Parents to be charged for children’s absences to reduce chronic school absenteeism
The impact of the COVID pandemic has started to decrease, but a significant long-term consequence still remains.
Chronic school absenteeism, a result of students being used to staying home during online learning, continues to be a problem nationwide.
In New York City, a shocking four in 10 students (about 353,000) were chronically absent during the last full school year (2021-22). The national average is 22%.
This persistent absenteeism is hindering efforts to address the learning loss caused by school closures during the pandemic, as highlighted by the National Assessment of Educational Progress which indicates setbacks in math and reading proficiency over two decades, particularly for low-income students.
New York has attempted to incentivize parents to ensure their children attend school regularly. In 2022, Gov. Hochul provided $214 in aid per child for families on public assistance to encourage school attendance.
The city has also employed a team of “attendance teachers” to collaborate with parents, schools, and city agencies to address the issue of student absenteeism.
Although the problem has worsened, it is not a new challenge. In 2013, Mayor Bloomberg launched a Truancy Reduction and Public Safety center, but it had minimal impact.
It is imperative to acknowledge that a child’s school attendance is primarily the responsibility of parents, and both positive and negative reinforcement can be effective strategies.
During the administration of the last Republican Governor, George Pataki, New York implemented a “learnfare” program for a brief period starting in 1998. This program deducted $60 per month from public assistance payments to households with chronically absent children to prevent school dropouts and improve attendance.
Households receiving public assistance represent approximately 148,000 city school students, as per data from the Citizens Committee for Children of New York.
Enforcing regular school attendance aligns with the principles of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, the federal welfare law.
The effectiveness of programs like “learnfare” has been demonstrated in other states, such as Wisconsin, where reductions in public assistance led to increased school enrollment and attendance rates.
It is possible to implement similar measures without being overly punitive, as seen in liberal Massachusetts, where chronic absence can result in families being placed on “learnfare probation.”
Mexico’s “Progresa” program and its conditional education stipend have successfully encouraged school attendance and discouraged child labor in impoverished rural areas.
Research shows that financial incentives like these can significantly increase educational attainment.
Addressing chronic absenteeism is crucial for all students, regardless of socioeconomic status. Programs like “learnfare” have shown positive results in improving attendance rates and educational outcomes.
Chronic absenteeism disproportionately impacts lower-income students, with higher rates observed among Hispanic and Black students.
According to Malkus, chronic absenteeism is more prevalent in districts with low achievement and higher poverty levels.
Education is a key factor in overcoming childhood poverty and achieving success. Initiatives like the “success sequence” emphasize the importance of finishing high school and pursuing further education or employment opportunities.
Regular school attendance is the foundation for academic success and personal development. A collective effort is needed to ensure a well-educated workforce, making measures like “learnfare” a valuable tool in addressing absenteeism.
Howard Husock, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and author of “The Poor Side of Town — And Why We Need It,” advocates for effective strategies to combat chronic school absenteeism.
