Attendance interventions rapid evidence assessment | EEF (educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk) 

The report documents the following limitations as compromising the validity of evidence and findings:  

• The majority of studies took place in the USA (only 3 from UK)  
• Over one third of the studies were shown to have some concern or high risk of bias in their methodologies 
• There is a lack of sufficient evidence to conclude the effectiveness of some approaches 
• The report acknowledges that some studies may have been missed due to time constraints and narrowed inclusion criteria restrictions.   

Overall, the report concludes that the overall quality of the evidence is weak. The report does highlight that there is some promising evidence, with studies showing small or very small impact on attendance, for several strategies including parental engagement approaches and responsive interventions that target the individual causes of low attendance. The report found mixed evidence for mentoring, behaviour interventions, meal provision, incentives and disincentives and extracurricular activities, with studies reporting both positive and negative impact of these interventions on attendance. There is not enough evidence to reach a conclusion for the efficacy of non-targeted interventions and whole-class interventions, such as the teaching of social and emotional skills, which had no impact overall.  

Should we delve deeper into parental engagement approaches and find examples of good practice in this area?
 

How can we ensure consistency across our schools and authorities in how we monitor and measure attendance, to gather reliable evidence to help drive sustainable, collaborative improvement in this area?
 

Due to a lack of high-quality research, do we need to spend more time gathering and sharing examples of effective interventions within and between our authorities? How could we best do this?  

See references list to access all studies included in the review.