Programs Combat a Community Problem-Chronically
Truant Students
From time to time, Education World updates and reposts a previously published article that we think might be of interest to administrators. We hope you find this recently updated article to be of value.
What is the connecting
link between restricted driving privileges, enforced community service,
and reduced welfare payments? These strategies are components of truancy-prevention
programs in effect throughout the United States.
Did you ever skip school for a day at the beach or a day of skiing?
That activity was probably minor compared to the exploits of many chronically
truant students today. Truancy has become a national problem.
And kids are not the only losers when they don't attend school or when
they miss hours of school each day. Society loses as well.
The At Risk Children Initiative reported that
"Many police departments have found that rising daytime crime
can be traced, in part, to truancy. In Van Nuys, California, a three-week
truancy sweep resulted in a 60% reduction in shoplifting arrests. In St.
Paul, Minnesota, crimes such as purse snatching dropped by almost 50%
after police began picking up truants and taking them to a new school
attendance center."
Local approaches to the problem of school attendance take several forms.
In Boston, Massachusetts, latecomers are locked out of school.
In Virginia, some driving privileges may be restricted.
In Chester, Pennsylvania, community service is required for truants.
In New York City, welfare payments are cut for families of truants.
In Chicago, Illinois, telephone hotlines allow citizens to report
truant students.
In California, grants worth millions of dollars aid communities in
their efforts to improve attendance and reduce truancy.
Because truancy is a societal problem, most truancy reduction programs
are community-based. School systems, police and probation departments,
welfare departments, and other social service agencies are teaming up
to get kids back in school.
COMMUNITY SERVICE IN CHESTER
A program in Chester, Pennsylvania, recognizes that fining parents is
often not enough to change the behavior of truant youths. Instead, the
new program will require community service of participating students.
"This is a step to facilitate education, not penalize a family," Gwendolyn
Miller, district attendance supervisor of the Chester Upland School District,
told the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Right now, Miller adds, parents can be fined $300 plus court costs.
The program focuses on getting the students back in school instead of
financially penalizing their families -- many of whom do not have the
money to pay.
The Chester Upland district has seen a decline in truancy rates during
the past few years -- average attendance is now about 80%. The small number
of students with "long-standing truancy problems" in this new program
will be carefully followed. They will each perform about nine hours of
community service, and if students over age 13 fail to show up for community
service they will be assigned to an alternative service program for juvenile
offenders.
"This signals to the community that the county and the court system
care about the children of Chester," Dexter Davis, a Chester Upland assistant
superintendent told the Inquirer. "You can have the greatest school
program in the world, but it doesn't mean anything if the children are
not there."
LETTERS IN LOS ANGELES
How would you react to a letter threatening legal action and possible
prosecution? The Los Angeles District Attorney's office sends letters
to the parents of truant students. The letters threaten the parents with
criminal prosecution unless they attend a school meeting. The strategy
seems to be working because attendance improved in almost 80% of the cases.
"This is a parental responsibility program," Deputy District Attorney
John Carols Tosello told the Los Angeles Times. He went on to say,
"...the health department has determined that poor attendance in school
is correlated with teenage pregnancy, with police involvement, with possible
gang involvement. There are many unforeseen negative consequences."
This program was designed to get the attention of parents -- and it
did. But some parents of children with chronic health conditions (and
resulting erratic attendance patterns) have complained of harassment.
Even in large systems, officials must understand the necessity of gathering
relevant information before threatening action where it is not appropriate
-- attendance figures of students do not always tell the entire story.
Likewise, parents should not overreact, but explain the problem and appreciate
that the student's interests are being addressed with good intent.
WELFARE CUTS IN NEW YORK
In September 1997, the New York Times reported that three city
schools would be among the first in the state to pilot a learnfare program.
By law, the program would extend to all schools in the state by September
1999. The article described the state law:
"...If a child missed five or more days of school in a three-month academic
quarter 'without good cause,' the social services agency is required to
cut welfare benefits for that child's household. The law applies to children
in first through sixth grades."
According to the article, "Critics have asserted that the policy punishes
children for their parents' failure to get them to school. Supporters
defend it as a route out of welfare for children who are encouraged to
stay in school."
