A New Program to Prevent Primary School Absenteeism: Results of a Pilot Study in Five Schools
Cook, Philip J.; Dodge, Kenneth A.; Gifford, Elizabeth J.; Schulting, Amy B. (2017). Children and Youth Services Review v82 p262-270. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED582897
-
examining788Students, grades1-2
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for The Early Truancy Prevention Project (ETPP))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Percent of students with 4+ absences |
The Early Truancy Prevention Project (ETPP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
64.21 |
70.50 |
Yes |
|
|
Percent of students with 6+ absences |
The Early Truancy Prevention Project (ETPP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
46.17 |
51.50 |
Yes |
|
|
Percent of students with 10+ absences |
The Early Truancy Prevention Project (ETPP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
22.30 |
25.30 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Other or unknown: 100% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
South
-
Race Black 50% Other or unknown 50% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 25% Not Hispanic or Latino 75% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 65% No FRPL 35%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in five elementary schools located in a single mid-sized school district in the southern United States.
Study sample
Participating schools were selected by the school district based on their schools’ need for the intervention and principals’ interest in participating. The study sample included 788 first- and second-grade students enrolled in these schools for an entire academic year. The researchers randomly assigned grade-level teaching teams within each school to either the intervention or comparison condition, resulting in five grade-level teams assigned to the intervention condition and five grade-level teams assigned to the comparison condition. All students in grade-level teams assigned to the intervention condition were included in the intervention.
Intervention Group
The Early Truancy Prevention Project (ETPP) is a school-based intervention designed to improve student attendance by strengthening communication between teachers and parents and providing teachers with information to identify and support students with attendance problems. In this study, the ETPP included several components. First, teachers visited students’ homes to strengthen relationships with parents, with three-fourths of teachers completing visits to over half of their students’ homes. Second, each teacher was provided with a smart phone to facilitate communication with parents. Third, teachers were given biweekly attendance data and had access to an online system in which they could assess each student’s barriers to attendance and get suggestions for interventions to address those barriers.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition received business-as-usual attendance practices. Teachers in comparison classrooms followed the school district’s standard attendance policies and procedures.
Support for implementation
The study’s theory of change for the Early Truancy Prevention Project indicates that teachers received training on conducting home visits, barriers to attendance and strategies to address those barriers, and use of the intervention’s online tracking system. No other details on this training were provided.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).