Grand Forks schools report large drop in missed class periods after new high‑school attendance policy

At a Jan. 27 meeting of the Grand Forks Public School District Board, district staff presented a first‑semester update on a tiered high‑school attendance intervention that administrators said coincided with a drop of about 20,000 missed class periods compared with the same semester last year.

District administrators explained why the change was made and summarized early results. "We are really gonna do this," said John Strandell, a district presenter, describing the plan's enforcement phases. The administration reported class periods missed fell from 57,334 in first semester last year to 37,261 this year, a decrease of roughly 20,000 periods.

The update matters because the district tied attendance to both student learning and school accountability. Administrators said chronic absenteeism contributed to learning loss and teacher workload, and that state and federal accountability measures use attendance as an indicator. Staff noted both Red River and Central high schools met a 95% attendance threshold used in the Choice Ready indicator on ND Insights for the semester reported.

Presenters described a four‑tier intervention. Tier 1 triggers a text message after six absences in a single class. Tier 2, at ten absences, prompts school social‑worker outreach to identify barriers such as transportation or home issues. Tier 3 begins after 12 absences and, for any subsequent absence in that class, the student receives a zero that cannot be made up; that contact is handled by an assistant principal. Tier 4, at 18 absences, can result in a student being dropped from the class and counseled on credit recovery options, including online courses or summer school.

Administrators said some data tools needed correction early in implementation (perfect‑attendance students had been omitted initially), and that the first semester operated as a pilot with tweaks made as staff learned how to document cases consistently. Teachers and department chairs reported changes in classroom practice: one presenter read teacher feedback that prep time is now being used mainly for grading and lesson planning rather than repeatedly reteaching material to absent students.

Administrators acknowledged the policy has increased work for counselors, social workers and assistant principals. "It is a lot more work for office staff, for counselors, for social workers, particularly assistant principals," a district presenter said, but added the hope is the system will become routine and less labor intensive once established.

Board members raised questions about medical excuses, consistency across buildings and communicating results to families and students. Dr. Lund asked whether staff had shown the data to students and parents; administrators said they could include the information in school newsletters. Dr. Hodak and others encouraged the district to use the data in community outreach. A student speaker, Adriana, said the policy was widely discussed among peers and that she saw it as effective.

Administrators also reported early academic indicators: the district cited a 43% decrease in F grades and a 16% decrease in D grades in first semester compared with the prior year, though presenters said some academic outcome data remain incomplete and are still being compiled.

Board members and staff discussed expansion of the approach to lower grade levels and noted task forces and cross‑building transition planning to address attendance in preschool through middle school. Staff said they have engaged local legislators and community partners to pursue broader supports where juvenile justice and social‑services referrals used to be available.

District staff said they will continue to refine tier thresholds and processes, track grade impacts, and improve how the district communicates outcomes to families.