These actions also grab the attention of parents and guardians, but
again caution must be taken to avoid penalizing families when it is not
warranted.
SMART IN COLUMBUS
Schools in Columbus, Ohio, instituted a program called SMART -- Student
Mediation and Assistance to Reduce Truancy -- to speed up action in truancy
cases. The program requires that families of chronic truants must meet
with school officials and members of the County Juvenile Court's Protective
Services Department. Officials use the meetings to determine why the student(s)
are not attending school and to make parents aware of their responsibilities.
"Parents are warned that their children are entitled to an education
and they could face a civil charge of educational neglect, which could
result in a child being removed from the home," states a Columbus Dispatch
report. "Parents also could be charged with contributing to the non-support
of a minor, a first-degree misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of six
months in jail and $1,000 fine."
Family problems, which surface at the meetings, are addressed and parents
are referred to helping agencies when appropriate.
SMART appears to be working. Most cases have been resolved before court
proceedings had to be instituted. "We feel strongly that at the elementary
school level it is the parents' responsibility to get the child to school,"
Nancy Catena, administrator of Protective Services, told the Dispatch.
SMART helps them meet that responsibility.
TRUANCY-PREVENTION GRANTS IN CALIFORNIA
In June 1997, the California Department of Education awarded $10 million
in grant money to local education agencies for truancy prevention and
public safety programs. The Targeted
Truancy and Public Safety Demonstration Grant Program aims "...to
develop ways to identify these youths before they become repeat offenders,
and to provide them with the preventive and corrective treatment to keep
them in school and out of trouble. We want to help these students learn
the personal and academic skills to do well in later life."
The programs are collaborations between schools, probation departments,
and law enforcement and social service agencies.
TRUANCY HOTLINE IN CHICAGO
In Chicago, public school officials are attacking truancy by combining
"systemwide efforts, local initiatives, and improved programs for at-risk
youth." The policy includes an automated calling system that will contact
homes of truant students and a 24-hour truancy hotline which citizens
can use to report truant students. According to a 1996 press release,
the primary problem is at the high school level. The Chicago Public Schools
program also
proposes restructuring high schools to make them more responsive to
the needs of students.
holds school staff members (principals, teachers and the administration)
accountable for helping to improve student attendance.
involves parents in a Truancy Outreach Program, which will operate
in all high schools. (A team of four high school parents and the school's
attendance coordinator work directly with truant students and their
parents.)
teams the schools with the Chicago Housing Authority "...to encourage
Housing Authority residents to have their children in school regularly."
encourages the Illinois Department of Public Aid "...to enforce the
current law which allows welfare checks to be withheld from parents
who have been cited for allowing their children to be truant."
LOCKED DOORS IN BOSTON
How can students learn the importance of punctuality, of attending school
for the entire day -- especially the beginning of the day? Some high schools
in Boston are making the point by locking school doors in a controversial
program that targets latecomers.
"This school year, dozens of students at 11 Boston high schools are
being shut out every day as officials refuse to tolerate tardiness," reports
the Boston Globe. "The effort has dramatically increased punctuality,
but students, police, and those who work with truants have begun complaining
the policy is forcing students onto the streets when they should be in
school."
Some school officials believe this is the best method of getting the
message to students that tardiness is not acceptable. But some students
feel that the lockout is too severe. Some community members and police
officers agree because students who cannot get into their schools are
on the streets all day.
A CLOSING THOUGHT...
In my own perfect world, truancy prevention would begin as part
of a prenatal education program for mothers and fathers. Parents would
learn about their responsibilities -- that children deserve, and by law
must receive, an education -- and parents would learn about possible
consequences. That prenatal class would stress the effects parental behaviors
and attitudes have on school attendance (and on all other areas of children's
lives). Schools would also keep parents (and older students) informed
of changing attendance laws and programs. Regular communication between
school, families, and students would address any problems early on.
Truancy programs must also plan safety nets to assure that the actions
taken are appropriate and deserved. Just as different strategies work
in different locales, individual situations will call for adaptation or
exception. And successful programs must keep as their focus helping students
get back to school. Punishment for students or their families should be
secondary.
What is the connecting
link between restricted driving privileges, enforced community service,
and reduced welfare payments? These strategies are components of truancy-prevention
programs in effect throughout the United States.