeism experienced by different races and ethnicities. Students of color generally have higher absenteeism than their white counterparts:

• White students, 14.5 percent
• Black students, 20.5 percent
• Hispanic students, 17 percent
• American Indian students, 26 percent

Asian students are the only nonwhite student population with an absenteeism rate, 8.6 percent, that is lower than that of white students.

While a clear correlation between poverty and absenteeism exists on average, not all high-poverty schools have high chronic absence rates. Some have been successful in helping families overcome attendance challenges by using prevention-oriented approaches, according to Attendance Works, an initiative that advocates for improved absence data collection and policy.

One prevention-oriented program that has proven effective is the formation of “attendance teams,” cross-functional groups that work to improve school attendance by monitoring attendance data, identifying causes for absenteeism, and coordinating prevention and support strategies. Typically led by a principal, an attendance team can include teachers, school nurses, guidance counselors, social workers, parent representatives, and other stakeholders.

The success of such strategies, particularly within schools that are at high risk for chronic absenteeism, underscores the importance of identifying schools at risk for high absence rates and taking steps to address the problem.

Causes of Poor School Attendance

Many factors are associated with poor school attendance:

• Physical health issues . Health conditions such as asthma, influenza, diabetes, tooth decay, and obesity are all associated with higher rates of student absenteeism. Nearly 10 percent of children aged four to14 are diagnosed with asthma, a leading cause of school absenteeism. Asthma accounts for a third of all days of missed instruction, according to Attendance Works.
• Bullying . Approximately 20 percent of students in the US aged 12 to 18 experience bullying. Bullying can include emotional abuse (name-calling, insults, teasing), the threat of harm or actual physical abuse (being pushed, tripped, or beaten), destruction of property, and ostracization (exclusion, being made the subject of rumors or lies). In the US, low socioeconomic status is a common factor in bullying, and immigrant youth are more likely to be bullied than locally born youth, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.
• Socioeconomic hardship . Socioeconomic hardship can lead to unstable housing or homelessness, as well as limited transportation resources. One child in six lives in poverty in the US, according to Children International.

Academic struggles can also cause students to become disengaged with school, which is one of the reasons that students with learning differences struggle with absenteeism.

Developmental Delays, Learning Disabilities, and Related Disorders

A study conducted by the National Center on Educational Outcomes found that elementary school students with disabilities served by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) were 1.5 times as likely to be chronically absent as their peers without disabilities. High school students with disabilities served by IDEA were 1.4 times as likely to be chronically absent. (IDEA addresses a broad range of mental and physical impairments, including developmental delays, learning disabilities, and related disorders.) Students with learning disabilities drop out of school at nearly three times the rate for all students, according to the National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD).

NCLD notes that students with learning and attention issues commonly experience bullying, struggle with feelings of failure, and often find it difficult to gain acceptance among their peers. All of these factors can put them at high risk for missing school.

A report from the US Department of Health and Human Services also links chronic school absenteeism and selected developmental disabilities. Children aged five to 17 with an intellectual disability had the highest prevalence of chronic school absenteeism at 14 percent, followed by children with autism spectrum disorder at 9 percent, those with other developmental delays at 7.2 percent, and those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) at 5.2 percent.

Mental Health and School Attendance

Mental health issues are among the factors that contribute to chronic absences, according to Attendance Works. Diagnoses of anxiety disorder and depression are not uncommon in children, according to the Anxiety and Depression Association of America (ADAA), which reports that as many as 2.8 million children aged 12 to 17 in the US have at least one major depressive episode in a year. Approximately 80 percent of children with an anxiety order and 60 percent with depression are not treated, according to ADAA.

Chronic absenteeism has also been linked to trauma, which can include experiences ranging from abuse and neglect to the loss of a loved one. More than half of students will experience a traumatic event by the time they reach adulthood, according to Waterford.org.

Effects of Poor School Attendance

When children are absent from school, they miss out on consistent instruction that is needed to develop basic skills. Children in early grades are particularly susceptible to falling behind in fundamental reading skills, which can have a snowball effect that impacts future learning.

Children who have learning and thinking differences can be especially vulnerable to the impact of absenteeism because missing school reduces opportunities for any interventions that might be necessary. If teachers fail to realize that they need an intervention, they are more likely to attribute a learning difficulty to absenteeism, essentially confusing the symptom for the cause.

Students who fail to read at grade level by the end of third grade are four times more likely than students who achieve proficiency to drop out of high school, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, citing a study by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Adults without a high school education generally earn lower incomes and experience higher unemployment than their peers who do earn a high school diploma, putting them at greater risk for poverty.

Poor attendance can also have a negative effect on social and emotional development. For example, students who are chronically absent in the early years of their education may not learn crucial school readiness skills (abilities such as critical thinking, problem solving, and creative thinking), and can fall behind their peers in social-emotional development. Excessive absences are also associated with lower scores on standardized tests, which typically assess primary skills and concepts.

While students pay the highest cost if they miss too much school, high absence rates also put a burden on teachers. Making up for lost instruction adds to their workload, and the valuable classroom time it takes up is a detriment to all students.

Addressing Chronic Absenteeism

Just as chronic absenteeism has no single cause, it has no simple solution either. Parents, teachers, administrators, and policymakers can all play a role in addressing high absence rates and improving children’s chances of receiving complete and effective education.

Strategies for Parents

Parents who are concerned that their child has a problem with school attendance can employ several strategies:

• Talk with the child . Conversations are the first step to understanding root causes and working toward a solution.
• Contact the school . Teachers, counselors, and administrators may be able to provide additional information that helps determine what is causing a child to miss school. Contacting the school also starts a conversation that can be mutually beneficial, and it demonstrates engagement.
• Consider an evaluation for an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or 504 Plan . Both programs can provide special accommodations and support for students who are struggling with disabilities.
• Set attendance goals with the child . Creating a plan and tracking progress can encourage better attendance and provide opportunities for conversations and support. Simple steps such as making sure a child gets enough sleep and taking steps to prepare for school the day or night before can also be effective.

Strategies for Educators

Teachers, administrators, and policymakers can work together to address chronic absenteeism. Such efforts begin with gaining a better understanding of the importance of attendance:

• Raise awareness . Training programs can help educators and administrators understand the importance of attendance and the long-term effects of chronic absenteeism.
• Report and study absenteeism data . Identifying students at high risk and the most prevalent causes of absenteeism helps create evidence-based solutions to attendance problems. Identifying problems early is crucial for success.
• Develop trauma-informed practices . Schools equipped to provide emotional support and resources to students who have suffered trauma can address a major cause of absenteeism.
• Set clear expectations . Both students and their parents need clear guidelines about attendance rules and the consequences for missing school.
• Schedule a meeting or visit with family . Reaching out to families personally (in person or using technology that allows social distancing) can be used to develop an individualized attendance plan for families.
• Recognize good attendance . Celebrating students with good attendance and demonstrating concern (rather than frustration or dismissiveness) when students struggle with attendance creates a positive environment that encourages students.
• Implement intervention programs . Some students may require counseling, mentorship, or behavioral interventions.
• Engage with specialists for case management . Specialists who can offer assistance might include child welfare agency staff, mental health professionals, or other social support system employees.

Turning Negatives Into Positives

Parents and educators who do the difficult work of improving student attendance have powerful motivation. Every negative impact associated with chronic absenteeism has a positive corollary for high attendance. Students who regularly attend school and graduate from high school build a foundation for more positive life outcomes:

• Better academic performance
• More work options and earning potential
• Greater opportunities for higher education
• Higher civic engagement
• More developed life skills that positively influence health and economic decisions

However great the challenge, improving attendance directly contributes to more equitable education and better student outcomes.

Empowering More Effective and Equitable Education

Chronic absenteeism is one of the most critical challenges facing educators. Addressing such a prevalent and significant barrier to education requires administrators with exceptional leadership and policy expertise.

American University’s School of Education prepares educators to create equitable learning environments and effect positive change. It promotes modern education that addresses more than just what students learn––it provides students with opportunities to reach their full potential and lead positive social change.

Suited for education leaders who believe in progressive change in education, American University’s online Doctorate in Education Policy and Leadership (EdD) program develops students in four primary domains: systems change, personal leadership, social justice and antiracism, and policy and research.

Discover how the online Doctorate in Education Policy and Leadership at American University enhances practical experience and theoretical knowledge, advances education careers, and develops professionals who transform education.

Education Policy Issues in 2020 and Beyond

Path to Becoming a School District Administrator

What’s the Difference Between Educational Equity and Equality?

American Academy of Pediatrics, School Attendance, Truancy & Chronic Absenteeism: What Parents Need to Know

Anxiety and Depression Association of America, Anxiety and Depression in Children

Attendance Works, 10 Facts About School Attendance

Attendance Works, “Data Matters: Using Chronic Absence to Accelerate Action for Student Success”

Children International, Child Poverty in the U.S. Attendance Works, “Mapping the Early Attendance Gap”

The Classroom, “The Effects of Excessive Absenteeism in Schools”

Economic Policy Institute, “Student Absenteeism: Who Misses School and How Missing School Matters for Performance”

National Center for Learning Disabilities, “The State of LD: Introduction”

National Center on Educational Outcomes, “Students With Disabilities & Chronic Absenteeism”

National Conference of State Legislatures, “Pre-Kindergarten-Third Grade Literacy”

PACER Center, “School Attendance Makes a Difference”

Stopbullying.gov, Facts About Bullying

Understood, “Chronic Absenteeism: What You Need to Know”

US Department of Education, 2017–18 Civil Rights Data Collection: General Overview, Changes, and List of Data Elements

US Department of Education, “Chronic Absenteeism in the Nation’s Schools”

US Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Protecting Students With Disabilities

US Department of Health and Human Services, National Health Statistics Reports, “Chronic School Absenteeism Among Children With Selected Developmental Disabilities: National Health Interview Survey, 2014–2016”

Waterford.org, “What Your School Needs to Know About Trauma-Informed Practices”

Request Information

Disclaimer » Advertising

• HealthyChildren.org

• Previous Article
• Next Article

Statement of the Problem

What is chronic absenteeism, why does chronic absenteeism matter, causes of school absenteeism, evidence for physical and mental health interventions to improve school attendance, infection prevention, school nurses, school-based health centers, mental health care, school policies and programs, parent interventions, coordinated school health, recommendations, additional resources, organizations addressing school attendance, links to resources to share with patients and parents, lead authors, council on school health executive committee, 2017–2018, former executive committee members, consultants, former liaisons, the link between school attendance and good health.

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• CME Quiz Close Quiz
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Mandy A. Allison , Elliott Attisha , COUNCIL ON SCHOOL HEALTH , Marc Lerner , Cheryl Duncan De Pinto , Nathaniel Savio Beers , Erica J. Gibson , Peter Gorski , Chris Kjolhede , Sonja C. O’Leary , Heidi Schumacher , Adrienne Weiss-Harrison; The Link Between School Attendance and Good Health. Pediatrics February 2019; 143 (2): e20183648. 10.1542/peds.2018-3648

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

More than 6.5 million children in the United States, approximately 13% of all students, miss 15 or more days of school each year. The rates of chronic absenteeism vary between states, communities, and schools, with significant disparities based on income, race, and ethnicity. Chronic school absenteeism, starting as early as preschool and kindergarten, puts students at risk for poor school performance and school dropout, which in turn, put them at risk for unhealthy behaviors as adolescents and young adults as well as poor long-term health outcomes. Pediatricians and their colleagues caring for children in the medical setting have opportunities at the individual patient and/or family, practice, and population levels to promote school attendance and reduce chronic absenteeism and resulting health disparities. Although this policy statement is primarily focused on absenteeism related to students’ physical and mental health, pediatricians may play a role in addressing absenteeism attributable to a wide range of factors through individual interactions with patients and their parents and through community-, state-, and federal-level advocacy.

Chronic absenteeism broadly refers to missing too much school for any reason, including excused and unexcused absences as well as suspensions. The US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights has used a definition of missing 15 or more days over the course of a school year. 1 Most researchers and a growing number of states have defined chronic absenteeism as missing 10% (or around 18 days) of the entire school year. Some organizations suggest using 10%, because it promotes earlier identification of poor attendance throughout the school year. For example, identifying students who have missed just 2 days in the first month of school predicts chronic absence throughout the year. 2  

Chronic absence is different than truancy. The definition of truancy also varies but usually refers to when a student willfully misses school, and the absence is “unexcused.” 3 Although students who are truant may be chronically absent, focusing solely on truancy may miss those students who miss excessive amounts of school for “excused” reasons. Regardless of whether absences are unexcused or excused, chronic absenteeism typically results in poor academic outcomes and is linked to poor health outcomes.

