To Attend or Not to Attend: Why Some Children Attend Schools and Others Don’t Professor John Dwyfor Davies & John Lee Reader in Education University of.

To Attend or Not to Attend: Why Some Children Attend Schools and

Others Don’t

Professor John Dwyfor Davies

&

John Lee

Reader in Education

University of the West of England

Bristol

Present position 1

High on government’s agenda High on education agenda of many states

‘Non attendance is a national issue and not just confined to areas of disadvantage’. It goes on to state that ‘At post primary level, students miss an average of 15 days each out of 167 (9%) (NEWB, Every Day Counts, Strategic Plan) (2005) (p.6)

Present position 2

Substantial resources provided (Denny,K. (2004)

Many new initiatives introduced More pupils truant (New

Philanthropic Society, 2005)

Not unique to Britain:

The National Educational Welfare Board here in Ireland in its Strategic Plan (2005) confirms that ‘Non attendance is a national issue and not just confined to areas of disadvantage’. It goes on to state that ‘At post primary level, students miss an average of 15 days each out of 167 (9%) (p.6)

Emphasis to-date

Much is known about why pupils choose to truant

Few of the initiatives to combat the problem adopt a comprehensive approach

Less work done on evaluation or efficacy of intervention initiatives

Too little work into ‘what works’

Within-home causal factors Poverty Parental lack of appreciation for value of

education Parents themselves were truants Family instability (parental discord, poor parent-

child relationships, frequent moving) Child abuse or neglect Substance abuse; alcoholic parents Parental convenience (babysitting etc.) Lack of parental supervision/guidance

Within-school causal factors

Inadequate early identification & support ‘boring’ curriculum (Nardi et al, 2002) Curriculum seen to lacks relevance to

present or future life Teaching methods discourage

cooperation

Some school factors

Failure to identify and provide services for ‘problem’ pupils

Poor pupil-teacher relationship High student/teacher ration Low teacher expectation Lack of parental/school communication and

involvement Too weak or too rigid administrative policies

In short

Parents & pupils blame the schools – bullying, problems with teachers, peer-pressure

LEAs & teachers blame the parents – attitudes to school, home environment etc. (Malcolm et al, 2003)

Non-attenders in Bristol SchoolsStudents

Student sample: Identified by EWOs & attendance officersInterview process: ‘paired-pal’ interviews Informal, semi-structured interview Description of school careers provided School staff and EWOs interviewed Parents interviewed at home

Student characteristics Tended not to come from families within which

there is a history of non-attendance.

Articulate

Able to argue logically and present a case

Reticent and quiet

Reasons provided by students

Bullying Student/teacher relationships Curriculum – not seen as a big

problem by many Inability to engage with a large

organisation – and teachers Illness Transitions and transfers

Reasons provided by students - relationships They see the quality of personal relationships at school primarily

in terms of relationships with staff, rather than the subjects individuals teach.

They identify the quality of relationships with staff in terms of what they see as ‘mutual respect’ and being treated in an ‘adult fashion’.

They perceive teaching as an individual, rather than a group activity and see teaching as explanation rather than instruction.

The male students reported that relationship problems were mainly with the staff of schools (as opposed to peers).

Peer relationships are more significant for female students.

Parental perspectives (general)

No evidence of an anti-school/ education culture in the home

The majority of parents wanted their children to attend school and felt they themselves had been deprived of education.

Similar views to students re. significance of student/teacher relationships

Parental perspectives (2)

Poor home/school communication systems School seen as arrogant towards parents and

students. Education Welfare Service not seen as a major

source of support. Learning mentors, Connexions personnel,

alternative providers and individual EWOs identified as helpful.

Senior Manager

Curriculum too rigidly and narrowly defined More local control of its content is needed. Close relationships needed between F.E. and

school for many 14+ students Local circumstances means employment is

easy to find - school seen as irrelevant Points of transition are triggers to non-

attendance

Senior Manager (2)

LEA policy is needed, to stop non-attenders transferring between schools

Funding alternative provision is a resource problem because funding follows pupils

Curriculum content is inappropriate Positive rewards for attendance needed Problems with relationships often used as an

excuse for non-attendance

EWOs – new to the service

The law needs to be tightened up on attendance (newer officers).

The deterrents to non-attendance should be publicised more effectively (newer officers).

EWOs – with longer service

Those who had been longer in the service identify welfare work as important and significant.

There should be more surveillance to locate truants – and to prevent it initially.

Older EWOs see their role as that of acting as a go-between between school and parents.

They also believe that they act as an advocate on behalf of the truanting students and the parents (older officers)

Phase 2 – Selection criteria

Years 9 and 10 students students who are: entered for the lowed tier in GCSE

mathematics. in the lowest sets of for English and

Science not those identified as having SEN likely to attend part-time FE provision Regular school attenders

Phase 2 – Methods

Interviewed in pairs or in small groups Students from 2 schools in very different

communities were selected 18 students in school A (8 girls and 10

boys) interviewed 17 students in school B (5 girls and 12

boys)

Early responses

There was a remarkable similarity in the views of both sets of students and these tended to fall into a set of themes

Early findings School provides a social space School provides a safe place Good teacher/pupil relationship Teaches things of value Curriculum needs to include academic & vocational

elements Curriculum needs to relate to world of work Teaches you a work ethic Without it there would be problems School structure seen as helpful

Priorities 1 Professionals & policymakers need to

engage with the pupil voice Need to create opportunities for students

to review and communicate their views on their educational context

Professionals & policy makers need to be willing to act on these views

Priorities 2 Schools need to be supported in ensuring that

they provide a safe environment Professional development needs to focus on

the ‘softer’ skills to ensure that relationships across the school are positive

consideration must be given to the nature of the nature and content of the curriculum and assessment

Possible futures

Closer, systematic identification of ‘at risk’ pupils in EY& primary

Increase school & parent awareness of importance of school attendance

Schools better resourced to address absenteeism from early stages

Better evaluation of experimental initiatives

Possible futuresSchool features

Schools need to be student and parent centred

Pupils viewed as active, participative learners

Better differentiation High quality vocational education Full recognition of student achievement

e.g ASDAN Aim to achieve parity and esteem for vocational

course & qualifications Partnership school/F.E/industry & commerce

Government strategy

Many strategies are ‘reactive’ & untested

Too short-termed & under funded Need to disseminate proven ‘good

practice’ Appropriately funding for key

initiatives – over extended period