Absence Makes the Smart Go Wander

Recently, Bridge Magazine—a Michigan-focused news venue—ran a series of articles on the appalling numbers of absences that Michigan schoolchildren have been racking up since (and, let’s be honest, before) the pandemic.

Last year, more than a quarter of Michigan students, nearly 388,000, were considered “chronically absent,” which includes excused and unexcused absences — everything from sickness and appointments to skipping school without parents’ knowledge. Before the pandemic, there were 290,000 chronically absent students, or 19.7% of public school students. 

The definition of chronically absent? Ten percent of the school year, or 18 days. There’s a handy little infographic where you can see how your district ranks, and how their absence rate has fared in the past six years. I was happy to see that the suburban school where I taught for more than 30 years, and the district where I now live and volunteer have low absence rates, generally a mark of an economically secure community. Kind of like test scores.

Also—like test scores—high rates of absenteeism are something that outside observers (read: Bridge Magazine) seem to want to pin on school districts. Here’s a headline: Unlike Michigan, Indiana got tough on missing school. It’s already working. Bridge features a story about the low absence rate in Fremont, Indiana, just across the border, with a photo of a motherly kindergarten teacher and her (white) students.

‘New [Indiana] laws standardize school response to absences, threaten criminal action against students and families and create a reporting system that streams data daily from individual classrooms to state officials.

Fremont has fewer economically disadvantaged students (about 40%), which researchers tie to increased absenteeism, but district leaders say they also have stepped up effort to help get kids in school. Small buses pick up homeless students, schools offer telehealth and dentistry care and a countywide “teen court” serves as a first accountability step for some truant teens.’

Well, bully for Indiana—especially for picking up homeless kids and offering wraparound services for those who might be inclined to skip school because they can’t get there, or their clothes are dirty, or their tooth hurts. I’m guessing that if Michigan schools could lower their rate of disadvantaged students our absence rates would also drop. As for threatening criminal action—truancy has been a recurring issue since forever, and carrots work better than sticks in encouraging positive habits and behaviors.

In one of Bridge’s articles about the Shocking Absence Crisis, this interesting tidbit appeared:

‘Last year, 162 school districts — 59 traditional and 103 charters — faced potential financial penalties for school days when fewer than 75% of students showed up. In five districts, all charter schools, the 75% threshold wasn’t met at least 22 days, according to data provided to Bridge Michigan by the Michigan Department of Education.’ 

There are about 540 fully public (not charter) school districts in Michigan, and around 300 charter schools. Data is murky—but thumbnail math says that just over 10% of fully public school districts (which includes many large urban districts and small, remote rural schools) have serious attendance problems. Meanwhile, over a third of charter schools (which are smaller and more select) are struggling with absences—and the most egregious rates (the ones dragging down the statewide numbers) come from charter schools.

Bridge did not provide that analysis. Interesting.

When thinking about the results of so many kids missing school, Bridge naturally turns to test scores. I’m not even going to summarize, because it’s exactly what you’d expect: kids who don’t go to school very often get lower test scores and struggle to learn to read. But that doesn’t mean they’re dumb, or unworthy. It means we’re not digging into the real roots of the problem.

The more essential questions are why kids aren’t attending, and how to bring them back into the gotta-go-to-school fold. What people and programs might fill their needs, invite them into a safe community?

With elementary students, absences are tied to parent behaviors—so Fremont, Indiana has the right idea: buses, free health and dental care, after-school programs, etc. With older students, building communities—sports, clubs, co-ops, supervised hangouts—are lures, but in the end, teenagers come to school to learn, to let their minds wander. When that doesn’t happen, if there’s nobody dragging you out of bed in the morning, why bother?

Here’s a footnote to the discussion: Should Kids Miss School for Vacation? Parents Say Yes, Teachers Aren’t So Sure. Synopsis: Parents are defensive about getting better prices on a Disney or skiing vacation and pulling their kids from school for family fun. Teachers are resentful about being required to rustle up packets and other busy work while Kid misses classroom discussions and contributions to group projects. Grades become an issue.

Speaking personally, I’ve never flipped out over kids missing a few days, especially if you get advance warning and a request for work that comes back completed. Learning is never uniform and predictable, and learning (not filling boxes in the gradebook) is the ultimate goal. Right?

I’ve been asked to excuse a two-month absence for a boy traveling to Egypt with his energy engineer father, and dealt with a championship snowboarder who missed most of a marking period but came back with Olympic and career goals, and a fistful of medals.

