2 Identifying and tackling absence
quickly when it occurs
11. Some pupils are absent from school without their
parents' knowledge. Electronic registration systems enable schools
to record and monitor attendance efficiently and they provide
information to follow up individual cases. Schools can then contact
parents early on the first day that a pupil is absent from school
without prior authorisation. In some schools this process is automated.
The Department spent £11 million between 2002-03 and 2003-04
assisting the introduction of electronic registration in 530 secondary
schools. An estimated 60% of secondary schools and 40% of primary
schools now use them. Most head teachers at schools with electronic
systems consider them to be effective in helping to tackle truancy
and improve attendance.[14]
12. The Department is simplifying school funding,
moving away from grants allocated to schools for particular purposes,
and giving them more choice as to how they spend their money.
Schools now have more devolved capital funding and could choose
to spend it on electronic registration if they felt it was a good
investment for the school. The Department is evaluating the different
types of electronic systems available and how they are best used.
It will then encourage schools without electronic registration
to invest in appropriate systems.[15]
13. Local authorities prosecute some parents whose
children do not attend school, including for the more serious
offence that is committed where a parent knows that their child
is not attending school but fails to act. Most local authorities
prosecute parents and around 7,500 parents are prosecuted each
year. Around 80% of these prosecutions result in a conviction
and the most common penalty is a fine of £50 to £100,
although the statutory maximum fine is £2,500. For some parents
£100 is a lot of money, but it is easily affordable for others.
The Department sees prosecution as just one approach that local
authorities can use, but believes that tough action is required
in some cases.[16] Prosecution
is not right in all cases, for example where parents are incapable
of organising their own lives.
14. A fast-track process for managing non-attendance
cases has had some impact in improving attendance. The process
includes early access to the courts, and is most useful where
parents are capable of getting their children to school regularly
but fail to do so. An evaluation of the fast-track process found
that absence rates declined during the process and rose again
afterwards, but not to the rates experienced at the start of the
process. The evaluation measured absence rates only up to 24 weeks
and there is a risk that absence rates could have continued to
rise.[17]
15. There is a wide range in absence rates between
local authorities, from 5.56% in Buckinghamshire in the 2004-05
school year to 8.64% in Manchester.[18]
Absence statistics for 2004-05 published by the Department show
that 116 out of 150 local authorities reduced total absence rates
in their areas. One of the best performers was Birmingham City
Council, an urban authority that had reduced total absence from
7.01% in 2003-04 to 6.54% in 2004-05.[19]
This local authority's range of measures includes effective use
of truancy sweeps and penalty notices, two approaches recommended
by the Department. The authority's Pupil Watch Officers patrol
the streets looking for truants and return them to school. They
challenge parents shopping with their school-age children during
school hours. The Council has also used £50 fixed penalty
notices, which were introduced under the Anti-social Behaviour
Act 2003, and are intended to be used early to deter parents from
allowing patterns of unauthorised absence to develop. In its first
use of the power to issue penalty notices, Birmingham City Council
used, or threatened to use, penalty notices on 800 occasions and
achieved improved attendance in 776 cases (97%). Few cases have
proceeded to prosecution.[20]
16. Pupils returning to school after a long period
of absence can find it difficult to settle because they have fallen
behind academically or because the underlying causes of the absence
have not been resolved. For persistent truants, there is a need
to break the cycle of truancy. Putting in the effort to avoid
persistent truancy could lead to savings later by reducing the
risk of involvement in crime and anti-social behaviour. Schools
and local authorities can increase the chances of these pupils
rejoining mainstream school, for example by providing personalised
support and not just putting them back in class and expecting
them and their teachers to cope.[21]
The Department has published research on reintegration that concluded
that successful reintegration occurs where there is a culture
of inclusion, commitment from schools and appropriate resources
to provide individually tailored support where necessary. The
research suggested that the coverage of reintegration support
was unacceptably low in some areas and for some groups.[22]
Some pupils might be better suited to education in a special school,
and a state boarding school is one option for preparing persistent
truants to resume their education.[23]
14 C&AG's Report, paras 3.13, 3.15 Back
15
Q 16 Back
16
C&AG's Report, paras 3.21-3.24; Qq 17, 75 Back
17
C&AG's Report, para 3.27 Back
18
Department for Education and Skills, Pupil absence in schools
in England 2004-05, Table 2 Back
19
National Audit Office analysis of Pupil absence in schools
in England 2004-05 Back
20
C&AG's Report, para 3.22; Q 94 Back
21
Qq 76-77, 89 Back
22
The reintegration of children absent, excluded or missing from
school, GHK Consulting, Holden McAllister Partnership and
IPSOS Public Affairs, Department for Education and Skills (2004) Back
23
Qq 28-29, 109 Back
|
