This week marks the return of students to schools in New York City, though the reality is a bit concerning: about one in three of them will miss at least 10% of the school year.
Chronic absenteeism is a significant hurdle when it comes to educational success.
Even if the Department of Education could claim to have an excellent curriculum, highly qualified teachers, and a seemingly endless budget, it wouldn’t matter if students aren’t actually in school.
It’s not surprising that around half of the students won’t end the year reading at grade level.
Absenteeism surged during the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to be a major issue.
In the 2018-19 school year, it was at 26.5%, but it rose to 34.8% five years later.
The problem often begins early: during the 2024-25 year, 37.8% of kindergarten students were considered chronically absent.
Research strongly links absenteeism, particularly in the early grades, to negative outcomes in school and beyond, including lower standardized test scores and a higher chance of issues like drug use or run-ins with the law.
Unexcused absences, which make up a significant portion of overall absenteeism, have the greatest impact on academic performance.
High absenteeism rates can disrupt teaching and make it tougher for students who regularly attend to keep up.
It’s a tough sell to taxpayers, asking them to fund record public education costs while a third of students are missing key times in the school year—it’s a clear sign of the shortcomings in value that city schools provide.
The Department of Education plans to spend more than $42,000 on each student, yet even the ones who do attend will find themselves in classrooms for 130 hours less than the national average.
This dysfunctional situation contributes to many families choosing to leave the system.
Enrollment in New York City’s public K-12 schools has declined by over 10% since 2020, translating to more than 100,000 students lost.
Countless families enroll their children in pre-K but choose to leave before kindergarten: while 52,400 applied for pre-K in 2024–25, only 46,370 later applied for kindergarten.
The School Construction Authority anticipates a further loss of about 150,000 students in the next decade.
In contrast, charter schools are expanding, with five new ones opening this year.
These charters currently enroll approximately 152,000 students, which is about 16% of the total student population.
What explains this difference?
One factor is that charter school leaders place a strong emphasis on attendance.
They communicate its importance to parents, meticulously track attendance, and quickly reach out to families when students miss classes.
Charter schools also incentivize punctuality directly; students who achieve perfect attendance earn awards, while those arriving late face penalties.
When charter students miss too many days, school administrators can respond flexibly, allowing them to work with families on underlying issues.
This adaptability is partly because charter teachers aren’t unionized and aren’t restricted by the rigid schedules found in DOE contracts.
Reducing chronic absenteeism should be a primary focus for Chancellor Kamar Samuels and district leaders.
Improving academic performance will be incredibly challenging if students aren’t consistently attending school.
This isn’t exactly a new dilemma, though; in past years, elected officials prioritized attendance issues.
For example, Mayor Mike Bloomberg initiated a long-term campaign in 2010 aimed at curbing chronic absenteeism, which included media campaigns, pairing at-risk students with “success mentors,” and even automated calls from celebrities encouraging school attendance.
Of the 100 schools involved in Bloomberg’s initiatives, 58 reported reductions in chronic absenteeism.
The current disregard for addressing the increased absenteeism since the pandemic highlights a decline in the Department of Education’s effectiveness, even though spending per pupil has far surpassed levels during Bloomberg’s time.
But there are some positive developments.
The DOE is now requiring each school to appoint a staff member as an absenteeism “avoidance liaison,” which is a step in the right direction.
These staff members should provide a variety of supports to encourage families to ensure their children attend school regularly and implement consequences for excessive unexcused absences.
Chancellor Samuels should also focus on high-risk students using an early-warning system to promptly address unexcused absences and intervene.
Absenteeism is a challenge faced by urban districts across the nation; take Detroit, for example, where they’re trying out cash incentives for students who attend school consistently.
People have differing opinions on this approach, but at least city officials are showing that they take the issue seriously by considering unconventional solutions.
New York should also be open to innovative strategies.
Moreover, there’s a clear need for better data: both at the city and state levels, New York is slow to release attendance statistics.
This delay leaves local researchers relying on outdated numbers for the 2024-25 school year while other states, like Connecticut and Rhode Island, provide public attendance updates monthly.
The first step toward enhancing New York City’s educational system is ensuring that students return to school consistently.
