Truancy 1
Running head: STUDENT TRUANCY

Student truancy: Why should I go to school?
Kevin Floress
Indiana University

Truancy 2
Abstract
Various school personnel, parents, community members, and juvenile justice officials among others are consistently concerned with the issue of truancy in schools. Truancy highly correlates to problem behaviors such as academic failure, dropping out of school, and criminal behavior (Giacomazzi, Mueller, & Stoddard, 2006). Perhaps the most pertinent question then is: What is causing students to be truant from school and what can be done to improve school attendance? This report will begin by examining the multifaceted implications of student truancy. After a review of the far-reaching effects of truancy, research-based interventions aimed at alleviating truancies will be explored.

Truancy 3
Student truancy: Why should I go to school?
Introduction to Truancy
Truancy defined
Without explanation it is not entirely clear what is meant when a student is said to be “truant.” For purposes of clarification, it is important to distinguish the term truant from the term absent. According to Teasley (2004), absenteeism can be defined as any event when a student does not attend school. Absenteeism can be affected by any number of factors such as lack of community support, dysfunctional family life, severe weather, personal illness, family illness, physical limitations or any other reason why a student may not attend school on a given day (Teasley). Truancy on the other hand, can be defined as unexcused and unlawful absence from school; typically without parental knowledge or consent. According to Lee and Miltenberger (1996), students that are truant typically spend the time they are out of school away from their home and tend to conceal the absences from his or her parents. Truancy then, is a form of absenteeism that is unexcused and without guardian consent.
Implications of truancy
According to Fantuzzo, Grim, and Hazan (2005) truancy is a multidimensional problem with far-reaching effects. When students are truant from school, they are not only hurting themselves but also their families, their schools, and their communities
(McCray, 2006).
On an individual level, truancy is connected with a complex system of problems such as emotional maladjustment, poor academic achievement, school dropout, substance abuse, and teen pregnancy (Fantuzzo, Grim, & Hazan, 2005). Research indicates that a

Truancy 4 student’s academic performance is negatively impacted if they miss even 30 hours of instructional time (Commentary, 2002). Not only is truancy highly correlated with low levels of school achievement but also with high dropout rates. The individuals that dropout from school are two-and-a-half times more probable to be on welfare, nearly twice as likely to be unemployed, and on average will earn significantly lower wages than adults who graduate (Commentary). To compound matters, truancy often leads to delinquency and criminal activity (Garry, 1996). Truant students are at higher risk for substance abuse and violence (McCray, 2006).
Not only does truancy affect individuals, it has implications that are felt at the school-level. According to Garry (1996), schools with chronically truant students are losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in state and federal funding. Oftentimes, this funding is directly tied to the percentage of students in attendance. Furthermore, schools are losing discretionary funds and the resources that come with these funds. In a causal relationship, truant students are negatively affecting his or her peers through the loss of funding (McCray, 2006). When students are absent, they are missing valuable instructional time. When these students are asked to perform on state-wide assessments, they are ill-prepared. As a result, poor student scores negatively affect the overall grade of the school and limit a school’s opportunity for additional or even continuing funding
(Commentary, 2002).
At the community level, truancy is associated with delinquent behaviors that range from vandalism to criminal violence. According to McCray (2006), truancy is especially prevalent in urban settings with high rates of criminal activity. Several urban law enforcement agencies have found a correlation between crimes committed during

Truancy 5 daytime hours and truancy. In short, when students are not in class, they are oftentimes committing crimes such as vandalism, burglary, and shoplifting (Garry, 1996).
Even public and private businesses are affected by truancy. Oftentimes individuals that have a history of truancies are not prepared to enter the workforce. As a result, businesses either have to continue searching for more qualified applicants or have to spend valuable time and money to train uneducated workers. Lastly, businesses are negatively impacted when truant students burglarize or vandalize their business (McCray,
2006).
Why are students truant?
First, it may be appropriate to consider the factors that contribute towards excessive unexcused absence from school. While each individual case of student truancy has unique circumstances, research has identified several key predictors of truancy.
According to Reid (2005), there are school-based factors such as student bullying, the curriculum, and even poor teaching that increase the likelihood of truancy. Furthermore, nearly all individual cases involve issues of social, psychological, and institutional features to some extent. One study

that included 160 students ages seven and older, found that students are truant for the following reasons: The influence of friends and peers, poor relationships with teachers, content and delivery of curriculum, family concerns such as parental attitudes and domestic problems, bullying, and classroom management. Each truancy case is unique and multifaceted (Reid).

