Reducing Student Absences at Scale by Targeting Parents’ Misbeliefs
Rogers, T. & Feller, A. (2018). Nature Human Behavior.
-
examining14,002Students, grades1-12
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Mailing with reminder about importance of absences (Rogers & Feller 2018))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absences |
Mailing with reminder about importance of absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
16.42 |
17.04 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Chronically absent |
Mailing with reminder about importance of absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
33.00 |
36.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Excused absences |
Mailing with reminder about importance of absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
5.32 |
5.57 |
Yes |
-- | ||
|
Unexcused absences |
Mailing with reminder about importance of absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
11.10 |
11.47 |
Yes |
-- | ||
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.
-
7% English language learners -
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
Urban
-
- 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
Pennsylvania
-
Race Black 53% Other or unknown 30% White 17% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 20% Other or unknown 80% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 73% No FRPL 28%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 203 schools within the School District of Philadelphia, a large urban public school district.
Study sample
The study included about 14,000 students in grades 1 to 12. Students were eligible for the study if (1) their parents did not opt out of the study; (2) they were enrolled in a regular school within the district (schools other than alternative, charter, or virtual schools); (3) they were not homeless; (4) they did not have an Individualized Education Program; (5) they were absent at least 3 days more than the most common number of absences in their school and grade in the prior year; and (6) they were not absent an exceptionally high number of days in the prior year. The study randomly assigned about half of these students to the intervention condition and half to the comparison condition.
Intervention Group
The intervention aimed to encourage school attendance. Parents received mailings from the district with a generic reminder about the importance of attendance and their ability to influence attendance. Parents received these mailings up to five times over the course of the year—in October, December, March, April and May. The district sent the first two mailings to the parents of all students. It sent the remaining three mailings only to parents of students with three or more absences at the time of the mailing. Parents received the mailings written in English, Spanish, or Mandarin based on district records of students’ home languages.
Comparison Group
Parents of students in the comparison condition received standard school communication, such as report cards.
Support for implementation
The study did not provide information about support for implementation of this intervention.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Rogers, T. & Feller, A. (2018). Supplementary Materials for Reducing Student Absences at Scale by Targeting Parents’ Misbeliefs. Nature Human Behavior.
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Mailing with reminder + information on the students’ total absences (Rogers & Feller 2018))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on the students’ total absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.98 |
17.04 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Chronically absent |
Mailing with reminder + information on the students’ total absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
32.40 |
36.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Excused absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on the students’ total absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
5.13 |
5.57 |
Yes |
-- | ||
|
Unexcused absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on the students’ total absences (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
10.85 |
11.47 |
Yes |
-- | ||
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.
-
6% English language learners -
Female: 52%
Male: 48% -
Urban
-
- 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
Pennsylvania
-
Race Black 53% Other or unknown 30% White 16% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 20% Other or unknown 80% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 72% No FRPL 28%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 203 schools within the School District of Philadelphia, a large urban public school district.
Study sample
The study included about 14,000 students in grades 1 to 12. Students were eligible for the study if (1) their parents did not opt out of the study; (2) they were enrolled in a regular school within the district (schools other than alternative, charter, or virtual schools); (3) they were not homeless; (4) they did not have an Individualized Education Program; (5) they were absent at least 3 days more than the most common number of absences in their school and grade in the prior year; and (6) they were not absent an exceptionally high number of days in the prior year. The study randomly assigned about half of these students to the intervention condition and half to the comparison condition.
Intervention Group
The intervention aimed to encourage school attendance and correct parents’ misconceptions about their child’s absences. Parents received mailings from the district with a generic reminder about the importance of attendance and their ability to influence attendance, along with information about their child’s total absences. Parents received these mailings up to five times over the course of the year—in October, December, March, April and May—but parents of students with lower absence levels received only the first two mailings. All mailings included the generic reminder, and the additional information about student absences was provided to all parents in the first mailing, but only to parents of students with higher absence levels in the later mailings. Specifically, parents of students with two or more absences received the absence information with the second mailing, and parents of students with three or more absences received the full content of the remaining mailings. The thresholds were based on absences counted up to the time of the current mailing. Parents received the mailings written in English, Spanish, or Mandarin based on district records of students’ home languages.
Comparison Group
Parents of students in the comparison condition received standard school communication, such as report cards.
Support for implementation
The study did not provide information about support for implementation of this intervention.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Rogers, T. & Feller, A. (2018). Supplementary Materials for Reducing Student Absences at Scale by Targeting Parents’ Misbeliefs. Nature Human Behavior.
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Mailing with reminder + information on students’ total absences relative to other students (Rogers & Feller 2018))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on students’ total absences relative to other students (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.93 |
17.04 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Chronically absent |
Mailing with reminder + information on students’ total absences relative to other students (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
31.90 |
36.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Excused absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on students’ total absences relative to other students (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
5.11 |
5.57 |
Yes |
-- | ||
|
Unexcused absences |
Mailing with reminder + information on students’ total absences relative to other students (Rogers & Feller 2018) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
10.82 |
11.47 |
Yes |
-- | ||
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.
-
7% English language learners -
Female: 53%
Male: 48% -
Urban
-
- 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
Pennsylvania
-
Race Black 53% Other or unknown 31% White 17% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 20% Other or unknown 80% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 72% No FRPL 28%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 203 schools within the School District of Philadelphia, a large urban public school district.
Study sample
The study included about 14,000 students in grades 1 to 12. Students were eligible for the study if (1) their parents did not opt out of the study; (2) they were enrolled in a regular school within the district (schools other than alternative, charter, or virtual schools); (3) they were not homeless; (4) they did not have an Individualized Education Program; (5) they were absent at least 3 days more than the most common number of absences in their school and grade in the prior year; and (6) they were not absent an exceptionally high number of days in the prior year. The study randomly assigned about half of these students to the intervention condition and half to the comparison condition.
Intervention Group
The intervention aimed to encourage school attendance and correct parents’ misconceptions about their child’s absences. Parents received mailings from the district with generic reminders about the importance of attendance and their ability to influence attendance, along with information about their child's total absences compared to typical absences for their peers. Parents received these mailings up to five times over the course of the year—in October, December, March, April and May— but parents of students with lower absence levels received only the first two mailings. All mailings included the generic reminder, and the additional information about student absences was provided to all parents in the first mailing, but only to parents of students with higher absence levels in the later mailings. Specifically, parents of students with two or more absences received information on total absences with the second mailing (including a comparison with typical classmates if their child’s absences were higher). Parents of students with three or more absences received the remaining mailings, including information on total absences (with a comparison to typical classmates if their child’s absences were substantially higher). The thresholds were based on absences counted up to the time of the current mailing. Parents received the mailings written in English, Spanish, or Mandarin based on district records of students’ home languages.
Comparison Group
Parents of students in the comparison condition received standard school communication, such as report cards.
Support for implementation
The study did not provide information about support for implementation of this intervention.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Rogers, T. & Feller, A. (2018). Supplementary Materials for Reducing Student Absences at Scale by Targeting Parents’ Misbeliefs. Nature Human Behavior.
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).