Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attendance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Norfolk officials: chronic absenteeism edges down to 19.6% while dropout rate ticks up to 12.2%
Summary
At a April 15 school board meeting, staff reported a slight decline in chronic absenteeism to 19.6% but a small rise in the dropout rate to 12.2%; presenters described attendance-recovery programs, limits on recoverable days, and gaps in systematically tracking reasons for dropout.
Miss McGarity presented quarter‑three attendance and dropout data to the Norfolk School Board on April 15, saying the district’s chronic absenteeism rate fell slightly to 19.6% from 19.9% last quarter while the dropout rate rose from 11.7% to 12.2% but remains below last year’s 15.9%.
The presentation said 90% of schools reduced chronic absenteeism in the quarter and that 69% of missed days among chronically absent students are unexcused. Miss McGarity described attendance‑recovery programs as structured, face‑to‑face sessions “where three hours with a licensed teacher equates to one recovered day.” She added that schools typically allow a maximum of 15 recovered days to count toward accountability reporting, and that those sessions are intended primarily to regain instructional time.
Board members questioned whether recovery sessions are primarily remedial or preventative and whether counting recovered days can obscure true attendance trends. Dr. Rose said the district monitors recovery and non‑recovery data separately so the recovery program does not “cloud what’s actually happening,” but she also suggested a broader policy discussion about long‑term student outcomes is warranted.
On tracking reasons for dropout, staff said there is no single, regularly published dataset that categorizes causes in a systematic way. Instead, graduation coaches submit qualitative notes and a weekly graduation‑coach report is shared with schools; that information helps teams design re‑engagement strategies but is not currently easy to extract as a structured, division‑wide reason code.
The board also heard operational details about how students are coded: a student is withdrawn after 15 consecutive days of absence and is recorded as a dropout unless and until re‑engaged. Presenters said some schools are refining early‑warning indicators in the division’s data warehouse to better identify at‑risk students earlier and tailor supports.
The board did not take any policy votes on April 15. Members requested follow‑up information including (a) a systematic breakdown of what percentage of chronically absent students participate in attendance‑recovery programs, (b) program cost and staffing details, and (c) academic outcomes for students who participate in recovery sessions versus other interventions. The administration said it will return with additional data and recommended next steps.