Factors such as poverty, unstable housing conditions, poor parental health, and racial or ethnic minority status are associated with poor child health outcomes and are known in the medical and public health communities as social determinants of health. 4 , – 6 Students living in poverty are more likely than students from higher-income families to be chronically absent from school. 7 , 8 Factors associated with chronic absenteeism include poorer overall health, 9 , 10 unstable housing conditions, 11 transportation difficulties, and exposure to violence. 12 Students who change schools within the school year are also more likely to experience absenteeism. 13 In addition, youth may be called on to care for sick family members or stay home with younger siblings when a parent or primary caregiver is sick or cannot take time off work, and this is more likely to occur among low-income families. 14 Finally, authors of some studies have found that students from racial and ethnic minority groups and those who are English language learners are more likely to be chronically absent than students who are not in these groups. 1  

Children with a history of maltreatment or exposure to major trauma, such as witnessing domestic violence or experiencing a natural disaster, are more likely than those without these exposures to experience absenteeism, truancy, school suspension, and school dropout. 15 , – 17 These children are also more likely to experience other risk factors for chronic absenteeism, including poor mental and behavioral health, poverty, homelessness, and frequent school changes. 15 , 16 , 18 Children who are living in foster care are more likely to transfer schools within a year compared with the general school population; however, this effect is mitigated among children with more stable (3 months or longer) foster care placements. 16 Although reliable data are lacking regarding the effect of immigrant or refugee status on school attendance, immigrant and refugee children are likely to have 1 or more risk factors for poor school outcomes, including poverty, racial or ethnic minority status, and exposure to major trauma. 17 , 19  

Chronic absenteeism can occur as early as preschool and kindergarten and has been shown to be related to future chronic absenteeism, grade retention, and poor academic achievement, particularly for social skills and reading. 3 , 8 , 20 , 21 Among elementary school students, absenteeism is highest in kindergarten and first grade, then decreases until middle school. At least 10% of kindergarten and first-grade students miss a month or more of the school year. 21 Absenteeism tends to increase again in middle school and high school, with an estimated 19% of all high school students being chronically absent. 1 A national map of chronic absenteeism based on the US Department of Education’s 2013–2014 Civil Rights Data Collection reveals wide geographic variation in chronic absenteeism and describes variations on the basis of race and ethnicity, with African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and Pacific Islander students experiencing higher rates of chronic absenteeism than their white and Asian American peers. 22  

Students with poor attendance score lower than their peers who attend school regularly on national skills assessments, regardless of race or ethnicity. 3 Chronic absenteeism can be a better predictor of school failure than test scores. In 1 study, students with high test scores who missed at least 2 weeks of school during the semester were more likely to have failing grades than students with low test scores who regularly attended school. 23 Chronic absenteeism as early as sixth grade is predictive of dropping out of school. 3  

The literature reveals that poor school performance is associated with poor adult health outcomes. Compared with adults with higher educational attainment, those with low educational attainment are more likely to be unemployed or work at a part-time or lower-paying job. 24 Those with lower educational attainment are less likely to report having a fulfilling job, feeling that they have control over their lives, and feeling that they have high levels of social support. 24 , 25 This lack of control and social support is thought to be associated with poor health attributable to difficulty adhering to healthy behaviors, psychological processes such as depression, and biological processes such as increased inflammation and reduced immune system function. 26 Adults with lower educational attainment are also more likely to smoke and less likely to exercise, which are directly linked to poor health outcomes. 24 , 25 Not earning a high school diploma is associated with increased mortality risk or lower life expectancy. 27 Conversely, obtaining advanced degrees and additional years of education are associated with a reduced mortality risk. 27 Over the past 20 years, disparities in mortality rates based on educational attainment are worsening for preventable causes of death. 28  

Chronic absenteeism is associated with engaging in health risk behaviors, including smoking cigarettes or marijuana, alcohol and other drug use, and risky sexual behavior, such as having 4 or more sexual partners. 29 For every year a student delays alcohol or drug use, his or her odds of regular school attendance in subsequent quarters increase. 30 Students’ experiences of teenage pregnancy, violence, unintentional injury, and suicide attempts are associated with chronic absenteeism. 31 , – 33 Roughly 30% to 40% of female teenage dropouts are mothers, with teenage pregnancy being the number 1 cause of high school dropout for adolescent female students. 34 Poor school attendance is also associated with juvenile delinquency; in 1 study of youth in Mississippi from 2003 to 2013, authors found that those with chronic absenteeism had 3.5-times higher odds of being arrested or referred to the juvenile justice system. 35  

Students may be frequently absent from school for a wide variety of reasons. In the publication, “The Importance of Being in School: A Report on Absenteeism in the Nation’s Public Schools,” Balfanz and Byrnes 36 describe 3 broad categories of causes: “(1) students who cannot attend school due to illness, family responsibilities, housing instability, the need to work or involvement with the juvenile justice system; (2) students who will not attend school to avoid bullying, unsafe conditions, harassment and embarrassment; and (3) students who do not attend school because they, or their parents, do not see the value in attending school, they have something else they would rather do, or nothing stops them from skipping school.” 36 An additional category (ie, “myths”) is also thought to cause problem absenteeism. Myths include when students and their families do not realize that missing just 2 days a month can be a problem, think that it is a problem only if absences are unexcused, or do not think absences are a problem for younger children in preschool through grade school. 14 Finally, school suspension and expulsion, as early as preschool, have increasingly been identified as causes of chronic absenteeism that disproportionately affect African American students and students with emotional and behavioral disorders and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. 37 , – 42  

Most studies of health-related causes of school absence have been conducted by authors focusing on a specific health condition and determining whether that condition is associated with missing school. Common health conditions that have been associated with school absenteeism include influenza infection, 43 , 44 group A streptococcal pharyngitis, 45 gastroenteritis, 46 fractures, 47 , – 49 poorly controlled asthma, 50 , – 54 type 1 diabetes mellitus, 55 chronic fatigue, 56 , 57 chronic pain 58 , – 62 (including headaches and abdominal pain), seizures, 63 poor oral health, 64 , – 67 dental pain, 68 , 69 and obesity. 70 , – 73 Experienced clinicians know that mental health conditions may present with physical health complaints, including some of those listed above that have been associated with frequent absences. Few studies have been conducted to identify groups of children with higher absenteeism and lower absenteeism and determine which health conditions are most prevalent among those with higher absenteeism. 74 Therefore, it is a challenge to clearly define which health conditions cause more absenteeism than others. In addition, although more data are needed, the data that exist and the authors’ clinical knowledge suggest that the most common health-related causes of school absenteeism likely vary among communities.

Although occasional absences attributable to health conditions can be expected, absences can quickly add up and lead to chronic absenteeism if a child experiences multiple health conditions, unrecognized or undertreated conditions, or lack of access to care. Absenteeism attributable to physical health conditions can be compounded by the presence of mental or behavioral health conditions and socioeconomic factors.

Children with disabilities are more likely to be chronically absent than children without disabilities. 1 Similarly, children and youth with special health care needs tend to have more school absences than children without. 75 , – 77 School performance, including absenteeism, of children and youth with special health care needs has been shown to be affected by risk and protective factors at the child, family, and system levels (eg, socioeconomic factors, the presence or absence of care coordination, and school climate and accommodations). 75 , 76 , 78 , – 80 Children with moderate-to-severe autism spectrum disorder may be at particular risk for disruptive behaviors that affect their own and other students’ learning. Students with autism spectrum disorder who display disruptive behaviors at school may be more likely to be excluded or absent from school. 81 , 82  

School absenteeism has been associated with mental health conditions and substance use disorders. 83 , – 86 Longitudinal cohort studies have revealed that conduct disorder and depressive symptoms can lead to frequent absenteeism and, conversely, that frequent absenteeism can lead to conduct disturbances and depressive symptoms. 87 Youth who are truant, defined as willfully refusing to attend school, are more likely than youth who attend school regularly to be diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, depression, and tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana abuse.

Studies have been used to examine school absenteeism by using a socioecologic model considering individual-, family-, and school-level factors. Authors of these studies have found that individual factors (such as hyperactivity, conduct problems, and poor perceived health), family factors (such as low maternal education and high levels of unemployment), and school factors (such as not feeling safe or not feeling treated with respect at school) all contributed to students’ poor attendance. 88 Issues that are likely to be brought up during a visit to a health care provider include bullying, gender identity and sexuality, and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). In-person and electronic bullying have been shown to be associated with school absenteeism. 89 Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning youth have been shown to be at risk for poor school connectedness, and poor school connectedness is a risk for poor attendance. 90 Finally, students with higher numbers of ACEs are more likely to have chronic absenteeism than students with fewer ACEs. 91  

Many organizations are making multidisciplinary efforts to promote school attendance at community, state, and national levels. Although the body of evidence about effective interventions to improve school attendance is growing, high-quality evaluation has been limited by the lack of routine measurement of chronic absenteeism and differences in how schools and local educational agencies measure and define absenteeism and attendance. 36 Several national organizations and collaborations are working to promote school attendance by bringing together stakeholders from diverse sectors, including education, law enforcement, juvenile justice, public health, and health care. Summaries of additional evidence and information about strategies to promote school attendance and address chronic absenteeism are available from these organizations and are listed in the Additional Resources section below.

Interventions used to improve hand hygiene practices in schools include increased frequency of hand-washing and use of hand sanitizers. It is suggested in a 2016 review of 18 randomized controlled trials that hand hygiene interventions can be used to promote good hand hygiene practices among children and school staff and can be used to reduce the incidence of respiratory tract illness symptoms, symptoms attributable to influenza, and school absenteeism. 92 Evidence was mixed for hand hygiene interventions to reduce absenteeism attributable to gastrointestinal tract illness. 92 The effects of school-based infection prevention measures have been best studied for influenza. In addition to studies of hand hygiene interventions, 93 school-located influenza vaccination programs have been shown to reduce school absenteeism during influenza season. 94 Finally, school immunization requirements have been shown to increase immunization coverage in the community, and high levels of coverage are necessary for the prevention of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases that could lead to school absenteeism. 95  

School nurses play a significant role in student success and attendance. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the National Association of School Nurses recommend a minimum of 1 full-time professional school nurse in every school, recognizing that the ideal nurse-to-student ratio varies depending on the needs of the student population. 96 , 97 Healthy People 2020 includes goals to have a school nurse-to-student ratio of 1:750 in elementary and secondary schools. 98 School nurses have the expertise to identify and intervene on health issues that may affect the learning environment and are critical team members for ensuring that students’ individualized education programs, 504 plans, or health care plans are appropriately designed and implemented. 96 , 97 , 99 Given the complexity of studying nursing services in the school setting and the paucity of research funding and researchers studying school nursing services, data regarding the effect of school nurses on school attendance are limited. One study revealed that 95% of students seen by a school nurse for illness or injury are able to return to class compared with 82% of students seen by an unlicensed school employee. 100 Studies have also revealed that the addition of full-time school nurses reduces illness-related absenteeism among children with asthma compared with children with asthma in schools with part-time school nurses. 101 , 102 One literature review revealed that school nurses can improve attendance among students with chronic absenteeism and that lower nurse-to-student ratios were associated with improved school-level attendance rates. 103 Many schools have nurse coverage only part-time, and some schools do not have nurse coverage at all 104 ; therefore, a health aide or other school personnel may provide some school health services. The services provided by health aides or other school personnel are essential when a nurse is not available, but these other providers typically do not have nursing training.

School-based health centers (SBHCs) have been shown to improve education outcomes, including grade point average and high school graduation, 105 and have been recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force to improve both education and health outcomes in low-income communities. 106 SBHCs provide health services to students who otherwise may have been sent home or missed school because of illnesses and injuries or attending medical appointments for management of chronic health problems. School-based health services can include preventive services, dental services, and mental or behavioral health services. 107 Research has shown SBHCs can reduce absenteeism. Authors of a study of SBHC users in Seattle found that those who used the clinic for medical purposes had a significant increase in attendance over nonusers. 108 , 109 African American male SBHC users were 3 times more likely to stay in school than their peers who did not use the SBHC. Authors of 2 studies in New York found that students enrolled in SBHCs had more time in class, better attendance, and fewer hospitalizations attributable to asthma. 110 , 111 Authors of another study found a 50% decrease in absenteeism and 25% decrease in tardiness for high school students who received school-based mental health services. 112 Overall, SBHCs have been shown to improve school attendance for students who use SBHCs for physical and mental health care, with greater improvement for those using SBHCs for physical health. 108 , 110 , 113  

Authors of a recent review of children’s mental health services provided in schools or in other community-based or clinic settings found that educational outcomes, including school attendance, are infrequently measured. 114 The authors of this review did suggest that mental health treatment was associated with improved overall educational outcomes for children. Investigators found that providing cognitive behavioral therapy for students identified with “school refusing” can improve attendance as well as anxiety and depressive symptoms. 115 , 116 “Trauma-informed schools” are schools in which the adults in the school community are prepared to recognize and respond to those who have been affected by trauma. 117 These schools are focused on the life experiences of a student and how the experiences may affect the student’s behavior and performance at school. In addition, these schools provide individual mental health interventions for students and/or link students and families to services in the community. Although research in this area is new and ongoing, a trauma-informed approach at schools appears to reduce school suspensions and expulsions and improve attendance and school performance. 117 Overall, more evidence is needed, specifically regarding the effectiveness of school-based mental health services and trauma-informed approaches for improving school attendance. 118 , 119  

Policies that promote a positive school climate can promote attendance. 120 As defined by the National School Climate Center, “School climate refers to the quality and character of school life. School climate is based on patterns of students’, parents’ and school personnel’s experience of school life and reflects norms, goals, values, interpersonal relationships, teaching and learning practices, and organizational structures.” 121 The concepts of school climate and school connectedness are closely related, and research reveals that students who feel a connection with their school are more likely to attend and less likely to engage in risky behaviors. 32 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has identified specific strategies to improve school connectedness. 122 The CDC also provides technical guidance regarding prevention of youth violence, including bullying, for schools and communities. This guidance suggests strategies including universal school-based programs for strengthening youth skills, connecting youth to caring adults and activities through mentoring and after-school programs, and creating protective community environments including a positive school climate. It is suggested in evidence that these strategies can be used to reduce youth violence and, in turn, improve school connectedness, attendance, and academic success. 123 Although many of these strategies are directed toward education professionals in the schools, they include engaging with community partners such as health care professionals. Some researchers suggest rewarding students for good attendance with parties, gift certificates, or other types of special recognition results in higher attendance rates. 124  

Schools that communicate effectively with all parents, regardless of language or culture, provide parents with a specific school contact person who can address their questions and concerns, and provide workshops about school attendance for parents have higher attendance rates. 124 , 125 Strong parental monitoring and parental involvement (eg, when a parent knows whether his or her child is attending school) are related to lower levels of delinquency, which is associated to better school attendance. 126 In 1 study conducted in 2014–2015 among students in kindergarten through 11th grade in Philadelphia, authors indicated that simply informing parents of their children’s absences from school can help reduce subsequent absenteeism; this may be partly because parents have misbeliefs about how much their child has been absent. 14 , 127 Schools that build strong partnerships with families and the community have shown improved student attendance. 125 In addition to school nurses and other members of the school health team, school counselors can play a key role in developing these partnerships. 128 , 129  

The CDC’s Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model provides a framework for health and educational professionals to promote students’ health and academic achievement. 130 , 131 The components of this model are health education; physical education and physical activity; nutrition environment and services; health services; counseling, psychological, and social services; social and emotional climate; physical environment; employee wellness; family engagement; and community involvement. Although not all of these components have been studied in relation to school attendance, authors of a recent comprehensive summary of the literature indicate that each component plays a role in improving children’s academic performance. 132 Aspects of nutrition services (breakfast at school); health services (nursing services); counseling, psychological, and social services (school-based mental health care); social and emotional school climate (school connectedness); physical environment (full-spectrum lighting, reduction of physical threats, indoor air quality); family engagement; and community involvement have all been associated with improved school attendance. 132  

Pediatricians could address school attendance in their office-based practices and communities and/or states or nationally as advocates using a tiered approach. The office-based approaches could include members of the health care team, such as front office staff, medical assistants, nurses, or care coordinators, to reduce the burden on the pediatrician.

