Introduction

A key challenge for those who address problematic school absenteeism is that researchers from many different disciplines study this population. Researchers in education, psychology, criminal justice, law, social work, nursing, medicine, and sociology have devised various definitions as well as different classification, assessment, and treatment strategies for this population. Mental health professionals often concentrate on anxiety-based school refusal, for example, whereas educators and criminal justice experts often concentrate on delinquent-related truancy. Thus, little standardization across research articles has emerged.

Several scholars in recent years have called for more integrated and comprehensive approaches to address problematic school absenteeism (Kearney, 2008a; Lyon & Cotler, 2009; Reid, 2011). Such approaches would: encompass all youth with difficulties attending school; incorporate prevention as well as intervention strategies; resonate with health, mental health, and educational professionals; and be tailored to the developmental and academic needs of a given student.

One approach that may fit these criteria is a response to intervention (RtI) model, or a systematic decision-making process to assign evidence-based strategies based on student need (Fox, Carta, Strain, Dunlap, & Hemmeter, 2010). RtI involves a proactive focus on early identification of learning and behavior problems and immediate, effective intervention. RtI includes a three-tiered approach of universal, targeted, and intensive interventions. Tier 1, or universal, interventions are directed toward all students and involve a core set of strategies and regular screening to identify students who are not benefiting from these core strategies. Tier 2, or targeted, interventions are directed toward at-risk students who require additional support beyond Tier 1 strategies. Tier 3, or intensive, interventions are directed toward students with severe problems who require a more concentrated approach and constant progress monitoring.

An RtI model may be compatible for problematic school absenteeism. RtI and problematic absenteeism scholars focus on the need for early intervention with progress monitoring, functional behavioral assessment, empirically supported treatments to reduce obstacles to academic achievement (including absenteeism), multitier organization, and a team-based approach for implementation. Early intervention is crucial, given that even moderate rates of absenteeism are linked to substantial academic and behavioral problems (Henry, 2007). The next sections outline Tier 1, 2, and 3 interventions for problematic school absenteeism that have received considerable empirical support.

Tier 1 Interventions

Tier 1 interventions are directed toward all students and are largely preventive. Tier 1 interventions are “whole school” in nature and focus on risk factors that contribute to absenteeism on a wide scale. Such risk factors include poor school climate, school violence and bullying, unhealthy learning environments, and student mental health concerns. Tier 1 interventions thus include strategies to improve school climate and safety as well as student health and social-emotional development.

Whole-school interventions to improve school climate include the Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports (PBIS) program, which emphasizes prosocial behaviors, frequent monitoring of disciplinary issues, and evidence-based practices for academic and behavior problems. PBIS is implemented by school officials and does improve academic gains and student perceptions of school safety; the program also reduces office disciplinary referrals and school suspensions (Lassen, Steele, & Sailor, 2006). PBIS may be adapted for attendance issues to include examination of patterns in attendance data and increased student involvement in attendance policies. The role of the homeroom teacher also can be restructured to identify students at risk for absenteeism and to inform school officials and parents about an absence (Graeff-Martins et al., 2007).

Climate approaches also include developing school cultures that recognize academic accomplishments. Award ceremonies for good attendance, frequent monitoring of absences, and quicker notification of parents following an absence thus are advisable (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002). Others have advocated that school climate approaches to boost attendance must involve flexible responses to absenteeism (as opposed to legal referral), customizing curriculum and instruction to individual academic needs, and alternative educational methods to allow for more gradual accumulation of academic credit (Archambault, Janosz, Fallu, & Pagani, 2009; Martin, 2011).

Whole-school interventions that reduce problematic school absenteeism also include bullying and violence prevention and conflict resolution. Bullying prevention focuses on clear and well-enforced school rules regarding social violence, classroom interventions, parental engagement, community participation, curriculum changes, increased supervision, social skills and support groups, behavioral contracts, counseling for victims and perpetrators, and mentoring (Olweus & Limber, 2010; Vreeman & Carroll, 2007). Beane, Miller, and Spurling (2008) found that their Bully Free Program enhanced school attendance between baseline (90.8%) and after 175 days of program implementation (97.8%). Other school-wide practices to reduce violence include security enforcement, crisis plans for violent acts, anger management classes, parent training and family therapy, and peer mediation. Truancy and dropout prevention programs often involve enhancing safe learning environments (Smink & Reimer, 2005).

Whole-school interventions to reduce problematic absenteeism also include health-based programs. These interventions focus on hand washing, flu immunization, asthma and lice management, specialized educational services for those with chronic medical conditions, and routine medical care for pregnant youth. These programs boost overall attendance levels. Other school-based health services that may reduce absenteeism include health and nutrition education as well as HIV and STD prevention (Freudenberg & Ruglis, 2007).

Whole-school interventions to reduce problematic school absenteeism also include programs to address students’ mental health needs. Substance abuse prevention, coping skills, and treatments for emotional, learning, and disruptive behavior disorders are good examples (Weist, Stiegler, Stephan, Cox, & Vaughan, 2010). Other programs focus on conflict resolution, anger management, coping with divorce or family conflict, and sex education (Brown & Bolen, 2008). Mental health programs in schools are sometimes combined with academic remediation strategies and have led sometimes to improvements in tardiness, absenteeism, and dropout rates (Hoagwood et al., 2007).

Tier 1 approaches for problematic absenteeism also include social and emotional learning programs, such as character education. The latter emphasizes core values and life skills to promote social competence and learning. Snyder and colleagues (2010) implemented a social-emotional and character development program that involved six areas:

1. Self-concept
   
2. Physical and intellectual actions (e.g., nutrition, decision-making skills)
   
3. Social and emotional actions (self-control, time management)
   
4. Interpersonal skills (e.g., empathy, conflict resolution)
   
5. Integrity and self-appraisal
   
6. Self-improvement (e.g., problem solving, persistence)

Schools with the intervention had significantly lower absenteeism than control schools.