Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State data: COVID dip, uneven recovery, and evidence chronic absenteeism is linked to steep test declines
Summary
Department staff showcased iReport data tools, reviewed post‑COVID assessment trends (reading recovery stronger than math) and presented a new analysis showing chronic absenteeism rates rose after the pandemic and are tightly correlated with lower state test scores.
Department of Education analysts told the State Board that New Hampshire assessment data show a pandemic‑era performance dip with stronger recovery in English language arts than in mathematics and that chronic absenteeism increased in the immediate post‑COVID years.
Nate Green, bureau administrator for Assessment and Accountability, demonstrated the department’s public dashboards (iReport, iAchieve, iExplorer) and described the department’s approach to cohort tracking and growth measures in addition to proficiency. Green said the department posts three years of iReport data and maintains longer historical datasets for researchers.
In a separate research sample connecting attendance to assessment outcomes, analysts used roughly 40–45,000 students per year across three years (about 127,000 student‑year observations) with reliable full‑year attendance and assessment records. In the 2019 baseline sample the mean percent of the year missed was 4.6%. Chronic absenteeism—defined in the presentation as missing 10% or more of the school year—rose substantially in 2022 within the study sample; presenters reported a sample‑wide chronic absenteeism rate of roughly 25% in 2022.
Presenters showed grade‑level scatterplots and effect estimates. In middle‑school grades the relationship between percent of year missed and state math scale score is steep: the analysts reported that missing around 10% of the school year is associated with a 30–40 point decrease on the math scale in seventh and eighth grades, which often corresponds to moving from ‘proficient’ to ‘not proficient’ in the state’s classification. Presenters and board members discussed subgroup differences—students with IEPs and students qualifying for free and reduced lunch typically start at lower average scale scores, which changes the marginal effect of additional absence.
Board members asked about causes and possible policy responses. Presenters said the department is building more detailed attendance reason codes into future data collection and emphasized technical assistance to districts for data review, iReport trainings and example analyses that let districts compare themselves with demographically similar peers. Members and staff discussed truancy definitions, local enforcement, and the potential role of targeted outreach, early‑intervention programs and community partnerships to support attendance recovery.
What’s next: the department offered to provide deeper, district‑level cohort and subgroup analyses on request and invited board members to upcoming iAchieve training sessions. The department will continue refining attendance reason codes and encouraged districts to use the technical assistance and office‑hours supports available.