In another study, Butler (2003) found that students that are frequently truant tend to have lower self-perceived academic ability, lower self-esteem, greater alienation from school, increased neuroticism, and antisocial behaviors. Furthermore, the study indicated

Truancy 6 that these students are less popular, often are perceived as depressed, have poor concentration skills, often tell lies, and are noncompliant.
Where to go from here?
The remainder of this report will examine empirically supported interventions that aim to improve issues of truancy. There are several proposed strategies that can be implemented to increase school-wide attendance. Since the topic of truancy is multidimensional, various strategies may be better suited under varying circumstances.
Individual-level, school-level, and community-level intervention strategies will be explored. Individual-level strategies
On an individual level, educators need to determine specific causality of truancy before designing a plan of action (Teasley, 2004). As stated earlier, there are several factors that may be contributing to why an individual is chronically truant. Whether that student has cognitive, behavioral, or other difficulties will dictate how one should tailor an intervention. A couple of programs that have proven generally successful though are peer-tutoring and mentoring programs (Join together, 1998).
Peer-tutoring programs are interventions that aim to assist a specific, target population (Join together, 1998). In peer-tutoring programs an older, achieving student is typically paired with a younger student that is having attendance difficulties. The older tutor will typically aid the younger student in the area of academic achievement. For example, a tutor might help the younger student with study skills or perhaps a specific homework assignment or subject area. In one case study using a peer-tutoring program, the dropout rate of the control group was 12% while the dropout rate of the peer tutoring

Truancy 7 intervention group was merely 1 percent (Join together, 1998). Not only were these students attending on a more regular basis, they were not dropping out.
According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (2003), another successful intervention at the individual level is mentoring. OJJDP’s review of peer-mentoring programs discovered an overall increase in students’ academic achievement and a reduction in delinquent behaviors when mentoring groups were compared to a control group. It was found that the most effective mentoring outcomes occur when a quality relationship is established between the mentor and the student and when the relationship lasts one year or longer (OJJDP).
School-level strategies
Perhaps the most effective strategy schools can implement to reduce rates of truancy is to create solid truancy policy. According to Railsback (2004), schools should begin by creating consistent and reasonable attendance policies that include appropriate consequences when students do not attend school. Schools need to find an ideal balance when deciding upon an attendance policy. They should promote a positive school environment that will have logical and appropriate consequences for missing school. In one study, when schools developed a policy that included students losing credit as a consequence for excessive truancy, school attendance improved (Epp & Epp, 2001). At the same time, it is important to have some flexibility in policy so that students are not discouraged from attending school. It has been found that an overly punitive policy can even increase truancies (Epp & Epp).
Railsback (2004) suggests that schools need to personalize the school experience.
They need to find ways to increase student engagement through personalization with

Truancy 8 students and families. For example, schools should advocate family involvement, foster a culturally responsive climate, create smaller learning communities, mentoring and advisory programs, and focus on instructional time. Schools need to create a personally relevant environment for students.
Other suggestions on how truancy rates can be improved at the school-level include comprehensive plans, positive reinforcement, and change over time (Epstein and
Sheldon, 2002). When schools create comprehensive plans, they should involve students, families, and the community. Positive reinforcement should be used whenever possible.
If the school can design a reward system for when students are able to attend, results are likely to be more effective than using negative or punishing activities. Lastly, attendance issues should be looked at on a systemic level and should not be expected to change instantly. Improved attendance rates should be expected to occur over time. According to
Epstein and Sheldon, the most effective strategy at the school level is to use a comprehensive approach where the school involves students, parents, and the community. Community level Strategies
Students that come from high-risk backgrounds are more likely to be truant from school. In low-income populations that have high levels of underemployment and unemployment, truancy issues should be addressed at a community-level. Communitylevel interventions should focus on collaboration and sharing of resources (Baker et al,
2001). Community interventions often have several common traits. Specifically, they typically include consistent enforcement of attendance laws, parental involvement,

