Improving school attendance and truancy in elementary schools has become an important goal for districts as they must track and address chronic absenteeism in their accountability plans under Californias Local Control Funding Formula and the federal Every Student Succeeds Act. The data could be among the measures included in the states dashboard of student performance measures as soon as the fall of 2018. Inconsistent school attendance and high absence rates are normally a result of multiple factors related to the young person, their family, neighborhood, and the school itself among others (Sugrue, Zuel, LaLiberteand, 2016) becomes a cause for additional difficulties such as poor academic performance, delinquency, school dropout, employment problems, and earlier and increased substance use and abuse (Fowler, 2015). The purpose of this paper is to develop an initial literature review draft on the effects of chronic absenteeism on academic achievement.Chronic Absenteeism Chronicabsence is a sign that a student is in jeopardy for school failure and possiblyearly dropout, regardless of the reason. Definition of Chronic Absenteeism According to the California Department of Education (2018), along with a majority of states in the Unites States (Dougherty, 2018), define a chronically absent student as one who misses at least ten percent of the school year. However, the U.S. federal government defines chronic absenteeism as students who have missed 15 days of school in a given school year compared to the states definition of students who have been absent ten percent or more of the school days. Chronic absenteeism is a relatively new designation that is still being defined in state and federal educational policy. Truancy, an established designation, focuses on unexcused absences unlike chronic absenteeism which can include absences for any reason. With truancy, all states have a definition and a code addressing it in their education code, a response structure, and a policy in place that can include both students and parents, as well as the criminal justice system. Chronic absenteeism does not have a common definition or a systematic process for handling cases in all states. Significance of the Problem Chronicabsenteeism is a complex problem with many factors with recent research callingit a nationwide crisis (Chang & Davis, 2015). Missing 10% or more of a school yeargreatly increases the probability that a student will experience significantacademic problems (e.g., poor grades and test scores) in the short term andsignificant social (e.g., incarceration) and socioeconomic (e.g., educationalattainment and employment) challenges in the longer term (Fowler, 2015, Sugrue, Zuel, LaLiberteand, 2016,Mallett, 2016, Gottfried & Kirksey 2017, Gershenson, Jacknowitz, & Brannegan,2017, London, Sanchez, & Castrechini, 2016). Students who are repeatedly absent fromschool, miss important learning and developmental connections can potentiallyhave negative consequences on future learning and outcomes. In California,three-quarters of kindergarten and first grade students who had beenchronically absent, failed meeting state reading and math proficiency standardsin third grade (Harris 2016). Whenabsenteeism reaches high levels in a classroom or school, all students areaffected as it becomes increasingly difficult for teachers to engage allstudents and meet their individual needs. In the United States, approximately10% of all elementary school students are chronically absent increasing toalmost 20% of high school students (US DOE, 2017). Furthermore,across all racial groups, as students progress through elementary school andinto middle and high school, the likelihood of absenteeism increases. Althoughchronic absenteeism is a universal problem, it is most prevalent among studentsof color, students with disabilities, students enrolled in urban schooldistricts, and students in high-poverty schools regardless of jurisdiction. Manyof these same students have overlapping characteristics such as poverty,ethnicity, and locale. Educators are challenged with multiple causes that addto the severity to the already existing problem, and often come with complex (Lara,Noble, Pelika, Coons, 2018). Policies Related to Chronic Absenteeism The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), increasedaccountability for states, school districts, and schools, however provided moreflexibility for states and local agencies in how they use federal educationdollars. NCLB, signed into law in January 2002, held schools accountable forraising math and reading proficiency as well as high school graduation rates.The Adequate Yearly Progress measures held elementary and middle schoolsaccountable for student absenteeism (NCLB, 2001). Althoughabsenteeism is an old problem, there is now a new impetus for addressing it.The newly enacted Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which replaces the NCLB, mandateschronic absenteeism to be reported at the school and district levels, thusallowing the use of federal funds for preventive measures and training to reducechronic absence. In addition, chronic absenteeism can be included as aschool-quality indicator in state-level ESSA accountability systems. Stateswill now have to establish data systems for tracking student absenteeism andreport the information collected. Therefore, school systems are more likely tointensify efforts at implementing solutions to chronic absenteeism (ESSA, 2015). The U.S. Department of Education released data onchronic absenteeism, revealing that 14 percent of the total student populationwere absent at least 15 days during the 2013-2014 school year. In October 2015,the presidential administration launched the Every Student, Every Dayinitiative (2015) to reduce chronic absenteeism by at least ten percent eachyear, beginning in 2016. Californiahas a new way of addressing local school and district progress known as theCalifornia School Dashboard, which looks at multiple measures including schoolattendance rates (Bauer, Liu, Schanzenbach, Shambaugh, 2018). Theoretical Framework Literature has established the important roles, withthe application of systems theory, that community, school, family, and individualfactors play in truancy. Sugrue,Zuel, and LaLiberte (2016) state that forelementary schoolage children, the most prominent microsystems are the familyand home environment and the school. Other systematic problems between theschool and home have been found to contribute to poor attendance. Such factorsinclude the communication difficulties between school staff and families, whichresult in parents lack of understanding of critical school attendance policiesand procedures and contribute to parents negative feelings regarding theschool system. However, few studies implicate motivational factors ascontributing to a students decision to attend school. Banduras motivational theory(1986) helps in determining what kinds of motivation would improve schoolattendance for at-risk youth. Motivation theory is a multifaceted theoreticalstrand that concentrates on why and how human behavior is activated anddirected. A motivational factor may be aligned with the ethic of care theory(Gilligan, 1982; Nodding, 1984), which is about acts of love and establishingrelationships that empower others (Gilligan, 1982). Nodding (1992) argues thatas human beings, we are all capable of caring for and about others. It is theact of caring that enables interpersonal relationships between individuals togrow and develop. In a recent research review, Ekstrand (2015) found thatstudents are drawn to school when there are feelings of school success reachedby strengthening core competencies, when bonding with adults is a possibility,and when the school climate is positive.Leading Causes of Absenteeism Medicalillness continues to be one of the significant causes and the most legitimatereasons for chronic absenteeism. (Havik, Bru, & Ertesvag, 2015). In fact,research indicates that among the pre-kindergarten and kindergarten studentswho are chronically absent, two-thirds of the absences are typically attributedto student health problems, such as asthma, and transportation (Samuels,2015). Other studies look at more severemedical issues and their contribution to school nonattendance. Schoolenvironment is another contributing factor to school nonattendance. Bullying,curriculum, student-teacher relationships, and other peer issues are allcategorized as school environment concerns (Teasely, 2004). Research by Lannegrand-Willems, Cosnefroy, and Lecigne, 2011), reinforce schoolenvironment concerns by stating that students who are frequently absent oftenfeel that they have a lack of control over their education. Due to thesefeelings, absentee students feel that have limited control of their success,view the school system as unfair, and turn to absentee behaviors. Researchrecommends that students need to feel more connected to the school, teachers,and faculty so they are less likely to be frequently absent from school thantheir disconnected counterparts (Ekstrand, 2015). Ingul, Klockner, Silverman& Nordahl, (2012) state that in order for students to value school andattend, they must feel supported and safe. Connectedness to a faculty member isa preventive factor in all areas of school environment-related absenteeism (Ingulet al., 2012; Havik et al., 2015). Anxietyis another key factor in school nonattendance. It is linked closely with othervariables such as the school environment and other mental health concerns(Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). Anxiety felt by a student can interfere in the dailylife of a student, therefore it can also impact school attendance. Test anxietyand performance anxiety also occur at high frequencies in school settings. Forsome students, generally at the elementary level, separation anxiety can causestudents to struggle leaving their parents to attend school. Lastly,generalized anxiety can cause students to worry constantly about everything allday (Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). Lastly, familial issues can contribute to school nonattendance if there is the presence of hostility, fighting, violence, and abuse in a household. (Havik et al., 2015). When addressing family-related attendance issues, lowersocio-economic status is simply more significantly correlated with schoolnonattendance, however, it is not a causing factor (Havik et al., 2015).Commonly Used Interventions Researchershave pursued implementation of a variety of interventions to addressabsenteeism and factors associated with it. Some interventions attempt to targeta particular factor causing absenteeism, and others try and address absenteeismon a general level. Response to Intervention, also known as RTI, is one modelfor addressing student issues on school, community, familial, and individuallevels (Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). There are three tiers of intervention inthe RTI model based on student need. Beginning with the majority of students, tierone level addresses student absentee issues on a community or school-wide level,including providing additional information to families. The second tier addressesstudents and the families of students who begin to demonstrate potentialbehavior concerns (Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). Interventions at the tier twolevel are supported more individually with a teacher, administrator, orcounselor to set up a behavior plan. At tier three, the intervention providedbecomes more intense, such as finding alternative school settings or otherextreme solutions (Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). Family-basedinterventions attempt to address attendance issues at the familial level andgenerally fall under tier two or tier three of the RTI model. Some examples offamily-based interventions are parenting skills groups, family therapy,interdisciplinary team strategizing meetings, criminal prosecution, andcommunity referrals (Maynard, Kjellstrand, & Thompsonn, 2013). Onesuggestion made by researchers toward improving school nonattendance has been familytherapy (Maynard et al., 2013; Pellegrini, 2007). Community-based interventionsare most always used in collaboration with family-based interventions as theytend to support each other. Despite the frequent simultaneous use of family andcommunity-based interventions, there are some community-based interventionsthat can be effective alone (Maynard et al., 2013; Epstein & Sheldon, 2007;Teasley, 