(PDF) Assessing Reasons for School Non-attendance (researchgate.net)

This study used a self-report questionnaire for students recruited from schools in seven municipalities in Norway. The municipalities included a relative large Norwegian city, towns, and rural districts. The survey was conducted at the end of the autumn term in 2012. A total of 5,465 students from the sixth to the tenth grades from 45 schools participated (ages 11–15; 51% males and 49% females). The response rate was 84%.

This study recommends that school refusal and truancy should be treated as two separate dimensions, despite other studies noting considerable overlap and recommending an integrated approach, through use of the term ‘school refusal behaviours’ (Kearney et al.) Findings from this study show that school refusal and truancy constitute different reasons and risk factors for school non-attendance, which may require different interventions.

The report highlights that school refusal is more likely during key transition periods (e.g. primary to secondary).

The study found that subjective health complaints was the most prevalent reason for school non-attendance in primary and secondary school, with 1 in 5 students reporting that as their reason for absence. More attention should be given to this type of non-attendance because it may often reflect unnecessary non-attendance that could negatively affect learning results and because it could contribute to undesirable attitudes concerning non-attendance that could carry over into work life.

The study also highlights how parents’ attitudes towards sickness-related absences are transmitted to their children (Josephson et al. 2013) and therefore suggest that parents should be actively involved in interventions to prevent and improve school non-attendance.

Truancy-related reasons were the most prevalent reasons recorded by pupils with special educational needs. This result may indicate the need to make special education a primary predictor of truancy. The report suggests that feelings of failure could push such pupils towards truancy.

Students who report somatic and subjective health complaints as reasons for legitimate non-attendance, can be indicative of later illegitimate non-attendance, which could incur serious long-term consequences. Early robust monitoring and investigation of somatic and subjective health complaints is therefore important in preventing later refusal and truancy.

Furthermore, a concern raised in the report is that the risk of refusal or truancy is increased when subjective heath complaints are accepted by schools as a reason for legitimate non-attendance, as this makes illegitimate non-attendance seem acceptable and, also, makes it more difficult for teachers to identify these pupils, delaying the response of necessary early intervention. Having good routines for recording non-attendance and its causes and creating individual follow-up plans for students who do not attend school could be effective measures for reducing illegitimate non-attendance.

Can we use the featured measurement model to assess reasons for school non-attendance to implement appropriate interventions?

Should the attendance of children with specific learning difficulties and special educational needs be closely monitored to avoid potential illegitimate school non-attendance?