Despite an unprecedented infusion of resources, the latest data show that American students are struggling to recover the ground they have lost and may even be making less year-to-year progress than before the pandemic. Yet, to a remarkable extent, educators and policymakers who profess to care about the problem are shying away from the most obvious remedy: Make kids come to school, and make their parents make them do so.
Between 2018 and 2022, the share of American students who experienced chronic absenteeism—commonly defined as missing at least 10 percent of the school year—skyrocketed from 15 percent to 28 percent. And, despite much public angst, the most recent numbers show that roughly a quarter of kids are still missing too much school.
Until this condition improves, returning to prior achievement levels is all but impossible. After all, even a few missed days can leave students disoriented—particularly if their courses are carefully sequenced. Moreover, research suggests that chronic absenteeism has spillover effects, depressing the achievement of peers whose teachers must repeatedly recapitulate their lessons.
Unsurprisingly, chronic absence is also linked to higher dropout rates and a greater likelihood of risky behavior such as drug and alcohol use. So, in recognition of the stakes, a cross-partisan coalition of think tanks and advocacy organizations is calling for a 50 percent reduction in chronic absenteeism within five years.
That’s a laudable goal. But how can it be achieved?
The prevailing consensus, as exemplified by Department of Education guidance, emphasizes the identification and removal of barriers to attendance. Is Johnny struggling to get to the bus stop? Move it a block closer. Is his family coping with illnesses? Host free-to-access medical clinics.
It’s hard to object to these efforts. Yet they are strangely disconnected from the current problem. After all, the rise in chronic absenteeism has been eerily universal. In proportional terms, younger and older students have seen nearly identical increases, as have urban and rural students, rich and poor students, and students from different racial and ethnic groups.
Barriers alone cannot explain such a rapid and universal shift. For example, longstanding transportation challenges didn’t become twice as severe because of the pandemic. Nor are lingering health-related challenges a plausible explanation (though it’s possible that parents are keeping kids with sniffles home from school more often than they used to). Nor has there been a notable increase in Americans’ economic distress. All of which suggests that the problem is fundamentally cultural.
In one sense, that’s bad news. Culture is hard to change. But there’s a silver lining. After all, if the biggest problem is that students who used attend school regularly have gotten out of the habit, then perhaps all that’s truly needed to reestablish the habit is a modicum of political courage and a not-so-gentle shove.
Admittedly, some previous efforts at enforcement have backfired. For example, suspending students for truancy is patently absurd, and student involvement in the criminal justice system correlates with even higher rates of absenteeism.
But of course, there are other options. For example, schools can and should prohibit students who miss class from playing in football games or other athletic competitions that week. And teachers can and should base a non-trivial percentage of students’ grades on “participation” including but not limited to attendance.
In theory, many school districts already deny chronically absent students class credit and require Saturday or after school detentions. Still, many districts don’t do these things. And even in those that do, we suspect that implementation is spotty.
As we write this, Ohio legislators are considering a bill that would pay students to go to school. And it’s true that positive incentives such as cash payouts, gift cards, and other financial rewards have a track record of success.
Yet in addition to sending a questionable message—effectively bribing people into basic, expected behaviors—such policies may be fiscally unsustainable. And, contrary to the assertions of some advocates, there is plenty of evidence that fines and other sanctions can also work when combined with effective outreach. For example, one comprehensive and seemingly effective intervention referred students to case managers and then penalized families who didn’t attend meetings.
Yes, many of these outcomes are undesirable. But so is the status quo. And if we truly believe that a public education is indispensable, we can’t demur when an unprecedented throng declines to show up.
In short, the point of "tough love” isn’t to win friends or make anyone’s life easier. It’s to get someone whose future matters to do something necessary and important.
Like go to school.