2004). Community-based interventions are used with higher frequency inlow-income neighborhoods. Accordingto many research, a strong and balanced school-based intervention system addressesstudent needs and disciplinary actions equally, thereby improving school attendanceover time (Teasley, 2004; Freeman, Simonsen, McCoach, Sugai, Lombardi & Horner,2015; Maynard et al., 2013; Pelligrini, 2007). School-wideinterventions are most effective when they are used in partnership with familyand community-based interventions, such as tier one in the RTI model (Teasley,2004; Maynard et al., 2013; Pelligrini, 2007). School-based programs are mosteffective when it educates teachers about school nonattendance and how teacherscan address it within the classroom (Maynard et al., 2013; Kearney &Graczyk, 2013). Individual interventions for school nonattendance are usually assignedto school faculty members as part of a comprehensive school-based approach. Aspart of the RTI model, individual interventions are generally part of tier twoor tier three. Otherstudies found that individual counseling, such as Cognitive Behavior Therapy,was effective in decreasing absence rates (Kearney & Graczyk, 2013). Consequently,peer or faculty mentors could be an effective intervention aiding in thedecrease of school nonattendance according to some researchers, stating thatindividual interventions can help students address the root of their attendanceissues. Becoming aware of the primary issue can assist counselors or othermentors to provide support for those concerns. Often, the primary issue is a huge componentto school nonattendance, and when addressed, decreases absenteeism accordingly(Teasley, 2004).Future Research Currently,data is lacking regarding individual interventions used in the school settings.Research does not have much information about individual intervention methodsthat can assist absentee students across nonattendance variables. Furthermore,future research that utilizes student-level data has the potential to identifythe associations between school organizational effectiveness and individualchronic absenteeism, particularly by controlling for more concrete measures ofstudent characteristics. Additionally, using longitudinal student-level datawould allow us to more accurately explore causal relationships between schoolorganizational effectiveness and chronic absenteeism through analysis of changein student absenteeism over time (Lenhoff & Pogodzinski, 2018). It isrecommended that future research should collect data on school, family, and communitypartnership and student attendance for more than two years in order toinvestigate the long-term impact partnerships have on students attendancebehaviors (Sheldon & Epstein, 2007). ReferencesBandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chang, H. N., & Davis, R. (2015). Mapping the early attendance gap. San Francisco, CA: Attendance Works.Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., McCoach, B., Sugai, G., Lombardi, A., & Horner, R. (2015). Relationship between school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports and academic, attendance, and behavior outcomes in high schools. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 1(11), 1-11. Fowler, D. (2015). Criminalization of truancy in Texas: Prosecution of failure to attend school in adult criminal courts. Austin, TX: Texas Appleseed.Gershenson, S., Jacknowitz, A., & Brannegan, A. (2017). Are student absences worth the worry in US primary schools? Education Finance and Policy, 12, 137165.Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Gottfried, Michael A., and J. Jacob Kirksey. 2017. When Students Miss School: The Role of Timing of Absenteeism on Students Test Performance. Educational Researcher 46 (3): 11930.Harris, Kamala. (2016). In School + On Track 2016. Office of the Attorney General, State of California Department of Justice, Sacramento, CA.Havik, T., Bru, E., & Ertesvag, S. (2015). Assessing reasons for school non-attendance. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 59(3), 316-336. Ingul, J., Klockner, C., Silverman, W., & Nordahl, H. (2011). Adolescent school absenteeism: Modelling social and individual risk factors. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 17(2), 93-100. Kearney, C., & Graczyk, P. (2014). A response to intervention model to promote school attendance and decrease school absenteeism. Child Youth Care Forum, 43, 1-25. Lannegrand-Willems, L., Cosnefroy, O., & Lecigne, A. (2011). Prediction of various degrees of vocational secondary school absenteeism: Importance of the organization of the educational system. School Psychology International, 33(3), 294-307. Lara, J., Noble, K., Pelika, S., Coons, A. (2018). Chronic Absenteeism. NEA Research Brief, 57- 2018, 1-8.Lenhoff, S. & Pogodzinski, B. (2018). School Organizational Effectiveness and Chronic Absenteeism: Implications for Accountability, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 23(1-2), 153-169.London, R.A., Sanchez, M., & Castrechini, S. (2016). The dynamics of chronic absence and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(112).Mallett, C. (2016). The school-to-prison pipeline: A comprehensive assessment. New York: Springer Publishing Company.Maynard, B., McCrea, K., Pigott, T., & Kelly, M. (2013). Indicated truancy interventions for chronic truant students: A campbell systematic review. Research on Social Work Practice, 23(1), 5-21.Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Pellegrini, D. (2007). School non-attendance: Definitions, meanings, responses, interventions. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23(1), 63-77. Samuels, C. (2015). Districts work with families to curb pre-K absenteeism. Education Week, 34(24), 7.Sugrue, E. P., Zuel, T., & Laliberte, T. (2016). The Ecological Context of Chronic School Absenteeism in the Elementary Grades. Children and Schools, 38(3), 137-145. Teasley, M. (2014). Absenteeism and truancy: Risk, protection, and best practice implications for school social workers. National Association of Social Workers, 26(2), 117-127. Get Help With Your AssignmentIf you need assistance with writing your assignment, our professional assignment writing service is here to help!Find out more
Recent Comments