Excused-unexcused absence distinctions show few outcome differences and delay intervention¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Studies find few differences between excused and unexcused absences in associated outcomes, and reliance on the dichotomy delays intervention until legal tripwires are triggered. → Kearney CA 2019

Evidence¶

Kearney CA 2019¶

Kearney CA, Gonzálvez C, Graczyk PA and Fornander MJ (2019) Reconciling Contemporary Approaches to School Attendance and School Absenteeism: Toward Promotion and Nimble Response, Global Policy Review and Implementation, and Future Adaptability (Part 1). Front. Psychol. 10:2222. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02222

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's narrative synthesis of studies comparing excused and unexcused absences, citing Gottfried (2009) who found both types significantly related to demographic, academic, and behavioral variables, and Dube and Orpinas (2009) who found no difference across youth profiles. No effect sizes printed.

"Numerous studies have illustrated ancillary problems associated with school absenteeism whether excused or unexcused, combine these absences when evaluating outcomes, or have found few differences based on this absence typology"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The school refusal-truancy dichotomy shows extensive overlap and heterogeneity — related
• Chronic absenteeism is studied as a factor in student achievement over two years, with the 10 percent absence threshold questioned as a trigger point for action — related
• Historical legacy of boarding schools and biased attendance responses deepen generational distrust that undermines attendance partnerships with AI/AN families — related