The first boy was an A student. He couldn’t make up what he missed—but the life experience more than made up for that. The second boy read at a 2nd grade level, a fact reinforced by several teachers when his parents told us about the tour of events he’d entered. Finally, his mother said: So we shouldn’t let him do what he’s so great at—we should make him stay here and fail all his assignments? How does that help him?

I have thought about her many times. Partly about the privilege well-heeled white parents have in managing their children’s absences—but also in considering why students stop coming to school.

If kids aren’t showing up to school, maybe it’s not about better data streams or legal threats, or texting their parents at the right time.

Maybe they don’t want to stay in school and fail their assignments, convinced that nobody cares much. What should we be doing about that?

2 Comments

  1. Unknown's avatar

    I find it hilarious that this magazine is using Indiana as the model for attendance accountability. I work in education in Indiana. Yes, the state passed a new absenteeism law this past legislative session. The only elements of that law that have any teeth are the following provisions:

    “Provides that the absence policy adopted by the governing body of a school corporation must provide for the categorization of excused absences in accordance with the categorization framework established by the department.”

    “Requires a public school to hold an attendance conference not later than 10 instructional days (instead of five instructional days) after the student’s fifth absence.”

    Prohibits a public school from expelling or suspending a student solely because the student is chronically absent or a habitual truant.

    So the new absenteeism law places more of the burden of enforcing a student’s attendance on the schools themselves. The second provision (“hold an attendance conference not later than 10 instructional days”) actually wasn’t a K-12 requirement prior to this law – having an attendance meeting at all was a requirement that had previously only been applied to elementary schools.

    Intermediate, middle, and high schools were already meeting students/families that were attendance issues, by the way. Because we want them to be at school. But thanks for putting that in writing?

    In the same legislative session, property tax caps were adjusted so that schools (along with other local services) got less money overall, and will continue to get less money for the foreseeable future. So this was yet another year of, “hey, schools: do more with less.” Indiana has had many years like that. I’m sure Michigan educators would love hear more of that message. You’re welcome, guys. Hoosiers have all the answers.

    And this snippet from the article really got me: “a countywide “teen court” serves as a first accountability step for some truant teens.

    This is in reference to our county juvenile probation system. Which, oh man. Maybe there’s an exception out there somewhere, but basically everyone I’ve ever talked to who works with county juvenile probation courts in this state thinks they’re worthless. And it is not because of the people working in juvenile probation: it is 100% because they are severely underfunded. They only have the funding and manpower to take on the absolute worst cases. And if they’re anywhere in striking distance of being an adult, you can forget about it.

    Juvenile probation is not the “first accountability step” for anybody, anywhere, in this state. That’s not how it works. Michigan has a juvenile justice system, by the way. (I hope it’s better than ours.) But did this magazine, um, not know that?

    All of the court-related language in the new Indiana law is optional, by the way. Meaning–prosecutors and courts can or may do this or that when a student his chronically truant, but they don’t have to. Which anyone in Indiana education knows what that means: we’re almost never going to get help from the courts. The actual legal consequences for truancy will almost never come into play, because our juvenile court system doesn’t have the resources to make that happen. And the new law provided absolutely zero funding for our juvenile justice system.

    If local school districts have the funding, manpower, and willpower to add layers of accountability to student attendance beyond these lukewarm “state requirements,” hey, great. But trust me when I say that Indiana did not find a magic solution to this problem, and made absolutely zero sincere effort at trying to figure why attendance has cratered, or how to get students to buy in to attending school more. Because trying to figure that out is too hard when you can tell us to just “have more meetings.”

    I find it telling that one administrator is quoted as saying, “If your attendance is not right, your test scores will never go up.” If that’s your motivator for trying to get students to attend, then we are still not having the right conversation. “I want kids to be here because then number will go up” is just so myopic and cynical.

    Thanks for sharing.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Unknown's avatar

      Thanks for a great comment. You are the on-the-ground witness that dispels the Bridge story about yet another set of silver bullets, over the border in Indiana.

      I am guessing that poor attendance is an issue everywhere in the U.S.– and it’s typical of Americans to think first about threats and bribes, then compare *their* threats and bribes to those cooked up by an adjacent state. You’re right– we need to be having lots of conversations about why attendance is faltering, how to get kids to see the value in coming to school.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment