Using data and the human touch: evaluating the NYC inter-agency campaign to reduce chronic absenteeism
Abstract
Following a 2008 report that documented the extent of chronic absenteeism in New York City's schools, the city organized an interagency task force to develop and implement a citywide effort to reduce chronic absenteeism. Given the size of the city school system and the scope of chronic absenteeism, the effort became the nation's most comprehensive campaign against absenteeism. Analyses of the campaign's pilot in 100 schools, with over 80,000 students, found that its efforts, particularly the Success Mentors program, significantly improved students' attendance rates and reduced chronic absenteeism, particularly for students from a high-poverty background.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Key drawbacks of the definitional spectrum include its lack of current utility in school districts and research studies, inability to provide information about the etiology or function of a school attendance problem, and lack of association with prevention or intervention protocols for this population.
“Key drawbacks of the definitional spectrum include its lack of current utility in school districts and research studies, inability to provide information about the etiology or function of a school attendance problem, and lack of association with prevention or intervention protocols for this population (Schildkamp et al., 2016; Balfanz and Byrnes, 2018).”
From Reconciling Contemporary Approaches to School Attendance and School Absenteeism: Toward Promotion and Nimble Response, Global Policy Review and Implementation, and Future Adaptability (Part 1) (2019) · cites this paper as Balfanz and Byrnes, 2018
Cites
BALFANZ, R., HERZOG, L., & MAC IVER, D. J. (2007) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520701621079 · Cited by 804 · see citing works
Self-citationGottfried, M. A. (2010) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831209350494 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kearney, C. A., Gonzálvez, C., Graczyk, P. A., & Fornander, M. J. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02222 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Kearney, C. A., Dupont, R., Fensken, M., & Gonzálvez, C. (2023) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2023.1253595 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Kearney, C. A. (2021) · Child & Youth Care Forum · doi:10.1007/s10566-020-09591-0 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
- Authors
- Balfanz, R., & Byrnes, V.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Byrnes, Vaughan
- Venue
- Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR)
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-02-09
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 107-121
- ISSN
- 1082-4669 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7671
- OpenAlex
- W2792914540
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 12.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Youth Substance Use and School Attendance
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Social Sciences › Education › Parental Involvement in Education
- Keywords
- chronic absenteeism, student attendance, inter-agency cooperation, New York City public schools, pilot program evaluation, data-driven policy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
