Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Attendance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Schuylkill Valley board hears detailed review of attendance rules, thresholds and follow-up supports
Summary
At its March meeting the Schuylkill Valley School District heard a staff presentation defining compulsory attendance, chronic absence and the district's steps (3-, 5- and 10-day letters, SAIC/SAIP, and outside referrals) used to intervene; board members pressed staff on letter-generation and communication with families.
Schuylkill Valley School District officials presented a step-by-step review of how the district defines and responds to student absences, outlining thresholds for compulsory attendance, chronic absence and the interventions the district uses before filing truancy citations.
The presentation by Dr. Brewer (title not specified in the record) explained state-driven definitions and district policy and described how the district identifies students for interventions such as Student Attendance Improvement Conferences (SAIC), school attendance improvement plans (SAIP) and referrals to the Advancing School Attendance Program (ASAP), administered by Service Access and Management, Inc. "Students who are chronically absent... have missed at least 10% or more of the days in the current school year," Dr. Brewer said, and added that Schuylkill Valley triggers local SAIC/SAIP attention sooner: "At Schuylkill Valley School District, our threshold for SAIC and SAIP for chronically absent students is between 15 to 20 days of absence."
The nut graf: The presentation matters because research and district data show attendance affects learning and because the board and parents raised concerns that letters and follow-up steps were not consistently communicated; trustees asked staff to clarify how the required notices are generated and delivered and how the district handles students with chronic health conditions.
District process and thresholds
Dr. Brewer walked the board through legal definitions and local policy (board policy 204, attendance), noting compulsory attendance extends through age 18 once a child is enrolled. He distinguished excused lawfull absences (illness, medical appointments, authorized activities) from unlawful/unexcused absences and described the district's standard notices: a state-required warning at three unlawful days and district 5-day and 10-day follow-ups. For habitual truancy (six or more unexcused/unlawful days) the district initiates an SAIC to build a SAIP. After an SAIP, the district may refer families to ASAP case managers and—if needed—file citations in district court; Child and Youth Services (ChildLine) involvement requires evidence the district exhausted required attendance steps.
Dr. Brewer provided local data showing the number of referrals to ASAP (elementary: 1 case; middle school: 14; high school: 1) and comparative metrics drawn from the Pennsylvania Future Ready Index for the 2023-24 year, noting the district's middle school had 92.1% of students not classified as chronically absent and the high school and elementary had 85.3% and 90.79% respectively.
Board questions and follow-up requests
Board members pressed for operational clarity. Trustee Kelly Steinke said multiple parents contacted her: "Why am I getting these letters? I personally got a letter for 1 of my children. I got the 5 day letter, but I never got a 3 day letter." Dr. Brewer said the student information system should "automatically generate" the required letters for unlawful absences, and that principals review and sign them before steps move forward, but he agreed to follow up with building administrators to confirm procedures and timing.
Trustees also raised sensitivity around students with chronic medical conditions and special education needs. Dr. Brewer acknowledged those concerns and explained the district flags students who have IEPs, 504 plans or GIEPs and seeks to convene appropriate teams earlier (he said 15'to'20 total days of absence should prompt heightened review for such students). He told the board that SAIC meetings and SAIP plans are intended to identify root causes and tailor supports, and that referrals to outside services are optional for families.
What the board directed next
Trustees asked staff to (1) confirm that the three-, five- and ten-day letters are being generated and sent as described; (2) report back with additional detail on why some families reported receiving 5-day but not 3-day letters; and (3) provide more information on how the district monitors students with chronic health conditions and how building administrators track attendance and escalate cases. Dr. Brewer said he would follow up and provide that information.
Ending
The presentation closed with trustees continuing to request more granular operational reporting so the board can monitor whether policy and practice are producing timely family outreach and appropriate supports for chronically absent students.
