Systems that Support Attendance
What Might a Multi- Tiered System of Support Approach Look Like for Attendance?
Attendance issues can be complex. Most schools have sound systems for supporting school attendance. Many of these systems expertly identify rising attendance concerns so that they can be addressed promptly. However, when the volume or complexity of attendance concerns increases, schools find themselves either putting out fires or stuck. Researchers and schools are increasingly looking towards Multi- tiered systems of support (MTSS) for supporting and addressing attendance concerns1
I imagine many readers might already be familiar with the concept of a MTSS. They have been around for some time. Here in Australia they feature heavily in reading interventions (e.g. Response to Intervention (RTI)), supporting positive behaviour (School Wide Positive Behaviour for Learning (SPBL or PBS4L)) , mental health and disability. In the US they are even written into the legislation for the identification of students with learning disability. So, what is an MTSS?
Multi- Tiered Systems of Support is an umbrella term for any program that involves multiple tiers of intervention. The concept is generally represented as a three tiered triangle (fig 1). Most MTSS models incorporate the following:
universal screening at tier I of all children to identify those at risk;
monitoring of progress to determine those children who are failing to respond to universal supports at Tier I
a multi-tiered response with increasing intensity of intervention at Tier II and Tier III to remediate or support those children who are not responding.
The concept of MTSS has been around for some time. Originating in the fields of medicine and clinical psychology, it has been in practice for decades. In the 1970’s Deno and Mirkin2 introduced the concept of Response To Intervention (RTI) in their studies observing academic growth through the use of curriculum-based measurement (i.e. measuring incremental academic growth after instruction). To address students’ academic deficits, the researchers proposed a system of increasingly intensive interventions guided by a lack of response to intervention.
RTI in education was founded in the early 2000’s in the emerging field of inclusive education. RTI was initially designed to replace the IQ/ achievement discrepancy model used to identify children with learning difficulties. RTI sought to address the deficit model of ‘wait-to-fail’ before identification, diagnosis and intervention for students with learning difficulties. It did this by advocating for early high-quality core instruction followed by increasingly intensive intervention for those students who did not respond.3
RTI also took diagnosis and intervention out of the clinic and promoted a team approach. Teachers, psychologists and other allied health professionals worked together to identify students’ need and determine the interventions to be used. Thus, RTI represented a comprehensive approach to prevention, identification and support of students with learning difficulty or disability.
What Might an Attendance MTSS Look Like?
According to Kearney and Gracznyak (2020) an attendance MTTS framework should include the following:
“A contemporary prevention science framework for school attendance and its problems, an orientation for developing, testing, and utilizing interventions that target essential levers of change…..blend theory with seamless implementation and problem-solving action to enhance the framework’s practicality, utility, and acceptability” (p.317).
Whilst this prescription of what an Attendance MTSS should do appears to be overly complex, it is not impossible. MTSS emphasises monitoring of progress, data based decision making, problem solving, evidence based intervention and implementation fidelity as well as operating across the multifaceted spheres that attendance occupies (i.e. academic, social, emotional, ecological and behavioural). Therefore, instead of the traditional two dimensional triangle (e.g. RTI) an attendance MTSS would be multi- dimensional (see figure 2).
Universal supports and monitoring of progress and determining attendance concerns.
Within a three dimensional attendance MTSS model universal supports would span across the domains that may impact on student attendance. This does not mean schools need to reinvent their current practices and supports. Instead, developing an attendance MTSS framework involves a reframing (for want of a better word) of current practice and supports. You would ask the question - What universal supports for student attendance (i.e. monitoring, following up, welcoming school culture, community partnership, supports for marginalised families, engaging curriculum etc.) do we already have in place? What supports do we need?
Problem solving, identification of the attendance issue and evidence based intervention
The first MTSS frameworks (e.g. RTI), traditionally followed a standard protocol approach. A standard protocol approach entails, all children identified as requiring additional support are provided with a uniform intervention. Those students who failed to respond to the intervention are provided with a more intensive standard intervention. Whilst this may have addressed some students exhibiting learning difficulties, it was quickly acknowledged that learning difficulties are complex and require individual tailored intervention to meet specific areas of need. Therefore, schools and practitioners often adopt a problem solving approach. This focuses the intervention by drawing on the data to identify and support the specific needs of the student.
It is widely acknowledge that attendance concerns are heterogenous (i.e. a one- size fits all approach is often inadequate). Therefore, schools seeking to adopt a MTSS for attendance generally follow a problem solving approach. Schools closely monitor attendance data and employ strategies to support positive attendance. Students who do not respond to this support are identified. Practitioners through interview, observation and in some cases allied health support seek to identify the cause of the attendance issue. In the initial stages less intensive individualised supports can be administered (e.g. goal setting, mentoring, pick up bus etc).
Addressing complex attendance issues
Students who have complex attendance issues that do not respond to the supports provided at Tier II progress to Tier III. It must be noted that some students will automatically progress to Tier III in a problem solving approach. It may be determined that these students require intensive supports. Addressing the attendance issue should be through an evidence based intervention (e.g. cognitive behaviour therapy, family therapy, social work support or psychological/ counsellor support). In complex cases a student may receive multiple supports to address barriers to attending school.
For many students, supports provided at Tier I and Tier II are enough to keep them on track or place them back on track. However, due to the complexity of school refusal and many attendance issues the prognosis is not always positive. Students who do get back to school often experience relapses or sporadic attendance until compulsory attendance is no longer necessary.
However, there is strong research4 5to support that those schools that intervene early and maintain a positive attendance school culture are able to prevent attendance issues requiring Tier III support.
Kearney, C. A., & Graczyk, P. A. (2020). A multidimensional, multi-tiered system of supports model to promote school attendance and address school absenteeism. Clinical child and family psychology review, 23(3), 316-337.
Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Council Exceptional Children.
Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2007). Response to intervention at school: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. In Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 3-9). Springer, Boston, MA.
Childs, J., & Grooms, A. A. (2018). Improving school attendance through collaboration: A catalyst for community involvement and change. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 23(1-2), 122-138.
Kearney, C. A., Gonzálvez, C., Graczyk, P. A., & Fornander, M. J. (2019). Reconciling contemporary approaches to school attendance and school absenteeism: toward promotion and nimble response, global policy review and implementation, and future adaptability (Part 1). Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2222.