District staff outline proposed attendance policy changes including remote attendance, recovery process and a no‑credit code

District staff on May 7 presented a comprehensive review of attendance practices and proposed revisions to policy JBA and regulation JBAR1 that would change how Savannah‑Chatham County Public School System measures and responds to student absences.

Miss McGuire, a district attendance lead, told the Board that the system’s key attendance metric currently shows 74.5% of students are absent fewer than 10% of enrolled days (the district’s CCRPI‑based measure) and that the district’s goal was to raise that rate by 3 percentage points. Staff said preliminary analysis shows little progress this year at the secondary level and recommended a package of policy, procedural and communications changes.

Among the staff proposals: define "truancy" to match state guidance (five or more unexcused absences), add an NC (no‑credit) grading code to record failure to meet attendance requirements, create an attendance‑recovery pathway, and establish a limited remote‑attendance option. Staff said the NC code would generally be a permanent notation showing the course was attempted but credit not earned; students would need to retake the course to obtain credit.

Under the proposed framework staff outlined a tiered response: notification and attendance‑recovery opportunities after initial absences, teacher and school team interventions at three unexcused absences, an early‑warning letter and social‑work referral at five unexcused absences, and the attendance waiver process at ten unexcused absences. Miss McGuire described the attendance‑recovery approach as instructional remediation rather than a paperwork change: recovery must document learning (for example, tutorial time or verified post‑secondary visits) and the district will cap recovery days and remote days.

Staff proposed a remote‑attendance allowance of up to five days per academic year — not usable during district or state mandated testing windows or during the first 10 days of school — and said such days should be requested five days in advance when possible. Attendance recovery options combined with remote attendance would be capped at 10 days for the academic year, staff said.

The proposed waiver rubric would give schools a structured review process for students who exceed 10 unexcused absences; staff said waivers would be considered only for students demonstrating academic proficiency (passing at 70 or higher) and who have documented extenuating circumstances and regular school contact. If a waiver is denied, the NC grading code would be applied.

Staff emphasized procedural consistency across schools and said schools may submit district‑level recovery proposals for approval. They also recommended a communications plan for families and a year‑end data review on how the district marks presence/absence. One technical change staff discussed was adopting a state‑permitted reporting interpretation that marks a student absent only if present for less than half of the instructional day; staff said applying that option could improve reported attendance statistics at middle and high schools, but they recommended broader validation before any change.

Board members asked detailed questions about consequences and exceptions. Dr. Brinkman and other trustees expressed concern about the permanence of an NC grade for students who are academically proficient despite many absences; staff said the waiver rubric and multiple recovery steps were designed to avoid unfair outcomes. Several trustees asked that staff provide the proposed policy language and the waiver rubric prior to the board’s June first read of the policy.

Staff also flagged the passage of Senate Bill 123 and said the district will incorporate any final state guidance. Because the May 7 session was informational, no vote was taken and staff will return with draft policy language and implementation plans.