Truancy 9 consequences for noncompliance, school-based truancy reduction programs, and community education and awareness (OJJDP, 2003).
One example of a community-based intervention is the Abolish Chronic Truancy
(ACT) Now program used in Tuscan, Arizona (Baker et al., 2001). The ACT Now program was created by more than 100 community stakeholders that included law enforcement, courts, community organizations, agencies, and social services among others. The program is based upon three key elements: Holding parents accountable for following mandatory attendance laws, diversion programs that focus on the causes of truancy, and appropriate consequences for students and parents who fail to complete diversion programs. Under this program, if a student is truant three times, parents are notified and offered a diversion program and a deferred court date. As part of the diversion program, parents are referred to parenting skills courses, as well as youth and parenting support groups. According to Baker et al., the ACT Now program has ultimately been successful as a result of its clear and consistent guidelines.
Discussion
It should be noted that many of the existing truancy intervention studies have methodological shortcomings that make evaluating the effectiveness of the programs across larger populations, varying contexts, and differing time spans difficult. Oftentimes findings are based on limited sample populations that do not necessarily produce results that can be generalized to diverse populations of students. It seems that existing intervention studies do not clearly present a theory of change with well-defined intervention components. Furthermore, it is difficult to find studies that have used exact evaluation methods that test the efficacy of the intervention. In short, there is not yet a

Truancy 10
“one-size-fits-all” approach on how to reduce student truancies. There seems to be a large mix of various intervention ideas that are effective with very specific populations. More research on the efficacy of truancy interventions that generalize to broader populations should be explored. Truancy is a complex, multifaceted, and serious issue that merits further research.

Truancy 11
References
Baker, M. L., Sigmond, J. N., & Nugent, M. E. (2001). Truancy reduction: Keeping students in school. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Butler, L. (2003), Social Work with Children and Families, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Safe and Drug Free Schools Program. Manual to combat truancy. Washington,
DC: Department of Justice, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Commentary (2002). Raising school attendance. The Education Digest,
67(6), 54–55.
Epp, J. R., & Epp, W. (2001). Easy exit: School policies and student attrition. Journal of
Education for Students Placed at Risk, 6(3), 231–247.
Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. Journal of Educational
Research, 95, 308 – 318.
Fantuzzo, J., Grim, S. & Hazan, H. (2005). Project start: An Evaluation of a communitywide school-based intervention to reduce truancy. Psychology in Schools, 42 (6).
Garry, E. M. (1996). Truancy: First step to a lifetime of problems.
Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 1–7.
Giacomez, A., Mueller, D., Stoddard, C. (2006). Dealing with chronic absenteeism and its related consequences: The process and short-term effects of a diversionary juvenile court intervention. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk.
11(2), 199-219.
Join Together, Boston, MA. (1998). Keeping kids in schools: Part of your community

Truancy 12 wide strategy to reduce substance abuse and crime. Monthly Action Kit. East
Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning.
Lee, M. I. & Miltenberger, R.G. (1996). School refusal behavior: Classification, assessment, and treatment issues. Education and Treatment of Children, 19, 474486.
McCray, E. D. (2006). Do you know where your children are? The persisting issue of school truancy. Intervention in School Clinic, 42 (1).
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (2003).Community responses to truancy. Engaging students in school.
Railsback, J. (2004). Increasing Student Attendance: Strategies from Research and
Practice. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.
Reid, K. (2005). The causes, views, and traits of school absenteeism and truancy: An analytical review. Research in Education, 74.
Teasley, M. L. (2004). Absenteeism and Truancy: Risk, Protection, and Best Practice
Implications for School Social Workers. Children & Schools, 26, (2).