These office-based and advocacy approaches promote school attendance for all youth.

Office-Based

Routinely ask at preventive care visits and sick visits about the number of absences a student has experienced. Consider adding questions about the number of missed school days in the previous month and the name of the school each patient is currently attending in templates in the paper or electronic medical record;

Encourage parents to bring copies of their child’s report card or share data available from their child’s online school information system during preventive visits. These data sources usually include information about school absences and tardiness;

Praise patients and caregivers when patients are regularly attending school, meaning they miss no more than a day per month on average;

Talk about the effects of school absences on school performance and future wellness. Talk about how absences can add up. Stress the value of developing strong attendance habits as early as preschool;

Support parents in addressing barriers to attendance;

Ask families of children with chronic health issues, such as asthma, allergies, and seizures, if they have an action plan at school. Help complete school action plans so that families feel secure sending their children to school. When needed, work with the school nurse to adjust the action plan when there is a change in a patient’s condition. Some states and national organizations or foundations have developed standardized forms for asthma, 133 allergy, 134 and seizure action plans 135 ;

Encourage families to share their concerns about their children’s health with their school nurse;

Assist families in documenting and interpreting their children’s medical needs or disability for an individualized education program or 504 plan to help them establish services to optimize learning opportunities 99 , 136 ;

Promote school attendance by using handouts, posters, or videos in your waiting area (see links to resources below), working with community partners (eg, during September Attendance Awareness Month campaigns: http://awareness.attendanceworks.org/ ), and communicating via your practice Web site or social media;

Educate yourself and your office staff about the appropriate and inappropriate reasons to exclude a child from school. Additional information about appropriate school inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in the following publications from the AAP: Managing Infectious Disease in Child Care and Schools: A Quick Reference Guide 137 and the chapter on school health in the Red Book: 2015 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases 138 ;

Provide firm guidance on when a child should stay home if sick and how to avoid absences from minor illness or anxiety (links to resource below);

Learn about resources in the community and connect families with resources that can improve the well-being of the entire family (eg, family counseling, food pantries, housing assistance) as described in more detail in the “Poverty and Child Health in the United States” policy statement 139 ; and

Routinely ask about whether your patients have experienced out-of-school suspension or expulsion and assist patients and families affected by suspension and expulsion (more detail in the “Out-of-School Suspension and Expulsion” policy statement). 42  

Population-Based

Pediatricians are encouraged to be advocates and supporters of children’s health. Available opportunities may include the following:

Work with AAP chapter leaders to advocate at the school, school district, state school board, and state legislative levels for policies and interventions known to promote school attendance. These interventions can include policies and approaches that promote a positive school climate and avoid suspension and expulsion. 42 , 121 Advocate for funding to ensure adequate numbers of school support personnel, including school nurses and school counselors, and for school-based medical, oral, and behavioral health services 96 , 140 ;

Encourage and collaborate with community leaders (faith leaders, public officials, businesses) to develop and deliver consistent and coordinated community-specific and culturally salient messages that inform the public about the importance of regular school attendance at all ages, starting in early childhood;

Educate and collaborate with school professionals about appropriate and inappropriate reasons for exclusion (eg, some schools continue to exclude children with head lice from school despite a strong, evidence-based recommendation to avoid exclusion from school for head lice). 141 AAP chapter leaders and the Council on School Health can provide assistance in these efforts;

Support school districts’ efforts to improve children’s and families’ access to health insurance and medical services;

Serve as a school physician or on a school board, school or school district health services advisory committee, or wellness committee to develop policies and practices that promote school attendance 142 ;

Work with your state school board, department of education, or school districts (local educational agencies) to encourage schools to consistently collect and share data with public health and health care providers on chronic absence by grade, school, and neighborhood, because chronic absence is often an indicator that children and families are struggling with health-related issues. Develop and promote strategies that encourage data sharing and are compliant with existing privacy laws;

Work with schools to identify physical and mental health conditions that are significantly contributing to school absenteeism among their students and help identify interventions to address these conditions; and

Encourage public health departments to compare chronic absence data and available health metrics to identify where collaborative action would be helpful.

In addition to the approaches described in tier 1, pediatricians can use the following office-based interventions for patients who are missing 2 or 3 days of school per month (∼10% of total school time):

Prevent, identify, and treat physical and mental health conditions that are contributing to school absences. Collaboration with school and mental health professionals is essential in the treatment of youth with psychosomatic symptoms that result in poor school attendance;

When possible, identify psychosocial risk factors and health factors among a patient’s caregivers that may be contributing to the patient’s school absenteeism and refer the caregiver to appropriate resources in the community;

Avoid writing excuses for school absences when the absence was not appropriate and avoid backdating to justify absences;

Strongly encourage patients who are well enough to attend school to return to school immediately after their medical appointments, so they do not miss the entire day;

Avoid contributing to school absences. In concordance with the medical home concepts of providing accessible, continuous, and family-centered care, consider offering extended office hours and encourage families to make preventive care appointments and follow-up appointments for times outside of regular school hours 143 ;

Communicate and collaborate with school professionals and community partners to manage the health conditions of your patients with chronic absenteeism. The school nurse is usually the best first contact. 96 The AAP publication Managing Chronic Health Needs in Child Care and Schools 136 is a reference that may be particularly useful in the child care or preschool settings, where a school nurse or child care health consultant may not be readily available; and

Encourage parents of students with excessive absences to seek a formal school team meeting (often termed a school study team) to discuss how the school and family can cooperate to address the issue. Specifically, parents can request that their student be considered for participation in their school’s behavioral intervention system. 144  

In addition to the approaches described in tiers 1 and 2, pediatricians can use the following office-based interventions for patients who have severe chronic absenteeism and are missing 4 or more days of school per month (∼15% of total school time):

Encourage the school or school district to provide services such as intensive case management and mentorship, communicate and collaborate with professionals providing support services in school, and serve as your patient’s advocate and medical expert; and

Children are eligible for home or hospital educational services from the public schools if they have a legitimate medical reason for absences. The use of these services should be clearly justified on the basis of the patient’s medical presentation. The goal should be for these services to be time limited. Communicate and collaborate with school professionals to decide whether out-of-school instruction is appropriate, develop a time line for out-of-school instruction, develop a reentry plan, and identify whether an alternative to out-of-school instruction is appropriate.

America’s Promise Alliance, Grad Nation ( http://www.americaspromise.org/program/gradnation );

Attendance Works ( http://www.attendanceworks.org/ );

Everyone Graduates Center ( http://www.every1graduates.org/ );

Healthy Schools Campaign ( https://healthyschoolscampaign.org/ );

National Center for Education Statistics, Every School Day Counts ( https://nces.ed.gov/ ); and

National Center for School Engagement ( http://schoolengagement.org/ ).

Handouts to give to parents ( http://www.attendanceworks.org/resources/handouts-for-families/ );

Video to show in waiting room ( http://www.attendanceworks.org/tools/for-parents/bringing-attendance-home-video/ ); and

Mobile-friendly Web site geared to preteenagers, teenagers, and their parents ( https://getschooled.com/dashboard ).

FUNDING: No external funding.

This document is copyrighted and is property of the American Academy of Pediatrics and its Board of Directors. All authors have filed conflict of interest statements with the American Academy of Pediatrics. Any conflicts have been resolved through a process approved by the Board of Directors. The American Academy of Pediatrics has neither solicited nor accepted any commercial involvement in the development of the content of this publication.

Policy statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics benefit from expertise and resources of liaisons and internal (AAP) and external reviewers. However, policy statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics may not reflect the views of the liaisons or the organizations or government agencies that they represent.

The guidance in this statement does not indicate an exclusive course of treatment or serve as a standard of medical care. Variations, taking into account individual circumstances, may be appropriate.

All policy statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics automatically expire 5 years after publication unless reaffirmed, revised, or retired at or before that time.

American Academy of Pediatrics

adverse childhood experience

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

school-based health center

Mandy Allison, MD, MSPH, FAAP

Elliott Attisha, DO, FAAP

Marc Lerner, MD, FAAP, Chairperson

Cheryl Duncan De Pinto, MD, MPH, FAAP, Chairperson Elect

Nathaniel Savio Beers, MD, MPA, FAAP

Erica J. Gibson, MD, FAAP

Peter Gorski, MD, MPA, FAAP

Chris Kjolhede, MD, MPH, FAAP

Sonja C. O’Leary, MD, FAAP

Heidi Schumacher, MD, FAAP

Adrienne Weiss-Harrison, MD, FAAP

Richard Ancona, MD, FAAP

Breena Welch Holmes, MD, FAAP, Immediate Past Chairperson

Jeffrey Okamoto, MD, FAAP, FAAP, Past Chairperson

Thomas Young, MD, FAAP

Hedy Chang – Attendance Works

Ken Seeley – National Center for School Engagement

Susan Hocevar Adkins, MD, FAAP

Laurie Combe, MN, RN, NCSN

Veda Charmaine Johnson, MD, FAAP

Shashank Joshi, MD

Nina Fekaris, MS, BSN, RN, NCSN

Linda Grant, MD, MPH

Sheryl Kataoka, MD, MSHS

Sandra Leonard, DNP, RN, FNP

Madra Guinn-Jones, MPH

Stephanie Domain, MS

Competing Interests

Re:the link between school attendance and good health.

As a Paediatrician who fully ascribes to the dictum that school non attendance is linked to long term life failure I acknowledge how crucial school attendance is. Furthermore I have my own aphorism which is that 'sick children go to school' - as evidenced by our patients with cancer, cystic fibrosis, JIA etc who are keen to go to school and whose parents are desperate to send them. School non attendance is more usually linked to factors such as separation anxiety, somatisation and at extremes embellishment and fabrication. there are often child and parental factors involved. School non attendance is therefore a manifestation of other underlying issues. School attendance per se seems to be crucial as even children who are successful academically function less well in society if they have not been to school. There is an unanswered question as to whether school absence is merely a symptom of wider dysfunction or an additional cause and exacerbating factor. The implication, and an orthodoxy which we believe, is that attending school is an important intervention by removing children from a somewhat negative home environment and exposing them to a more normal one in school including providing the skills required for social living. if school non attendance is predominantly a symptom of multiple other issues it is unlikely that increasing attendance alone will improve outcomes until the other cause are addressed

Ref; Understanding School Refusal A Handbook for Professionals in Education, Health and Social Care M. S. Thambirajah, Karen J. Grandison and Louise De-Hayes Jessica Kinsley publishers 2007

RE: The Link Between School Attendance and Good Health

Pediatricians and Pediatric Dentist should routinely tell the parents of their young patients that they are to return to school the same day before/after routine office visits. My experience in the school health office is that students may have an early morning or an afternoon appointment for annual/semi-annual check ups but keep the student out of school for the entire day.

Advertising Disclaimer »

Citing articles via

Email alerts.

Affiliations

• Editorial Board
• Editorial Policies
• Journal Blogs
• Pediatrics On Call
• Online ISSN 1098-4275
• Print ISSN 0031-4005
• Pediatrics Open Science
• Hospital Pediatrics
• Pediatrics in Review
• AAP Grand Rounds
• Latest News
• Pediatric Care Online
• Red Book Online
• Pediatric Patient Education
• AAP Toolkits
• AAP Pediatric Coding Newsletter

First 1,000 Days Knowledge Center

Institutions/librarians, group practices, licensing/permissions, integrations, advertising.

• Privacy Statement | Accessibility Statement | Terms of Use | Support Center | Contact Us
• © Copyright American Academy of Pediatrics

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

• Skip to content
• Skip to search
• Staff portal (Inside the department)
• Student portal
• Key links for students

Other users

• Forgot password

Notifications

{{item.title}}, my essentials, ask for help, contact edconnect, directory a to z, how to guides.

• Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation

Understanding attendance: A review of the drivers of school attendance and best practice approaches

This report was originally published 10 June 2022.

• 2022 understanding attendance (PDF 2204 KB)

Key findings

Chapter 1: what is attendance and non-attendance and why does it matter, school attendance impacts students’ academic achievement and other long-term outcomes.

• Higher rates of absences have been associated with lower NAPLAN scores (Hancock et al. 2013; Daraganova et al. 2014).
• The association between absences and achievement is stronger among students in disadvantaged schools (Hancock et al. 2013).
• Unauthorised absences have a greater impact on achievement than authorised absences (Hancock et al. 2013; Gershenson et al. 2017).
• In NSW, students who report positive attendance behaviours in Year 7 are on average 3 months ahead in their learning by Year 9, compared with students who have poor attendance behaviours (Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation (CESE) 2017).

The effect of attendance behaviours in Year 7 on Year 9 NAPLAN reading scores (CESE 2017:6)

• Students’ prior attendance is a strong predictor of their future attendance. A student’s attendance patterns may be established in early primary school, with school readiness being an important protective factor.
• Students with chronic absenteeism are more likely to drop out of school and experience poorer long-term health and social outcomes.

Chapter 2: What influences school attendance?

Attendance is driven by a complex range of factors inside and outside of school.

• School attendance is influenced by a complex range of factors relating to the individual student’s engagement and wellbeing, their family and community context, and the school (for example, Kearney 2020; Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) 2021; Childs and Lofton 2021).
• Factors influencing attendance are not mutually exclusive. Students may have several interrelated factors driving their attendance, or multiple barriers to attending school that stem from a shared root cause.
• School-related drivers of attendance are factors relating to a school’s academic climate, social climate, safety and institutional environment.

New longitudinal research among NSW secondary school students shows that student engagement and wellbeing, as well as teaching practices, help to predict attendance

• Homework behaviour, positive behaviour at school and sense of belonging are relatively strong predictors of attendance.
• The engagement and wellbeing effects are stronger for students with lower attendance.
• For students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, homework behaviour and sense of belonging are stronger predictors of attendance than for students from other backgrounds.
• For younger Aboriginal secondary students, wellbeing is particularly important.
• For older Aboriginal students, teachers’ high expectations are particularly important.
• Teaching practices indirectly affect attendance by influencing engagement and wellbeing.

Effective teaching practices affect attendance via student engagement and wellbeing

Note. Earlier longitudinal analysis of NSW Tell Them From Me data showed that drivers of sense of belonging include positive teacher–student relations, teaching relevance, valuing school outcomes, positive friendships, absence of bullying, optimism and positive self-concept, co-curricular participation as well as high levels of effort, interest and motivation (refer to CESE 2020e).

Chapter 3: What can schools do to improve attendance?

Evidence-based strategies for improving school attendance are framed in a tiered model of prevention and intervention.

• A tiered model of support takes a multi-faceted approach to prevention and intervention strategies for improving attendance that recognises the complexity of non-attendance problems and the need to tailor interventions to each school’s context (Kearney 2021).

A multi-tiered system of support for strategies to address school non-attendance

Universal prevention strategies aim to foster a positive school culture of attendance for all students

• using effective classroom management and motivating learning goals
• setting clear standards and high expectations for attendance
• increasing family engagement with the school
• promoting positive relationships between teachers and students
• promoting connectedness and belonging
• implementing an anti-bullying plan
• ensuring cultural safety.

Early intervention strategies and intensive intervention strategies should be matched to students’ needs and the root causes of non-attendance

• Targeted intervention and prevention strategies are intended for smaller groups of students or individual students. It is important to match strategies to students’ needs by identifying the root causes of non-attendance for the targeted students and then selecting the appropriate strategies (Hanover Research 2016; Kearney et al. 2019).
• Successful strategies often involve a multi-faceted program rather than a single isolated practice, particularly for students experiencing severe absenteeism with complex causes. These often rely on coordinated efforts across multiple service providers and partnerships with the student’s family members (Kearney et al. 2019).
• meal programs such as breakfast clubs (MacDonald 2018)
• school-located flu vaccination programs (Hull and Ambrose 2011; Keck et al. 2013; Pannaraj et al. 2014)
• improving transport access (Fan and Das 2015; Gottfried 2017)
• mentoring programs such as Check and Connect (Guryan et al. 2017).
• individualised training in personal and social capabilities
• active participation of family members
• incentive-based strategies that are carefully designed to target sustainable, long-term behaviour change.

Chapter 4: What do schools require to improve attendance?

Improving attendance in schools relies on adequate resourcing and other system supports.

• Key enablers for successful implementation of attendance improvement strategies in schools include leadership, actionable data, community engagement and shared accountability (Louis et al. 2010; Reid 2012; Graczyk and Kearney 2014; Balu et al. 2016; Dreise et al. 2016).
• The enablers are an integrated set of conditions for sustainable implementation, rather than isolated factors. They require adequate resourcing and capability building for sustainable implementation.

• Research report
• Student engagement and wellbeing

Business Unit:

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Addictions and Substance Use
• Administration and Management
• Aging and Older Adults
• Biographies
• Children and Adolescents
• Clinical and Direct Practice
• Couples and Families
• Criminal Justice
• Disabilities
• Ethics and Values
• Gender and Sexuality
• Health Care and Illness
• Human Behavior
• International and Global Issues
• Macro Practice
• Mental and Behavioral Health
• Policy and Advocacy
• Populations and Practice Settings
• Race, Ethnicity, and Culture
• Religion and Spirituality
• Research and Evidence-Based Practice
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Work Profession
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Strategies and interventions for improving school attendance.

• Johnny S. Kim Johnny S. Kim Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver
•  and  Calvin L. Streeter Calvin L. Streeter University of Texas at Austin
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.1227
• Published online: 07 July 2016

This article presents an overview of school absenteeism, truancy, and school refusal behaviors.

The various definitions of school truancy and absenteeism are described along with prevalence rates and correlates with school absenteeism. The article also discusses interventions and strategies that are empirically demonstrated as effective in helping school professionals increase school attendance. The article concludes by discussing ways to improve school attendance through multilevel interventions.

• school refusal behavior
• absenteeism

Definition and Descriptions

Improving student attendance is a major preoccupation for many schools across the country. Though little educational research has focused on the relationship between attendance and student performance, some studies suggest that school attendance and student academic performance are closely associated (Borland & Howsen, 1998 ). The assumption is that when students are not in school, they cannot learn (Gottfried, 2010 ). Though this assumption seems plausible, the implied causal ordering of the relationship is not always clear. For example, does school attendance improve academic performance, or does academic performance serve as an incentive for successful students to regularly attend school? Whatever the association, it has led many school districts, school administrators, and state governments to spend tremendous resources to carefully monitor, document, and report school attendance data.

Epstein and Sheldon ( 2002 ) suggest that improving school attendance is as important as any issue that schools face today. Concern about school attendance may focus on truancy and chronic absenteeism, as when students fail to come to school on any given day. But class cutting, where students come to school to be counted but then selectively skip one or more classes each day, is seen by some as a symptom of alienation and disengagement from schools and a serious issue for many urban school districts today (e.g., Fallis & Opotow, 2003 ). Either way, school attendance is a serious school and social problem that should involve a multilevel approach to effectively address it.

The term truancy is used in many different ways in the scholarly literature (Maynard, McCrea, Pigott, & Kelly, 2013 ). As a general descriptive term, truancy is used to refer to students who are absent from school for any reason without their parents’ knowledge (Kearney, 2008 ). Truancy is typically defined as a certain number of unexcused absences. However, definitions of what constitutes truancy may vary considerably from one school district to another, and from state to state as it is encoded into compulsory education laws (Garcia-Garcia, 2008 ).

Chronic absenteeism is not the same thing as truancy. According to Balfanz and Byrnes ( 2012 ) chronic absenteeism means missing 10% of the school year for any reason. Again, the threshold number or percentage can vary from school to school. They point out that a school can have average daily attendance of 90% on any given day and still have 40% of its students chronically absent because on different days, different students make up that 90%. Chronic absenteeism generally refers to some level of excessive absence from school, and the consequences can be severe, especially for students in early grades (McCluskey, Bynum & Patchim, 2004 ; Romero & Lee, 2007 ).

School refusal behavior has been defined as “difficulty attending school associated with emotional distress, especially anxiety and depression” (King & Bernstein, 2001 , p. 197). It is the focus on emotional distress, along with parental awareness of the problem, that distinguishes school refusal behavior from truancy (Fremont, 2003 ). While depression and anxiety are most frequently associated with school refusal behavior, many factors can contribute to a student’s refusal to go to school, including bullying or cyberbullying, school safety concerns, and pressures associated with high-stakes testing and demands for academic achievement (Lingenfelter & Hartung, 2015 ).

No matter what the cause, reluctance to attend school often means students are headed for potential delinquent activity, social isolation, and educational failure (Baker, Sigmon, & Nugent, 2001 ; Loeber & Farrington, 2000 ). Poor attendance means that students are not developing the knowledge and skills needed for later success. In addition, when not in school, many students become involved in risky behaviors such as substance abuse, sexual activity, and other activities that can lead to serious trouble within the legal system (Bell, Rosen, & Dynlacht, 1994 ; Dryfoos, 1990 ; Huizinga, Loeber, & Thornberry, 1995 ; Rohrman, 1993 ). For many youths, chronic absenteeism is a significant predictor of dropping out of school (Dynarski & Gleason, 1999 ). Beyond its immediate consequences for students, truancy can have significant long-term implications for youths in terms of their becoming productive members of the community. For decades, research has shown a correlation between poor school attendance and problems later in life, such as criminal activity, incarceration, sexual activity, marital and family problems, trouble securing and maintaining stable employment, substance (tobacco, alcohol, drugs) use, and violent behavior (Catalano, Arthur, Hawkins, Berglund, & Olson, 1998 ; Dryfoos, 1990 ; Dube & Orpinas, 2009 ; Henry, 2010 ; Houck, Hadley, Tolou-Shams, & Brown, 2012 ; Robins & Ratcliff, 1978 ; Snyder & Sickmund, 1995 ).

Though individual students are often blamed for truancy, school attendance may be seen as an important indicator of how well the school is functioning and the kind of educational environment created within the school. For example, large schools with limited staff and resources might be easier environments in which students can be more anonymous, and thus often have more attendance problems than small schools where a missing student is more likely to be noticed (Finn & Voelkl, 1993 ). In addition, students are more likely to skip school when the school environment is perceived to be boring or chaotic, when students don’t feel they are being intellectually challenged, or when there are no consequences for being truant.

For schools, the consequences of truancy can be significant as well. Not only is student attendance seen as one indicator of school performance, in most states money is tied directly to student attendance. Because funding formularies often include student attendance, fewer students in the classroom means fewer resources for academic programs. School administrators and all those involved with schools have a vested interest in getting children to school and keeping them there all day (Sutphen, Ford, & Flaherty, 2010 ).

Truancy has important consequences for the community, too (Baker et al., 2001 ). These include a workforce that lacks the basic knowledge and job skills needed to fully participate in the labor market and contribute to the economy. This can result in increased costs of social services and higher rates of poverty. Local businesses are often concerned about direct losses incurred from truants’ shoplifting and indirect losses from their hanging out near their businesses and fighting, using drugs and alcohol, and intimidating customers (Baker et al., 2001 ).

Truancy and chronic absenteeism have both immediate and far-reaching consequences for individual students, families, schools, and communities. Effective interventions must understand the problem from multiple perspectives and address it at multiple levels. This is especially the case for poor, minority students in urban neighborhoods (Spencer, 2009 ).

Student Attendance Literature Review

Although there are numerous research studies on school absenteeism, truancy, and school refusal behaviors, estimating the national prevalence of these school attendance problems has been difficult. Many states use differing reporting standards and definitions of truancy, which limits the ability to aggregate state-level data and present a clear national picture on this problem (National Center for School Engagement, 2006 ; Vaughn, Maynard, Salas-Wright, Perron, & Abdon, 2013 ). Despite these challenges, Vaughn and colleagues ( 2013 ) used the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) study to estimate prevalence and correlates of truancy in the United States. Using the 2009 adolescent sample data, this study found that 11% of adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 reported skipping school in the past 30 days. Furthermore, the study reported 9% having skipped 1–3 days and 2% reporting having skipped 4 or more days of school within the past 30 days. Additionally, the study found that adolescents who skipped school more frequently were older, had less parental involvement, and exhibited more externalizing (e.g., disruptive behaviors, antisocial behaviors, substance use) and internalizing (e.g., depression, anxiety) problem behaviors. More truant adolescents were also less engaged in school and reported lower grades (Vaughn et al., 2013 ).

Most of the research literature on low school attendance and truancy has focused on either its causes or its relationship to academic performance (Corville-Smith, Ryan, Adams, & Dalicandro, 1998 ; Lamdin, 2001 ). Despite the fact that absenteeism is a concern for school administrators, teachers, parents, social workers, and counselors, limited research has been done to examine ways to improve school attendance (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ; Lamdin, 2001 ). This is especially the case when looking for rigorous, randomized-controlled trial (RCT) research design studies evaluating the efficacy of various interventions or programs focused on addressing absenteeism and school attendance. A study by Sutphen, Ford, and Flaherty ( 2010 ) reviewed the research literature on truancy interventions. The authors found only 16 studies to review between the years 1990 and 2007 , with only half the studies using group comparison designs. Their review found only 6 studies that produced promising interventions, which highlights the lack of evidence-based truancy programs currently available.

Recently, Maynard and colleague ( 2013 ) conducted a meta-analysis that examined interventions aimed to increase school attendance for elementary and secondary school students who were identified as having chronic attendance problems. This meta-analysis included 16 experimental design studies—5 RCT and 11 quasi-experimental design—that met their criteria for inclusion in their quantitative systematic review. Results showed a medium effect size estimate with a random effects mean of 0.46 and a 95% confidence interval of 0.30 and 0.62. This pooled effect size estimate was statistically significant (p < 0.05) and positive, indicating students who received the various indicated truancy interventions did better than those that did not on attendance outcomes (by an average of 4.69 days). This meta-analysis study also found no differences on programs that were school-based, community-based, or court-based on student attendance, as well as if the interventions were individual, family, group, or multimodal. One of the key findings from the meta-analysis study by Maynard and colleagues ( 2013 ) was “. . . the lack of evidence to support the general belief that collaborative and multimodal interventions are more effective than simple, noncollaborative interventions” (p. 17). These findings are encouraging in that various types of programs (settings and modality) can be just as effective in helping chronically absent students, which allows schools more options and choices.

Some research studied schools that offer rewards or monetary incentives to improve school attendance. Sturgeon and Beer ( 1990 ) examined 14 years of data from a rural high school in the Midwest to see if an attendance reward of exemption from taking semester tests had decreased absenteeism. They examined the school’s student attendance records from 1976 to 1979 , when there was no attendance reward policy, and compared them with student attendance records from 1980 to 1989 , when the attendance reward policy was in effect. Results showed a statistically significant decrease in the number of absences after the attendance reward was adopted. During the years 1976–1979 , the average total absent days was 1750.5, which decreased to 912.5 during the years 1980–1989 .

Reid and Bailey-Dempsey ( 1995 ) randomly assigned junior high and high school girls with academic or attendance problems to either a program that offered financial incentives for improving school and attendance performance, a program that offered social and educational services to the girls and their families, or a control group. Both the financial incentive program and case management program modestly improved school attendance over the control group, but similar results were not seen the next year. Though there was no statistically significant difference between the financial and case management programs in terms of school attendance, academic improvements were better for students receiving case management services than for students receiving only financial incentives.

Miller ( 1986 ) conducted a study to see if participation in a therapeutic discipline program would improve students’ attitudes on attendance, increase attendance, and provide greater insight into solving attendance problems among students at a large suburban high school. Students who were truant were randomly assigned to either the therapeutic discipline program or to a control group. The therapeutic program required students to work through a bibliotherapeutic learning packet and attend a follow-up exit conference with the dean to go over the packet. Traditional methods were used on the control group: threatening students with further disciplinary measures and in-school suspension in which students were required to do schoolwork. Both programs required students to participate in a written exercise to measure insight into ways they could help solve their truancy problems. Results from this study showed students in the therapeutic program increased class attendance, had fewer absences from classes, and listed a greater number of insights into resolving their attendance problems. These differences were statistically significant when compared to the control group.

Multilevel Interventions to Improve School Attendance

Across the country, hundreds of thousands of students are absent from schools each day. In order to effectively address attendance problems, school administrators, teachers, and staff must understand the problem from a multilevel perspective. Within education research, school social workers, counselors, psychologists, and administrators have looked at an approach known as Response to Intervention (RTI), which involves three tiers of intervention services. Tier 1 services are delivered to the entire school, while Tier 2 intervention services are delivered to a classroom or small group of students who are at risk for certain problems. Tier 3 intervention services are individual services offered to students with more severe levels of risk (Franklin, Kim, Ryan, Kelly, & Montgomery, 2012 ). While Tier 3 targeted interventions that focus only on individual students may improve attendance in the short term for that one student, it is unlikely that such interventions will have a widespread effect on attendance across the school. In addition, school attendance must be viewed as everyone’s responsibility, not just that of the school’s attendance officer. Figure 1 emphasizes the point that although the individual student is at the center of our concern about truancy, an effective response should involve the school, the family, and the community in a multisystem approach.

Figure 1. Student-centered multisystem approach to improve school attendance.

School attendance can be influenced by a number of factors specific to the student. These might include drug and alcohol abuse, mental health problems, poor physical health, teen pregnancy and family responsibilities, student employment, and a lack of understanding of the long-term consequences of school failure. Incorporating Tier 2 or 3 interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy (Ginsburg & Drake, 2002 ; Harris & Franklin, 2003 ) for these at-risk groups of students can help to address these influential factors.

Sometimes the school itself is largely responsible for truancy. School factors often include the school climate, such as school size and attitudes of teachers and administrators, lack of flexibility in meeting the needs of students with diverse learning styles and different cultural experiences, inconsistent policies and procedures for dealing with chronic truancy, inconsistent application of those policies, lack of meaningful consequences, a chaotic school culture and/or unsafe school environment, and a curriculum that is perceived as boring, irrelevant, or unchallenging. In these instances, Tier 1 interventions that target the whole school environment, such as the Positive Action Program (Flay, Allred, & Ordway, 2001 ; see Table 1 for details), are necessary to address school-level factors that influence school attendance. Family factors that can affect student attendance include domestic violence, alcohol and drug abuse, inadequate parental supervision, poverty and low-wage jobs that require the parents to work long hours, lack of awareness of attendance laws, and parental attitudes toward education and the school. Therefore, school-based family interventions such as Project SAFE (Kumpfer, Alvarado, Tait, & Turner, 2002 ) are necessary to address family factors that affect attendance. Project SAFE is a prevention program that seeks to prevent risking behaviors that can lead to substance misuse and composed of the I Can Problem Solve (ICPS) program and Strengthening Families (SF) program. The overall goal of Project SAFE is to teach problem solving, critical thinking, and communication skills to parents, children, and families.

Communities, too, can influence school attendance. They can hurt attendance when they present few opportunities for young people or lack affordable childcare or accessible transportation systems. Communities with high mobility rates and large numbers of single-parent households tend to have high truancy rates. Also, differing cultural attitudes toward education can make a difference in whether a child wants to attend school (Baker et al., 2001 ).

Applying Interventions Within a Response to Intervention Framework

Individual student strategies.

Tier 2 or 3 intervention strategies that focus on the individual student tend to focus on psychoeducational interventions and cognitive restructuring (Kearney, 2003 ). School social workers and other counselors assess reasons a student is absent, focusing on school- and family-related issues. Cognitive and behavioral strategies can help such a student deal with anxiety, stress, and frustrations. Behavioral strategies include relaxation, imagination, and breathing exercises the student can do in class to reduce worry and nervousness (Kearney, 2003 ). Cognitive strategies include the use of solution-focused and cognitive-behavioral therapy techniques. School social workers and mental health professionals should also focus on increasing students’ self-esteem and social skills, since most students who frequently cut school have little self-confidence academically or socially (Corville-Smith et al., 1998 ). After-school tutoring programs and mentoring programs can be effective strategies for students who avoid coming to school because of academic problems (National Center for School Engagement, 2007 ). Tier 3 targeted intervention strategies that focus on students who don’t like school or don’t get along with a teacher or with other students are more complex and require a multilevel approach. Perhaps the strategy might focus on the student or family or evaluate whether mental health services or drug/alcohol treatment services are needed. It could be that the focus should be on academics: Would these students gain more from school if it incorporated technology into the learning process and integrated vocational and school-to-work materials into the curriculum? Career internships might provide valuable hands-on experience that also further stresses the importance of attending classes. Or perhaps the focus should be on the social aspect of school: Is the school one that makes students feel safe, respected, and welcomed? This can be accomplished by knowing students by name and recognizing their successes—no matter how small they may seem (Colorado Foundation for Families and Children, 2004 ).

This sort of multidisciplinary strategy—addressing truancy from three different sides, i.e., student, family, and school—is the only way to make long-term strides in improved school attendance. Though traditional approaches such as punishments and forcing attendance through parental involvement and truancy officers may be effective in increasing daily student attendance in the short run, the gains don’t last, because these activities weren’t associated with changes in chronic absenteeism (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ).

Family Strategies

Family involvement is an integral part of reducing school absenteeism, and schools need to collaborate with families in order to improve student attendance (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ). Family problems spill over into the classroom and can affect student attendance and academic performance. A study by Corville-Smith and collegues ( 1998 ) found that absentee students, when compared with students who attended school regularly, perceived their families as being less accepting of them, less cohesive, less consistent and effective in discipline, and more conflicted and controlling.

School social workers and other school-based practitioners are in a unique position to help families deal with their child’s attendance problem. One way practitioners can assist families is by providing resources for families and students. Family problems such as unsteady employment, lack of reliable transportation, divorce, and family conflict all affect student attendance and performance. Providing resources and connecting families with appropriate social services will help reduce family problems and improve the student’s attendance.

Epstein and Sheldon ( 2002 ) provide a list of three effective family strategies available to school-based practitioners:

Communicate with families when students are absent . Collaboration between the school and the family begins with frequent and open talks about the student’s attendance problem. An increased effort needs to be made by practitioners to provide parents with information and resources from the school. This can be done by including the parents in school meetings with teachers, administrators, school social workers, and others either at the school or via conference call. Bowen ( 1999 ) recommends that practitioners solicit the parents’ perceptions of and insights into their child’s attendance problem. Bowen also recommends that school staff give parents ideas about activities and techniques they can use at home to improve their child’s academic and behavioral problems. Having a specific school contact person for attendance problems can also help increase communication between the school and families if the families have that person’s name and phone number (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ). This designated school employee should have resources and strategies available to help parents deal with the attendance problem.

Hold workshops for parents . School-based practitioners should conduct workshops that deal specifically with attendance problems. These workshops can provide parents with new strategies and tools to improve school attendance. Workshop topics might include reasons for absenteeism, strategies for improving attendance, advice on getting students up and ready for school on time, information on transportation resources, and tips for dealing with resistance. Workshops should include specific information about attendance policies, procedures, and penalties to better inform families.

Visit the home . Some school social workers, nurses, and others use home visits and phone calls to parents as part of their family-based intervention to increase parental involvement in their child’s schooling (Ford & Sutphen, 1996 ). Making home visits is an effective strategy for reducing rates of chronic absenteeism and is usually used when students have severe attendance problems. Home visits allow school personnel to gain a more ecological perspective on the student and her or his home environment; they can see if family problems may be contributing to the attendance problem. Based on the home visit assessment, practitioners can develop a contract with the family detailing specific goals that need to be met in order to avoid legal sanctions.

School Strategies

Changes in schools’ organizational structure, curricula, and culture are needed if attendance problems are to be effectively addressed (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ). Schools should promote an environment where students feel connected to the school and invested in their learning. One way to accomplish this is to improve teacher–student relationships and engage students as active members of the school community. Reducing class sizes, if possible, will increase the interactions between student and teacher and give students the attention they need. Schools can involve students in coming up with Tier 1 universal intervention strategies and programs aimed at reducing absenteeism. By involving students and seeking their perspectives, schools help students feel important and allow their voices to be heard (Fallis & Opotow, 2003 ).

Some of the more common approaches schools take to address attendance problems involve referring students to school social workers and/or truant officers. This strategy can help improve attendance rates but may not be effective with chronic absenteeism. Providing attendance awards can also be helpful, but they should be given as incentives for improved attendance and not just for perfect attendance (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002 ). Another strategy is to provide after-school programs that motivate students to attend school in order to participate. These after-school programs can also be educational, covering topics on improving student self-esteem and building social skills because, as we said above, absentee students more often suffer from these deficits.

Model Truancy Prevention Program

In 1998 , The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) developed a bulletin report that highlighted some of the major research findings regarding the problem of truancy and chronic absenteeism. Various programs aimed at individual, school, and community levels were funded in 1999 through OJJDP in an effort to develop evidence-based programs aimed at improving school attendance. Reimer and Dimock ( 2005 ) identified several critical components for effective truancy prevention programs:

broad-based multidisciplinary collaboration of community agencies such as schools, social services, juvenile courts, and law enforcement

family involvement that values parents “for their advice, experience, and expertise in the community, as clients of our public systems of care, and as experts in the lives of their children” (p. 14)

comprehensive approach that addresses all of the factors that affect truancy, including transportation, mental health issues, academic issues, and school climate

combine meaningful sanctions for truancy and appropriate incentives for attendance to promote pro-school attitudes and change the behavior of student

create a supportive context for learning that includes organizations, community cultures, and policies

rigorous evaluation and assessment

The National Center for School Engagement ( 2007 ) produced a report of model programs that address truancy, school attendance, and student achievement concerns. Eighteen programs were identified as “Blueprint” Model Programs based on a set of standards of program effectiveness developed by the Center for the Study of the Prevention of Violence at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Table 1 provides an overview of 10 of these programs. A detailed description of all programs can be found in the NCSE report (NCSE, 2007 ), and more information on the Blueprint Model Programs is available at the Center for the Study of the Prevention of Violence website .

Table 1. Blueprint Model Programs

* OJJDP, Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency; CSAP, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.

Implications and Conclusion

This chapter recognizes the challenges that school administrators, teachers, and families face in trying to improve school attendance. Research has shown a correlation between poor school attendance and problems later in life, such as criminal activity, incarceration, marital and family problems, trouble securing and maintaining stable employment, and violent behavior. Though the individual student is at the center of our concern about truancy, an effective response must involve the school, the family, and the community. Strategies that focus on the individual student include psychoeducational interventions, cognitive restructuring, after-school tutoring programs, and mentoring programs. School social workers and others may also need to encourage the use of mental health and drug/alcohol treatment services for either the student or a family member of the student. Family interventions include providing resources and connecting families with appropriate social services to help reduce family problems, increasing communication with families when students are absent, holding workshops for parents, and visiting parents at their home. Changes in schools’ organizational structure, curricula, and culture are needed to address serious attendance problems.

Improving school attendance is a social problem that needs to be addressed from a multilevel approach involving not only the student and the school but also the family and community. It is also not enough just to get students to show up at school by using punitive measures such as truant officers and suspensions. Schools must work to engage the student by creating a school environment that is welcoming and by addressing academic difficulties that may deter the student from attending school.

