Norfolk Public Schools reports drop in chronic absenteeism to 17.5%; board probes suspensions, transfers and recovery efforts

Ms. McGarrity presented Norfolk Public Schools' quarter‑four attendance and dropout data, telling the board the chronic absenteeism rate dropped from 19.6% in quarter three to 17.5% in quarter four — “the lowest it has been at the same time of year since we began the school board reporting structure,” she said. The division also reported a slightly lower division dropout rate for the quarter, though Dr. McGarrity warned final rates will be certified later by the Virginia Department of Education.

The presentation highlighted that 70% of absences for chronically absent students were unexcused and that McKinney‑Vento students accounted for about 8.4% of those chronically absent. Ms. McGarrity said 19.5% of chronically absent students transferred into division schools after the first day, and 21.7% transferred out before the end of the year; all are included in the chronic‑absence calculations.

Board members asked detailed follow‑up questions about drivers and remedies. Ms. Singh asked whether suspensions were inflating absenteeism figures and what percent of chronically absent students had half their absences due to suspension; administration said about 9.2% of chronically absent students had 50% of their absences tied to suspension. “Those students still have an opportunity to recover instructional time,” Ms. Michelle Moore, who works with graduation and chronic absenteeism, told the board, describing the division’s credit recovery and attendance‑recovery protocols that occur outside the regular school day and require a certified teacher to be present.

Board members pressed on practical barriers to attendance recovery. Ms. Singh and others said they were concerned that recovery offerings, being outside the regular school day, may not attract the highest‑risk students. Ms. Moore said schools try to connect recovery to activities students value — for secondary students that might be events tied to prom or athletics — and that graduation coaches and MTSS supports tailor interventions to engage small groups of students.

The board also raised the role of out‑of‑district transfers in absenteeism rates. Several members asked the administration to disaggregate data to show whether chronically absent students are disproportionately students who requested transfers into other division schools; administrators said that analysis had not been completed in the manner requested but that schools can run reports to isolate the impact by sending/receiving school. Officials also acknowledged that teacher absenteeism and substitute coverage can affect student engagement and attendance.

On outcomes, staff said attendance recovery efforts moved roughly 4% of chronically absent students to a not‑chronically‑absent status for the quarter; staff emphasized many additional students participated in recovery and remedial opportunities even if they did not change chronic status. Ms. McGarrity and Ms. Moore said further analysis over the summer will examine subgroup patterns and the extent to which out‑of‑district transfers, suspensions and mobility drive chronic absenteeism.

The board did not take formal action on policy during the session; members requested additional analysis of transfers and consideration of whether short‑term in‑school educational settings tied to disciplinary placements could reduce absences counted as suspension days. The administration said it will continue the summer work to refine enrollment and attendance reporting ahead of state certification.