Since the pandemic, schools have become political battlegrounds, where seemingly every issue is polarized: school closures, mask mandates, teachings about race and sexuality, school choice, the content available in school libraries, and even reading and math instruction.
Indeed, two of us testified to our differences on some of these topics in the same congressional hearing. But chronic absenteeism stands apart from these contentious issues. Not only is it not polarized, it is the most important issue facing schools today.
Despite our differences on other education issues, we three agree that all states and school districts must make this the top priority for this school year, by adopting an ambitious goal: cut chronic absenteeism by 50 percent over five years.
Before the pandemic, about 15 percent of public school students were chronically absent, meaning they missed 10 percent or more of the school year, or about 18 days. That rate skyrocketed across the board during the pandemic, surging in red and blue states; in high-poverty and low-poverty districts; in urban, suburban and rural districts; and among all student groups.
In 2022, chronic absenteeism rates nearly doubled their pre-pandemic baseline. More alarming still, by 2023 (the most recent year with available data), rates had only fallen by 2 percentage points, suggesting this problem will not simply go away on its own.
We need a plan, now, because the real systemic threat is that these elevated post-pandemic rates of absenteeism will become a new normal, with dire consequences both for students and society.
Chronically absent students are less likely to read proficiently by third grade, and more likely to struggle academically in middle school and drop out of high school. Long-term effects extend beyond academics, impairing the development of social-emotional and executive-functioning skills that are essential for success in work and life. And chronic absenteeism also worsens equity issues, deepening opportunity gaps for Black, Latino, Native American and low-income students.
What’s more, chronic absenteeism doesn't just hurt the absent students. Research shows that when one student frequently misses school, peers are more likely to do the same. Absenteeism also disrupts the classroom environment, slows the pace of instruction and makes the difficult job of teaching even tougher.
While the absenteeism challenge is daunting, it is not insurmountable if our education leaders make curbing chronic absenteeism their top priority next school year and maintain that focus over time. Without clear goals, however, that focus will inevitably wane. That’s why all state and district leaders should embrace the bold but achievable goal of cutting chronic absenteeism by 50 percent over five years.
To tackle the post-pandemic chronic absenteeism crisis, we must understand its causes.
Factors such as sickness, mental health, transportation and unwelcoming or unsafe school environments contributed to absenteeism before the pandemic — and still do today. The pandemic worsened these issues by disrupting norms and routines, creating confusion about attending school with minor symptoms, weakening family-school relationships and fostering a misguided belief that remote learning could make up for absences.
Halving the chronic absenteeism rate in five years will require an all-hands-on-deck approach. These efforts will vary across contexts because the causes of chronic absenteeism vary from one school to the next. But a failure to use every tool available could prevent us from meeting this necessary goal.
One key to this effort is clear communication. Governors and state education leaders need to clarify that fighting chronic absenteeism is their top priority for schools. They also need to raise parents’ and students’ awareness about the value of showing up to school every day, as well as bolster local educators’ attendance efforts. The superintendents, principals and teachers on the front lines need to stress this issue and engage families — early and often — when students are at risk of becoming chronically absent. Timely and clear absenteeism data from states and districts must both show the extent of the challenge and the progress that schools make.
A second key is to support families and engage students. School districts have to identify root causes of absenteeism and work with community organizations on issues like community safety, physical and mental health resources and unstable housing. Likewise, schools must offer students learning spaces that are not only safe but engaging and welcoming, where each student is known, and knows it.
A third key is accountability. For parents and students, that means re-establishing attendance habits that were common a few years ago. For schools and districts, it means prioritizing student needs daily and having clear expectations and appropriate responses for families whose students miss too much school. For states, that means setting goals, tracking progress and pushing districts and schools until they turn the tide.
We know that thoughtful approaches to curbing absenteeism will differ across 13,000 school districts, each with its own needs and sensibilities. Even among ourselves, we differ in the emphasis we place on supports (which we know are essential for specific needs and also know those needs did not necessarily double post-pandemic) and accountability, knowing that heavy-handed consequences can be counterproductive and that overly lenient responses may not be productive enough.
Nevertheless, we strongly agree that effective action on chronic absenteeism, in every state and district, is crucial for the coming school year.
The threat of chronic absenteeism is here, and an ambitious goal is both vital and achievable. If our education system fails to turn back the pandemic rise in absenteeism, the burden will be borne by the next generation of students.
That is a pandemic legacy our nation cannot afford.
Hedy N. Chang is the founder and executive director of Attendance Works. Denise Forte is the president and CEO of EdTrust. Nat Malkus is a senior fellow and deputy director of Education Policy Studies at AEI.