Further Reading

• Cumbo, G. L. , & Burden, H. (2012). Truancy reduction: Research, policy, and practice . Seattle: Center for Children and Youth Justice.
• Dembo, R. , & Gulledge, L. M. (2009). Truancy intervention programs: Challenges and innovations to implementation. Criminal Justice Policy Review , 20 (4), 437–456.
• Gandy, C. , & Schultz, J. L. (2007). Increasing school attendance for K-8 students . St. Paul, MN: Wilder Research.
• Smink, J. , & Reimer, M. S. (2005). Fifteen effective strategies for improving student attendance and truancy prevention . Clemson, SC: National Dropout Prevention Center/Network.
• Sutphen, R. D. , Ford, J. P. , & Flaherty, C. (2010). Truancy interventions: A review of the research literature. Research on Social Work Practice , 20 (2), 161–171.
• Teasley, M. L. (2004). Absenteeism and truancy: Risk, protection, and best practice implications for school social workers. Children & Schools , 26 (2), 117–128.
• Baker, M. L. , Sigmon, J. N. , & Nugent, M. E. (2001). Truancy reduction: Keeping students in school . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
• Balfanz, R. , & Byrnes, V. (2012). The importance of being in school: A report on absenteeism in the nation’s public schools . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Center for Social Organization of Schools.
• Bell, A. J. , Rosen, L. A. , & Dynlacht, D. (1994). Truancy intervention. Journal of Research and Development in Education , 57 , 203–211.
• Borland, M. V. , & Howsen, R. M. (1998). Effect of student attendance on performance: Comment on Lamdin. Journal of Educational Research , 91 , 195–197.
• Bowen, N. K. (1999). A role for school social workers in promoting student success through school–family partnerships. Social Work in Education , 21 , 34–47.
• Catalano, F. R. , Arthur, M. W. , Hawkins, J. D. , Berglund, L. , & Olson, J. J. (1998). Comprehensive community- and school-based interventions to prevent antisocial behavior. In R. Loeber & D. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 248–283). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Colorado Foundation for Families and Children . (2004). Ten things a school can do to improve attendance . Denver, CO: Author. Retrieved March 17, 2016, from www.truancyprevention.org/pdf/10_ImproveAttendance.pdf
• Corville-Smith, J. , Ryan, B. A. , Adams, G. R. , & Dalicandro, T. (1998). Distinguishing absentee students from regular attenders: The combined influence of personal, family, and school factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 27 (5), 629–637.
• Dryfoos, J. G. (1990). Adolescents at risk: Prevalence and prevention . New York: Oxford University Press.
• Dube, S. R. , & Orpinas, P. (2009). Understanding excessive school absenteeism as school refusal behavior. Children & Schools , 31 , 87–95.
• Dynarski, M. , & Gleason, P. (1999). How can we help? Lessons from federal dropout prevention programs . Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
• Epstein, J. L. , & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. Journal of Educational Research , 95 (5), 308–318.
• Fallis, R. K. , & Opotow, S. (2003). Are students failing school or are schools failing students? Class cutting in high school. Journal of Social Issues , 59 (1), 103–119.
• Finn, J. D. , & Voelkl, K. E. (1993). School characteristics related to school engagement. Journal of Negro Education , 62 , 249–268.
• Flay, B. R. , Allred, C. G. , & Ordway, N. (2001). Effects of the Positive Action Program on achievement and discipline: Two matched-control comparisons. Prevention Science , 2 , 71–89.
• Ford, J. , & Sutphen, R. D. (1996). Early intervention to improve attendance in elementary school at-risk children: A pilot program. Social Work in Education , 18 (2), 95–102.
• Franklin, C. G. , Kim, J. S. , Ryan, T. N. , Kelly, M. S. , & Montgomery, K. L. (2012). Teacher involvement in school mental health interventions: A systematic review . Children & Youth Services Review , 34 , 973–982.
• Fremont, W. P. (2003). School refusal in children and adolescents. American Family Physician , 68 (8), 1555–1560.
• Garcia-Garcia, M. (2008). Role of secondary schools in the face of student absenteeism: A study of schools in socially underprivileged areas. International Journal of Inclusive Education , 12 (3), 263–280.
• Ginsburg, G. S. , & Drake, K. L. (2002). School-based treatment for anxious African-American adolescents: A controlled pilot study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , 41 , 768–775.
• Gottfried, M. A. (2010). Evaluating the relationship between student attendance and achievement in urban elementary and middle schools: An instrumental variables approach. American Educational Research Journal , 47 , 434–465.
• Harris, M. B. , & Franklin, C. G. (2003). Effects of a cognitive-behavioral school-based, group intervention with Mexican American pregnant and parenting adolescents. Social Work Research , 27 , 71–83.
• Henry, K. L. (2010). Skipping school and using drugs: a brief report. Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy , 17 , 650–657.
• Houck, C. D. , Hadley, W. , Tolou-Shams, M. , & Brown, L. (2012). Truancy is associated with sexual risk among early adolescents. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics: JDBP , 33 (9), 728.
• Huizinga, D. , Loeber, R. , & Thornberry, T. (1995). Urban delinquency and substance abuse: Initial findings . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
• King, N. J. , & Bernstein, G. A. (2001). School refusal in children and adolescents: A review of the past 10 years. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , 40 (2), 197–205.
• Kearney, C. A. (2003). Bridging the gap among professionals who address youths with school absenteeism: Overview and suggestions for consensus. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice , 34 (1), 57–65.
• Kearney, C. A. (2008). School absenteeism and school refusal behavior in youth: A contemporary review. Clinical Psychology Review , 28 , 451–471.
• Kumpfer, K. L. , Alvarado, R. , Tait, C. , & Turner, C. (2002). Effectiveness of school-based family and children’s skills training for substance abuse prevention among 6–8-year-old rural children. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors , 16 , S65–S71.
• Lamdin, D. J. (2001). Evidence of student attendance as an independent variable in education production functions. Journal of Educational Research , 89 (3), 155–162.
• Lingerfelter, N. , & Hartung, S. (2015). School Refusal Behavior. NASN School Nurse , 30 (5), 269–273.
• Loeber, R. , & Farrington, D. (2000). Young children who commit crime: Epidemiology, developmental origins, risk factors, early interventions, and policy implications. Development and Psychopathology , 12 (4), 737–762.
• Maynard, B. R. , McCrea, K. T. , Pigott, T. D. , & Kelly, M. S. (2013). Indicated truancy interventions for chronic truant students: A Campbell systematic review. Research on Social Work Practice , 23 , 5–21.
• McCluskey, C. P. , Bynum, T. S. , & Patchim, J. W. (2004). Reducing chronic absenteeism: An assessment of an early truancy initiative. Crime & Delinquency , 50 (2), 214–234.
• Miller, D. (1986). Effect of a program of therapeutic discipline on the attitude, attendance, and insight of truant adolescents. Journal of Experimental Education , 55 (1), 49–53.
• National Center for School Engagement . (2006). Assessing the prevalence of truancy: A four piece puzzle . Denver, CO: National Center for School Engagement.
• National Center for School Engagement . (2007). Blueprints for violence prevention programs that reduce truancy and/or improve school attendance . Denver, CO: National Center for School Engagement.
• Reid, W. J. , & Bailey-Dempsey, C. (1995). The effects of monetary incentives on school performance. Families in Society , 76 (6), 331–340.
• Reimer, M. , & Dimock, K. (2005). Best practices and model truancy programs . Clemson, SC: National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, Clemson University.
• Robins, L. N. , & Ratcliff, K. S. (1978). Long-range outcomes associated with school truancy . Washington, DC: Public Health Service.
• Rohrman, D. (1993). Combating truancy in our schools—a community effort. NASSP ( National Association of Secondary School Principals ) Bulletin , 76 (77), 40–45.
• Romero, M. , & Lee, Y. (2007). A National Portrait of Chronic Absenteeism in the Early Grades . New York: National Center for Children in Poverty, Columbia University, Mailman School of Public Health.
• Snyder, H. N. , & Sickmund, M. (1995). Juvenile offenders and victims: A national report . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
• Spencer, A. M. (2009). School attendance patterns, unmet educational needs, and truancy. Remedial and Special Education , 30 , 309–319.
• Sturgeon, R. , & Beer, J. (1990). Attendance reward and absenteeism in high school. Psychological Reports , 66 (3), 759–762.
• Sutphen, R. D. , Ford, J. P. , & Flaherty, C. (2010). Truancy interventions: A review of the research literature. Research on Social Work Practice , 20 , 161–171.
• Vaughn, M. G. , Maynard, B. R. , Salas-Wright, C. P. , Perron, B. E. , & Abdon, A. (2013). Prevalence and correlates in the US: Results from a national sample . Journal of Adolescence , 36 , 767–776.

Related Articles

• School Social Work

Other Resources

• New & Featured
• Forthcoming Articles

Printed from Encyclopedia of Social Work. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 02 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.66.14.236]
• 185.66.14.236

Character limit 500 /500

Blog The Education Hub

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2023/05/18/school-attendance-important-risks-missing-day/

Why is school attendance so important and what are the risks of missing a day?

Being around teachers and friends in a school or college environment is the best way for pupils to learn and reach their potential. Time in school also keeps children safe and provides access to extra-curricular opportunities and pastoral care.   

That’s why school attendance is so important and why the Government is committed to tackling the issues that might cause some children to miss school unnecessarily.   

Here’s what you need to know about school attendance .  

What does the data tell us about school attendance?  

The attendance rate across all schools in England was 92.6% in the week commencing 6 th February 2023, up from the Autumn term average of 92.1%.   

National teachers’ strikes that took place on 1 st February 2023 had a negative effect on attendance rates. On this day, attendance dropped to 43%, despite 90% of schools remaining open in some capacity.   

The latest data also shows the proportion of students who were persistently absent (those who missed 10% or more of their possible sessions). Across the year to date, 23.4% of students were persistently absent – this was driven by high rates of illness towards the end of the Autumn term.  

How does attendance affect outcomes for pupils?   

Being in school is important to your child’s achievement, wellbeing, and wider development. Evidence shows that the students with the highest attendance throughout their time in school gain the best GCSE and A Level results.  

Our research found that pupils who performed better both at the end of primary and secondary school missed fewer days than those who didn’t perform as well.   

The data also shows that in 2019, primary school children in Key Stage 2 who didn’t achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and maths missed on average four more days per school year than those whose performance exceeded the expected standard.   

Similarly, in the same year, secondary school pupils who didn’t achieve grade 9 to 4 in English and maths missed on 10 more days on average over the key stage than those who achieved grade 9 to 5 in both English and maths.   

What are the risks of missing a day of school?   

Every moment in school counts, and days missed add up quickly. For example, a child in Year 10 who is absent for three days over a half term could miss 15 lessons in total.   

The higher a pupil’s attendance, the more they are likely to learn, and the better they are likely to perform in exams and formal assessments.   

Data from 2019 shows that 84% of Key Stage 2 pupils who had 100% attendance achieved the expected standard, compared to 40% of pupils who were persistently absent across the key stage.  

What if my child needs to miss school?  

Parents and carers have a legal duty to ensure your child gets a full time-education. Usually, that means going into school from the age of 5 to 16.  

There are only a small number of circumstances where missing a school day is permitted. Your child must attend every day that the school is open, unless:  

• Your child is too ill to attend.  
• You have asked in advance and been given permission by the school for your child to be absent on a specific day due to exceptional circumstances.  
• Your child cannot go to school on a specific day because they are observing a religious event.  
• Your local authority is responsible for arranging your child’s transport to school and it’s not available or has not been provided yet.  
• Your child does not have a permanent address and you are required to travel for work. This exception only applies if your child attends their usual school or another school where you are staying as often as possible. This must be 200 half days or more a year if they are aged 6 or older.   

These are the only circumstances where schools can permit your child to be absent.  

What counts as an exceptional circumstance?  

School leaders are responsible for deciding what counts as an exceptional circumstance when it comes to a child missing school.    

They should look at each application individually, considering the specific facts and background context. If a leave of absence is granted, the school will decide how long the pupil can be away from school.  

Holidays are very rarely an acceptable reason for a school absence and are unlikely to be treated as an exceptional circumstance.   

What are you doing to improve school attendance?  

We’re supporting schools to boost attendance through a range of initiatives, set out in our recent attendance strategy and guidance . This includes a new data visualisation tool which makes it easier for teachers to analyse attendance, and the formation of an Attendance Action Alliance of national education and care leaders who are working together to target the reasons behind poor attendance.

We’re now building on this through the expansion of our Attendance Hubs programme. These are networks of schools that share best practice and practical resources with each other to help drive up attendance rates. For example, the Hubs might support schools to roll out automatic text messaging to parents when pupils have not showed up at school, or to improve the use of data to identify children at risk of poor attendance.

On top of this, we’re expanding our Attendance Mentors programme. Delivered by children’s charity Barnardo’s, the programme targets areas of the country with the highest levels of pupil absence, with trained mentors working directly with persistently and severely absent children and their families to identify barriers to attendance and support them back into school.

We’re also collecting evidence to inform future policy on children missing education, meaning those who are not registered at school or receiving suitable home education. This will help us to identify best practice and effective ways to make sure all children are receiving an appropriate education.

Altogether, these measures will aim to improve attendance, leading to better attainment and mental wellbeing amongst school children.

Where can I get support to help my child attend school?  

If your child is struggling to go to school, both their school and your local authority have a responsibility to help you to support your child’s attendance.  

In most cases, if your child’s attendance level is falling, their school will contact you to explore the reasons and discuss what help can be put in place. You can expect the school to meet with you and your child if they are old enough.    

If the barriers to your child’s attendance are in school, the school is responsible for working with you to help overcome the issues. Information on who in school you can contact for help, including the school’s senior leader responsible for attendance, can be found in the school’s policy on its website or available in hard copy from the school itself.  

If the barriers to attendance you or your child are facing go beyond the remit of the school, both the school and local authority have a responsibility to help you. This includes helping you to access the wider support you might need, for example from the school nurse or from local housing or transport teams.  

Further guidance on how to help your child to attend school is available here .  

Tags: performance , Performance statistics , primary school , primary schools , Pupils performance , school , school attendance , schools , Secondary School , Secondary Schools , support , teachers strikes

Sharing and comments

Share this page, related content and links, about the education hub.

The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.

Please note that for media enquiries, journalists should call our central Newsdesk on 020 7783 8300. This media-only line operates from Monday to Friday, 8am to 7pm. Outside of these hours the number will divert to the duty media officer.

Members of the public should call our general enquiries line on 0370 000 2288.

Sign up and manage updates

Follow us on social media, search by date, comments and moderation policy.

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Perspective article, a change in the frame: from absenteeism to attendance.

• 1 Office of the Executive Vice President for University Academic Affairs, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, United States
• 2 Indiana University School of Social Work, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, United States
• 3 Technical Communication, Department of Technology Leadership and Communication, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, United States

School attendance is important for student long-term academic and career success. However, in the U.S., our current practice often disenfranchises more at-risk students than it helps. Students slated for suspension and expulsion are often recipients of these practices. This manuscript offers a recommended change in how we frame student absenteeism and attendance using attendance markers and conceptual information by identifying the discrepancies, proposing options, and recommending a new way to actively leverage attendance data (not absenteeism data) for proactive student support. Particular attention is paid to how excused and unexcused absences and in-school suspensions are treated. An emerging pivot program, the Evaluation and Support Program , engages students while they receive school services, community support, and complete consequences is discussed as a possible, promising intervention.

Introduction

Failure to be present in the school environment can thwart development ( Carroll, 2010 ) and seriously impair mental, cognitive, and socio-emotional outcomes ( Kearney, 2008 ; Maynard et al., 2012 ; Heyne and Sauter, 2013 ; Gottfried, 2014 ) especially in the early schooling days. States have enacted legislation to guarantee that children in their formative years are properly educated to play a useful role in society ( Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ). A discrepancy exists between the gray areas of the desire to educate children and the legal issues of the amount of education required. This discrepancy causes a struggle to define attendance and absenteeism for society, and more specifically, for teachers and attendance officers ( Kearney, 2004 ).

The frames of how we currently look at these issues are focused on labels such as absenteeism and truancy . We can examine those frames more closely by starting with the changing definitions. For the purposes of this discussion, absenteeism is the study of the various forms or interplay of policies and procedures governing attendance ranging from presence to absence and all its corollary constituents, outcomes, interventions, and consequences ( Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ; Heyne et al., 2018 ). Truancy is the label used for students who do not attend school when they are supposed to be attending, although there are nuances of what that looks like (see, ex. Gentle-Genitty, 2009 ; Maynard et al., 2012 ; Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ). Attendance is defined as the amalgamation of student behaviors, policies, procedures, and protocols used for capturing the formal presence or absence of a student in a registered school system by an official school officer or system ( Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ). Because the field of school attendance and absenteeism is still emerging, recent efforts have focused not on attendance or absenteeism but instead on the complex relationships students have with their schools and families ( Keppens and Spruyt, 2017 ) and various iterations and categorization of school attendance problems (i.e., school refusal, truancy, school withdrawal, dropout…), resulting in no consensus on these efforts ( Heyne et al., 2018 ). Further, challenges rest in the inconsistent use and lack of consensus of definitions, and the variations result not in new terms, but in a categorization of the same behaviors according to their persistence, severity, and or avoidance ( Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ; Heyne et al., 2018 ).

Studies show that students who are engaged and see value in education are less likely to experience truancy ( Gentle-Genitty, 2009 ). Students who have absences and tardies in one semester are more likely to have ongoing absences and tardies ( Gottfried, 2017 ). Similarly, students who do not attend and who have classmates who do not attend have a correlation between the absences and their individual grades ( Marbouti et al., 2018 ). Timing has also been shown to have an effect on attendance or lack thereof ( Marbouti et al., 2018 ).

Schools have mechanisms and protocols for collecting data on student absenteeism. However, the literature shows that schools are not adequately evaluating the effectiveness of their procedures for collecting and validating attendance data, resulting in unintended consequences for the students, schools, and communities. This manuscript offers a recommended shift to the view of absenteeism and attendance and recommends ways to leverage attendance data for proactive student support. An intervention may disrupt trauma, connect students to supports, establish positive relationships, and provide pivot pathways to student success, thereby reducing rates of suspension and expulsion.

Interventions

Interventions exist and have been contributing to the research in this area for a number of years (ex. Jenson et al., 2013 ). The Ability School Engagement Program (ASEP) mitigates risk factors for violence and anti-social behaviors ( Cardwell et al., 2019 ). Another intervention included leadership binders and examined student attitudes toward school ( Berlin, 2019 ).

Another recently proposed intervention, the Evaluation and Support Program (ESP), is an alternative to the expulsion and arrest method, placing the responsibility for re-engaging youth on the school and community. ESP is being used alongside a value system called CORE, which includes civility, order, respect, and excellence (CORE). This tiered method ( Kearney, 2016 ) offers alternatives to the expulsion and arrest method and placing the responsibility for re-engaging the youth on the school and community prior to expulsion. The CORE-ESP intervention could begin changing the framing of absenteeism and includes workshops covering anger management, conflict resolution, drug education, and other similar topics and focuses on (1) priority evaluation and assessment with at least one parent, (2) treatment recommendations inclusive of education and therapy, and (3) at the end of completed tasks, a review hearing to evaluate educational placement. Interventions are focused on care and quality of life and can include the following:

• Anger Management, Academic Growth and Recovery, CORE Court, Community Service.

• Drug Education, Individual Counseling, Group Counseling, Mentoring.

• Truancy Intervention, Conflict Mediation, Restorative Justice.

• Apex Credit Recovery Pathway, Academic Reengagement, Career Builders & Parenting Workshops, Healing Hearts, Extended Day School.

The tiered model emphasizes a genuine concern and care for students by viewing the at-risk students as a member of the larger community and seeks viable alternatives to arrest and expulsion including

• Offer most interventions on school grounds to reduce unnecessary travel and cost.

• Use an Integrated System of Care framework to address the needs of the students and families while maintaining the safety of the learning environment.

• Decrease involvement of identified at-risk students into the juvenile justice system.

• Reduce out-of-school suspensions and disproportionality with school discipline to provide alternatives to arrest and expulsions through positive evidence-based school discipline practices.

• Ensure that when students are out of the classroom due to suspension or expulsion, a continuing education plan is in place and plans for adequate support and services are available upon re-entry.

• Reduce law enforcement referrals and arrests on school property, except where an arrest is necessary to protect the health and safety of the school community.

• Expand access to academic, mental health, and other community supports for students and their families.

• Increase academic success through implementing a plan toward social and academic re-engagement.

The impetus for this program was a decree by a local judge, which noted that the court perceived a pervasiveness in disenfranchising at-risk student populations. Disenfranchising can take many forms including the reporting structure for status offenses. The program goal is to strategically interrupt the school-to-prison pipeline through strong connections with community partnerships and by establishing a pre-screening consultant with the prosecutor's office. In addition, schools work with the local school hearing office to design parallel tracks and establish alternative pathways. This perspective takes an inclusive approach rather than the marginalized vs. mainstream approach currently held by most policy analysis frameworks.

Recommendations

Much research is needed in the area of addressing these complex issues. Reframing the beliefs and practices in the educational system is a place to start and can be founded on the belief that student bonds contribute to student success ( Gentle-Genitty, 2009 ; Veenstra et al., 2010 ). For students who commit offenses that rise to the level of public safety concern and who experience trauma, the most stable factor in their lives is often school. Establishing strong connections with community resources can help keep at-risk students in school. Without this reframing, at-risk students may continue to pivot away from school and rarely return or graduate—often reinforcing the school-to-prison pipeline. Reframing with an attendance focus instead of an absenteeism focus disrupts trauma, connects students and families to support, establishes positive relationships, and provides pivot pathways to success.

Multiple Attendance Markers

Multiple markers can be used to track and report attendance including teacher records, attendance officer reports, test-taking outcomes, suspensions (in- and out-of-school), expulsions, attendance percentages or percentiles, discipline behaviors, excused and unexcused absences, and the student's overall presence. Presence can be used to mark the student's attendance every day, every half-day, or by period. Period or half-day tracking more effectively captures patterns and attending behaviors ( Keppens and Spruyt, 2017 ). As the field of absenteeism has grown, methods for tracking processes and interventions have also grown. Beyond simply tracking presence or physical attendance, current research also considers tracking processes, interventions, classifications, and categorizations. Through the evaluation and analysis of the mental/cognitive and socioemotional as well as the physical attendance of the child in determining patterns of school attendance, much more targeted and structured outcomes have come to light.

Heyne and Sauter (2013) and Kearney (2008) share concerns on school refusal and other psychological underpinnings from tracking more than just physical attendance. When focusing on increasing rates of attendance, including more data can aid schools in more accurately responding to students' needs by treating them as humans vs. as mere numbers or targets and emphasizing a cognitive behavioral approach coupled with a mental health approach to absence and presence ( Klerman, 1988 ). This approach is ideal because it surfaces early manifestation of daily symptoms that often result in negative outcomes.

The tiered approach ( Figure 1 ) divides students into three tiers reflecting the level of anticipated need for support ( Kearney, 2016 ). Prevention, Tier 1 , captures all students (those missing <5% are considered satisfactory, those missing 5–9% are considered at-risk). It reinforces value for attendance and provides structures for monitoring, clarifying, recognizing, educating, and establishing a culture of positive attendance. It is the universal prevention and education approach capturing 50–100% of students. This tier also includes the need to establish positive relationships with families. Early intervention is critical for success. Recognizing good and improved attendance, educating and engaging students and families about the importance of attendance, monitoring absences, and setting attendance goals helps establish a supportive and engaging school climate.

Figure 1 . Assessing levels of student need—Implementing a model of tiered intervention ( Kearney, 2016 ; Used with permission from Attendance Works).

Tier 2 captures the 11–49% of students who have a history of absence (missing 10–19% of school) or who face a risk factor that makes attendance tenuous. These students need a higher level of more individualized support in addition to the universal supports ( Kearney, 2016 ). Tier 2 involves building caring supportive relationships (such as first period teachers Success Mentors, foster care, transportation) with students and families to motivate daily attendance and address challenging barriers.

Tier 3 , the highest level of need, often captures the top 10% of the population who require more intensive and individualized responses. Their chronic absence is at a threshold of missing 20% or more of school in the past year or during the first month of school and/or facing risk factors. These are the most vulnerable students facing serious hurdles, and they may be homeless, involved in foster care, or involved in the juvenile justice system.

Core-ESP Connect-Success Mentor Model

The CORE Connect-Success mentor model ( Figure 2 ) includes success mentors (teachers) who are advocates and motivators and encourage their 1st period students (mentees) during CORE time to attend school every day ( Kearney, 2016 ). Teachers track the attendance of their 1st period students and form a relationship that lends to academic success through the ethics of care. Other periods are responsible for taking attendance also; however, sharing information through an open systems process strengthens the cadence and increases accountability for tracking at-risk students.

Figure 2 . Key elements of a CORE success mentor (Used with permission from Attendance Works).

School districts can reallocate funds to invest in preventative and diversion programs to allow schools to access prevention and provider dollars, create partnerships to apply for local juvenile diversion and school safety and research grant opportunities, and seek out other federal community and private funding. Director of Student Services meetings can be held with representatives from various agencies (Department of Education, Department of Child Services, law enforcement, etc.) to foster a consistent dialogue to allow everyone to develop better processes. The result is improvements in defragmented services by integrating care with other community organizations, assessment of the overall mental health status of school districts, and the establishment of clear lines of communication to create new and improved reciprocal partnerships between schools and the courts that are more responsive to the needs of schools.

Other outcomes from coordination can include:

• Partnering with higher learning institutions to develop and evaluate effective risk assessment tools aimed at determining the high-risk offenders.

• Recruitment of enthusiastic human capital and other district resources to foster a sense of internal support.

• Training of key personnel in Trauma Informed Care and Brain Science to create Trauma Informed Care Schools within the school districts.

It is necessary to create a positive reinforcement behavioral alternative approach to expulsion and arrest. Students need to know they may successfully return to their schools armed with a better understanding of the connection between their behavior at school and that of the community, and consequences associated with their actions.

Attendance-focused tracking can help to show care with immediate action for all involved, especially when the tiered levels of need and strategic responses are used. This focus on attendance instead of absenteeism may help foster a positive environment where students are better able to improve mental, cognitive, and socio-emotional outcomes ( Gentle-Genitty, 2009 ; Heyne and Sauter, 2013 ; Gottfried, 2014 , 2017 ).

Students and parents should understand policies, practices, and definitions ( Kearney, 2004 ; Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ) to help them feel that the school cares. The child and their attendance should be celebrated, and a sense of school bond fostered ( Gentle-Genitty, 2008 , 2009 ; Veenstra et al., 2010 ). This bond can be leveraged for the benefit of all in protecting and fostering safety. The same is true when schools are able to use tracking attendance to establish a strategic method of collecting daily period data to establish patterns of student behavior. This is a shift in thinking. Tracking attendance should be a complementary responsibility to the larger task of ensuring we value and appreciate those who do attend and allow for them to bond and value their schooling. Thus, teacher engagement and classroom modifications should be norms.

What must be done? Much future research is needed in these areas. More intervention programs must engage teachers to look more deeply at attendance and the idea of paying attention to presence rather than absence. Teachers need to learn more about the contexts of their student absences. For example, why do students miss class when there is a substitute teacher? Are the students who are absent missing on specific days? For example, perhaps they are struggling and do not attend on days that include math classes. Do all the siblings in one family miss specific days because living situations cause late drop offs or missing the bus? We live in a schooling-dependent society where many parents work, and the school is the official place for their children to learn while they are gone. Students show up in the school environment every day and interact in complex relationships with teachers and administrators who are supposed to care, but often, few see what is really happening. The outcomes can lead to loneliness, suicide, bullying, and, sadly, school shootings. Students are being pushed to the edge simply because there is a stark change in patterns of behavior and engagement, and schools have no way to formally notify each other that something was off. More research in these areas and additional alternatives to attendance and engagement tracking may help.

Schools have not been effective focusing on absenteeism ( Gentle-Genitty et al., 2015 ). Operationalizing attendance problems is not just the idea of excused and unexcused absences, as both are absences where the student is not ready and able to learn. It is about the same students being suspended repeatedly via in-school suspensions and marked absences. If the students are attending, regardless of the form, they must be counted as present. This factor alone will help us to gather more accurate data and decide which data is being tracked for patterns of behaviors and changes, and what actions we take with the data to protect all students and offer support to those most in need.

A tiered approach ( Kearney, 2016 ) can help with school-wide interventions that benefit all and are individualized and intensified, working best in a culture of school attendance that values presence. This is a culture where typical factors of attendance are tracked and reported, discrepancies in what is tracked and used are shared, and negative patterns are disrupted early. There is no sense in collecting information if it will not be used to help the students. Focusing on attendance saves money, helps students graduate, and ultimately helps schools play the roles they were meant to play as bridges between families and communities to prepare students for their roles as responsible citizens.

This work offers only a glimpse into reframing the absenteeism focus to a focus on attendance and discusses other unintended consequences of attendance issues, including the effects on at-risk students. This list of recommendations and outcomes is not exhaustive, but suggestive and intended to inspire and expand current ideas about what positive interventions and preventions could be implemented in other schools. All of this is done with the hope of changing the attendance paradigm from being punitive to being a trauma-informed care approach that fosters positivity and support for reengagement. Perhaps this manuscript can expand the conversation to continue this important work more broadly.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

This project and community partnership was made possible through countless agency and school collaborations and seed funds from the IUPUI Chancellor Bantz Community Fellowship Program. The Primary Author was the program's 2017 Community Research Scholar and grant recipient. In addition, support to capture the research work is attributed to IUPUI's Olaniyan Scholars—undergraduate researchers: Teresa Parker, Darius Adams, Timara Turman. Warren Township school staff, agency partners, and Prosecutor's Office, prosecutor Kristen Martin are also to be thanked.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Berlin, S. (2019). Improving Student Attitudes Towards School Via the Implementation of Leadership Binders. Master's Thesis, Goucher College School of Education, Baltimore, MD, United States.

Google Scholar

Cardwell, S. M., Mazerolle, L., and Piquero, A. R. (2019). Truancy intervention and violent offending: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Aggress. Violent Behav. 49:101308. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2019.07.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Carroll, H. C. M. (2010). The effect of pupil absenteeism on literacy and numeracy in the primary school. Sch. Psychol. Int. 31, 115–131. doi: 10.1177/0143034310361674

Gentle-Genitty, C. (2008). Chronic Truancy and Social Bonding: Role of Schools. Las Vegas, NV: International Association for Truancy and Dropout Prevention.

Gentle-Genitty, C. (2009). Tracking More Than Absences: Impact of School's Social Bonding on Chronic Truancy . Latvia: Lambert Academic Publishing. doi: 10.1037/e625252012-001

CrossRef Full Text

Gentle-Genitty, C., Karikari, I., Chen, H., Wilka, E., and Kim, J. (2015). Truancy: a look at definitions in the USA and other territories. Educ. Stud. 41, 62–90. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2014.955734

Gottfried, M. A. (2014). Chronic absenteeism and its effects on students' academic and socioemotional outcomes. J. Educ. Stud. Risk 19, 53–75. doi: 10.1080/10824669.2014.962696

Gottfried, M. A. (2017). Does truancy beget truancy?: evidence from elementary school. Elem. Sch. J. 118, 128–148. doi: 10.1086/692938

Heyne, D., Gren-Landell, M., Melvin, G., and Gentle-Genitty, C. (2018). Differentiation between school attendance problems: why and how? Cogn. Behav. Pract. 26, 8–34. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpra.2018.03.006

Heyne, D., and Sauter, F. M. (2013). “School refusal,” in The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Treatment of Childhood and Adolescent Anxiety , eds C. A. Essau and T. H. Ollendick (Chichester, NM: Wiley), 471–517. doi: 10.1002/9781118315088.ch21

Jenson, W. R., Sprick, R., Sprick, J., Majszak, H., and Phosaly, L. (2013). Absenteeism and Truancy: Interventions and Universal Procedures . Eugene, OR: Ancora Publishing.

Kearney, C. A. (2004). “Absenteeism,” in Encyclopedia of School Psychology , eds T. S. Watson and C. H. Skinner (New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plemum, 1–2.

Kearney, C. A. (2008). An interdisciplinary model of school absenteeism in youth to inform professional practice and public policy. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 20, 257–282. doi: 10.1007/s10648-008-9078-3

Kearney, C. A. (2016). Managing School Absenteeism at Multiple Tiers. An Evidence-Based and Practical Guide for Professionals . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/med:psych/9780199985296.001.0001

Keppens, G., and Spruyt, B. (2017). Towards a typology of occasional truancy: an operationalization study of occasional truancy in secondary education in Flanders. Res. Pap. Educ. 32, 121–135. doi: 10.1080/02671522.2015.1136833

Klerman, L. V. (1988). School absence: a health perspective. Pediatr. Clin. North Am. 35, 1253–1269. doi: 10.1016/s0031-3955(16)36582-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Marbouti, F., Shafaat, A., Ulas, J., and Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2018). Relationship between time of class and student grades in an active learning course. J. Eng. Educ. 107, 468–490. doi: 10.1002/jee.20221

Maynard, B. R., Salas-Wright, C. P., Vaughn, M. G., and Peters, K. E. (2012). Who are truant youth? Examining distinctive profiles of truant youth using latent profile analysis. J. Youth Adolesc. 41, 1671–1684. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9788-1

Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Tinga, F., and Ormel, J. (2010). Truancy in late elementary and early secondary education: the influence of social bonds and self-control—the TRAILS study. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 34, 302–310. doi: 10.1177/0165025409347987

Keywords: attendance, absenteeism, expulsion, suspension, excused absences

Citation: Gentle-Genitty C, Taylor J and Renguette C (2020) A Change in the Frame: From Absenteeism to Attendance. Front. Educ. 4:161. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00161

Received: 31 July 2019; Accepted: 23 December 2019; Published: 21 January 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Gentle-Genitty, Taylor and Renguette. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Carolyn Gentle-Genitty, cgentleg@iu.edu

This article is part of the Research Topic

School Attendance and Problematic School Absenteeism in Youth

• Help & FAQ

The Importance of School Attendance: Findings From the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development on the Life-Course Effects of Truancy

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

School dropout has been extensively studied in the literature as a correlate of negative life outcomes. A precursor to school dropout is truancy, the unexcused or illegitimate student absence from school. Few studies have examined the relationship between truancy and involvement in crime and adjustment more generally over the life-course. This study extends previous work by exploring whether truancy at age 12 to 14 is related to later life outcomes such as crime, aggression, and adjustment using data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. Results indicate that truancy has long-lasting associations with negative life outcomes, especially for non-violent crime and problem drinking. Importantly, these findings hold for certain outcomes controlling for a comprehensive host of environmental and individual childhood risk factors.

• adult adjustment
• delinquency
• problem drinking

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

• 10.1177/0011128716660520

Other files and links

• Link to publication in Scopus

T1 - The Importance of School Attendance

T2 - Findings From the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development on the Life-Course Effects of Truancy

AU - Rocque, Michael

AU - Jennings, Wesley G.

AU - Piquero, Alex R.

AU - Ozkan, Turgut

AU - Farrington, David P.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - School dropout has been extensively studied in the literature as a correlate of negative life outcomes. A precursor to school dropout is truancy, the unexcused or illegitimate student absence from school. Few studies have examined the relationship between truancy and involvement in crime and adjustment more generally over the life-course. This study extends previous work by exploring whether truancy at age 12 to 14 is related to later life outcomes such as crime, aggression, and adjustment using data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. Results indicate that truancy has long-lasting associations with negative life outcomes, especially for non-violent crime and problem drinking. Importantly, these findings hold for certain outcomes controlling for a comprehensive host of environmental and individual childhood risk factors.

AB - School dropout has been extensively studied in the literature as a correlate of negative life outcomes. A precursor to school dropout is truancy, the unexcused or illegitimate student absence from school. Few studies have examined the relationship between truancy and involvement in crime and adjustment more generally over the life-course. This study extends previous work by exploring whether truancy at age 12 to 14 is related to later life outcomes such as crime, aggression, and adjustment using data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. Results indicate that truancy has long-lasting associations with negative life outcomes, especially for non-violent crime and problem drinking. Importantly, these findings hold for certain outcomes controlling for a comprehensive host of environmental and individual childhood risk factors.

KW - adult adjustment

KW - delinquency

KW - problem drinking

KW - truancy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018455015&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0011128716660520

DO - 10.1177/0011128716660520

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85018455015

SN - 0011-1287

JO - Crime & Delinquency

JF - Crime & Delinquency

Regions & Countries

Religious landscape study.

The RLS, conducted in 2007 and 2014, surveys more than 35,000 Americans from all 50 states about their religious affiliations, beliefs and practices, and social and political views. User guide | Report about demographics | Report about beliefs and attitudes

Explore religious groups in the U.S. by tradition, family and denomination

Explore religious affiliation data by state, region or select metro areas, northeastern states.

• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• New Hampshire
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island

Southern States

• District of Columbia
• Mississippi
• North Carolina
• South Carolina
• West Virginia

Midwestern States

• North Dakota
• South Dakota

Western States

All metro areas.

• Atlanta Metro Area
• Baltimore Metro Area
• Boston Metro Area
• Chicago Metro Area
• Dallas/Fort Worth Metro Area
• Detroit Metro Area
• Houston Metro Area
• Los Angeles Metro Area
• Miami Metro Area
• Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro Area
• New York City Metro Area
• Philadelphia Metro Area
• Phoenix Metro Area
• Pittsburgh Metro Area
• Providence Metro Area
• Riverside, CA Metro Area
• San Diego Metro Area
• San Francisco Metro Area
• Seattle Metro Area
• St. Louis Metro Area
• Tampa Metro Area
• Washington, DC Metro Area

Topics & Questions

Demographic information.

• Race and Ethnicity
• Immigration Status
• Marital Status
• Parental Status

Beliefs and Practices

• Belief in God
• Importance of Religion
• Attendance at Religious Services
• Prayer Frequency
• Prayer Groups
• Feelings of Spiritual Wellbeing
• Feelings of Sense of Wonder
• Guidance on Right and Wrong
• Standards for Right and Wrong
• Reading Scripture
• Interpretation of Scripture
• Belief in Heaven
• Belief in Hell

Social and Political Views

• Political Party
• Political Ideology
• Size of Government
• Government Aid to the Poor
• Homosexuality
• Same-Sex Marriage
• Protecting the Environment
• Human Evolution

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Personal tools

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

• Legal Developments

The Civil Rights Project / Proyecto Derechos Civiles 8370 Math Sciences, Box 951521 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 [email protected]

• Copyright Policy
• Accessibility

Copyright © 2010 UC Regents

• School of Education Hosts Grant-Funded Symposium for K-12 School Partners
• Mercy University News
• School of Education
• News & Events

Pictured from left to right are Mercy University Education faculty Elena Nitecki, Sudha Ramaswamy, Aki Ohseki, Teresa Quackenbush, Roseanne Vallice Levy, Jennifer San Diego, Harriet Lew, and Ahmed Almadami.

On April 17, the Mercy University School of Education, supported with grant funding from the U.S. Department of Education Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans (PPOHA) Program GRAD-PRO Grant and the BranchED Grant, hosted the Symposium on Teacher Education, Mentoring, and Career Development: Rising to the Challenges. In attendance were over 60 Pre-K-12 educators, principals, administrators, as well as Mercy Education faculty.

The purpose of the Symposium was to cultivate discussions about major issues and challenges in today’s schools: meeting the needs of our diverse and culturally rich student population, student mental health, hiring and retaining new teachers, and the new skills and strategies required of new teachers. These discussions, in addition to surveys, will serve as a first step in determining how the School of Education can best support and partner with Pre-K-12 schools in the Greater New York City metropolitan area. The two grants, GRAD-PRO and BranchED, will provide financial support for various projects and initiatives that aim to address schools’ needs.

“The Symposium was an excellent opportunity to connect with our partners in schools to hear from them what is happening on the front lines. This will help us use our grant funds to make a meaningful difference in these schools,” said Elena Nitecki, Professor in Childhood Education and Principal Investigator for the GRAD-PRO Grant.

Roseanne Vallice Levy, Associate Dean of the School of Education and Principal Investigator of the BranchED grant agreed. “Both grants have given us the opportunity to enter into our transformation phase in which we can do a deep dive into our current programs and course offerings in collaboration with our K-12 partners. Our mission is to better prepare our teacher candidates to teach in today’s classroom.”

The participants in attendance represented several districts in the Bronx, Harlem, and Westchester County. The Mercy School of Education faculty included full-time faculty and adjuncts, many of whom are working in schools as teachers and administrators.

To learn more about the Mercy University School of Education, visit  https://www.mercy.edu/academics/school-education

To learn more about the GRAD-PRO Grant, visit  https://www.mercy.edu/academics/grad-pro

Class of 2027: Required module info coming this week

Medical Student Education May 02, 2024

Rising Phase 1 Year 2 students (Class of 2027): Watch your email this week for information on completing required human subject research modules.

Your human subject research training includes nine Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) modules, which you must complete between May 6 and July 19.

Why is human subject research so important?

Indiana University School of Medicine strongly believes medical students should be familiar with human subject research issues and requires all medical students to receive training in it. Human subject research affects every physician working with patients.

It's important to know why patients must be protected during biomedical research and understand the ethical, practical and regulatory principles involved in doing research. In addition, all practicing physicians need to know about the elements of informed consent and the oversight given to research activities by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs).

Medical Student Education

Subscribe to this blog.

We've added you to our mailing list!

Sorry, there was a problem

Suggested for you

Jump to navigation

VASCI student Mara Beck presented at the Undergraduate Research Conference

Title: “SARS-Cov-2 Serological Surveillance in New England White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus)”

Summary: Global spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinforced the importance of understanding the mechanisms of zoonotic disease spread. Today’s novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is hypothesized to have originated in horseshoe bats–a natural host of coronaviruses–with subsequent animal intermediates propagating transmission to and from humans. One of such susceptible animal hosts and focus of this research are white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Increasingly suburban habitats, herd dynamics, asymptomatic infection, and unclear spillover mechanism necessitate a deeper understanding of cervid infection reservoirs. 

The current body of research in white-tailed deer reports seropositivity for non-human circulating variants–alpha, gamma, and delta–as well as omicron. Surveillance of local pathogen prevalence is warranted to inform the impact of humans on wildlife and future directions in public health in light of recent documentation of spillover to humans.

The present honors research project aims to analyze 50 student-collected dried blood samples for SARS-CoV-2 IgG, indicating previous infection and seroconversion. Dried blood spot samples were collected from hunter harvested carcasses at weight check stations in Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, and Hampshire counties in Fall 2023. Weekly work in the Osborne lab sees continuous development and optimization of deer specific ELISA and ramping up of sample testing. 

The Massachusetts Undergraduate Research Conference (MassURC) was a wonderful opportunity to share my project with the community and make connections. I encourage every tenacious undergraduate with a passion for science and curious mind to try their hand at research, you may just find your niche! Many thanks to Dr. Barbara Osborne, Dr. Andrew Lover, Rebecca Lawlor, Ryan Baker, MassWildlife, and the Commonwealth Honors College, whose support and mentorship has been invaluable. 

Veterinary and Animal Sciences

• Make a Gift

• open search

From the latest big breakthrough to the most influential and inspiring figures on campus to Pitt in the community, Pittwire is your official source for what’s happening now.

• Health and Wellness
• Technology and Science
• Arts and Humanities
• Community Impact
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Innovation and Research
• Our City/Our Campus
• Pitt Magazine
• Features & Articles
• Accolades & Honors
• Ones to Watch
• Announcements and Updates
• Life at Pitt
• Arts & Sciences
• Computing & Information
• Dental Medicine
• Engineering
• General Studies
• Health & Rehabilitation
• Honors College
• Public & Intl Affairs
• Public Health
• Social Work
• COVID-19 Response
• Sustainability

Graham Hatfull is among the latest National Academy of Sciences electees

Subscribe to Pittwire Today

The University of Pittsburgh’s Graham Hatfull was elected to the elite membership of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in recognition of “distinguished and continuing achievements” in research on April 30.

The Eberly Family Professor of Biotechnology in the Kenneth P. Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences and faculty member of the international Howard Hughes Medical Institute joins a group of 120 electees from the U.S., bringing the NAS total to 2,617 active members. 

“I was stunned at the news,” Hatfull said. “It is an amazing honor to be recognized as a member of the National Academy of Sciences. It is humbling, but wonderfully recognizes the contributions of all of the researchers in my lab over many years.”

His research focuses on lung diseases and the potential role of mycobacteriophages that kill bacteria and halt deadly infections otherwise resistant or unresponsive to antibiotics. Hatfull’s lab contains the largest refrigerated catalogue of these phages in the United States, if not the world.

[Read more: Hatfull’s lab shows phage attacks in new light]

“We could not be more proud of Graham for this well-deserved recognition,” said Adam Leibovich , Bettye J. and Ralph E. Bailey Dean of the Dietrich School and College of General Studies. “This innovative work is literally saving lives. What makes his contributions even more extraordinary is that he has engaged undergraduate and graduate students as collaborators, not just at Pitt but around the world, effectively mentoring the next generation of ground-breaking researchers.

“Additionally, he led the way in turning the biological laboratory class into a true research experience for all of our students. The entire Dietrich School is enriched by his scholarship and leadership,” Leibovich said.

In 2022, Hatfull’s lab co-authored three research papers  about phages’ success with patients. This work has been highlighted the past year alone in news reports by  CNN International and  USA Today . Hatfull also received a lifetime achievement award from the  European Society of Mycobacteriology last summer.

Employees, benefits open enrollment is May 1-15

Pitt is launching an office of sustainability in the health sciences, here are the speakers for pitt’s graduate school commencement ceremonies.

Graduate School Newsletter - May 2024

Thank you to those who participated and attended graduate research, scholarship and creative activity day (grscad) on april 23, 2024..

There were 47 posters for the 2nd annual GRSCAD poster presentation.

2024 GRSCAD Poster 1st Place - Aditi Poudel

2024 GRSCAD Poster Honorable Mention - Astha Neupane

2024 Distinguished Innovation and Creative Work Award Winner – David Wambui

Upcoming events.

Ice Cream Social 

•  Wednesday, May 1 3-4:30 p.m. CST 
•   University Student Union – near the west entrance

Join the Graduate School staff as we celebrate the end of the 2024 academic year with ice cream and socialization! This event is open to all graduate students. Those in attendance also have a chance to win some cool door prizes! 

Important Upcoming Dates

• May 3, 2024 - Capstone Component Completion
• May 4, 2024 - Spring 2024 Commencement Ceremony
• June 20, 2024 - Official Transcripts Available
• July 2024 - Diplomas Available

Graduate Assistantship Opportunities

Like us on Facebook !

Follow us on Instagram !