https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2419-7253
Figures
Abstract
Students who frequently miss school are at greater risk for academic difficulty. High levels of absenteeism as early as kindergarten have been associated with long-term consequences, such as low reading proficiency in Grade 3 and low academic achievement in Grade 5, both of which have been associated with lower rates of high school graduation and enrollment in post-secondary education. The prevalence of school absenteeism has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic and there have been sustained shifts in student attendance rates from kindergarten to Grade 12 since 2020. The goals of this population-level, repeated cross-sectional cohort study were to compare rates of chronic absenteeism, defined as being absent from school at least 10% of the time, in kindergarten in Canada before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and examine the association between children’s chronic absenteeism and their concurrent developmental vulnerability. A total of 513,159 kindergarten children participated in the study, with 284,712 (55.5%) being in the pre-COVID-19 cohort (2017−2020) and 228,447 (44.5%) in the post-COVID-19 cohort (2020−2023). Across Canada, rates of chronic absenteeism increased from pre- to post-COVID-19, from 17.7% to 41.3%, with differences by jurisdiction. The greatest increase was seen in Ontario, while the smallest increase was seen in British Columbia. Children attending kindergarten in the post-COVID-19 cohort were three times more likely to be chronically absent compared to their peers attending kindergarten before the onset of the pandemic. Despite this, chronic absenteeism in the post-COVID-19 period was associated with reduced odds of overall developmental vulnerability, a pattern that is likely attributable to shifts in the composition of chronically absent children. In the post-COVID-19 cohort, a greater percentage of children who were chronically absent resided in higher SES neighbourhoods compared to their chronically absent peers attending school before the onset of the pandemic. While increasing rates of school absenteeism should not be ignored, our results suggest that chronic absenteeism following COVID-19 might be more nuanced than before. The jurisdictional differences in rates of chronic absenteeism observed in this study could be due to the various public health measures put in place by the various provincial and territorial governments. It is also possible that the children from higher SES neighbourhoods missed more school after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic because their parents had the capability to work from home, making it easier to keep their child(ren) home from school. The decreased association between chronic absenteeism and developmental vulnerability post-COVID-19 may be partially related to changes in access to online learning resources, which could have enabled some students to remain academically engaged while at home. However, further research is needed to better understand the underlying reasons for school absence and how the relation between absenteeism and academic achievement may vary across developmental stages to effectively support learning trajectories.
Citation: Reid-Westoby C, Duku E, Gaskin A, Janus M (2026) Chronic absenteeism in Canadian kindergarten classes, pre- and post-COVID-19, and its association with concurrent developmental vulnerability. PLoS One 21(6): e0345192. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0345192
Editor: Mohd Ismail Ibrahim, Universiti Sains Malaysia - Kampus Kesihatan, MALAYSIA
Received: March 5, 2026; Accepted: May 19, 2026; Published: June 15, 2026
Copyright: © 2026 Reid-Westoby et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The source data used in this study were originally collected under service provision contracts with Canadian provincial and territorial governments and are therefore subject to legal, ethical, and contractual data-sharing restrictions. Data were provided to the Offord Centre for Child Studies (OCCS) for secondary research use under specific data-sharing agreements established between jurisdictional authorities and the OCCS. As such, the data are not owned by the researchers or by the OCCS and cannot be deposited in a public repository or made openly available. Individual-level data are approved only for use within the secure OCCS research environment and solely for the purposes outlined in the approved study protocol. Public sharing of the data is further restricted by the terms of the original data sharing agreements and privacy requirements governing the collection and use of the data. The research team at OCCS collects the data on behalf of the provinces and territories and maintains a data repository of all EDI data collected in Canada. For these reasons, the authors serve as the designated points of contact for all data access requests and are responsible for ensuring that any proposed secondary use complies with the original legal, ethical, and contractual obligations associated with the data. Although the authors cannot make their study’s data publicly available at the time of publication, all authors commit to make the data underlying the findings described in this study fully available without restriction to those who request the data, in compliance with the PLOS Data Availability policy. For data sets involving personally identifiable information or other sensitive data, data sharing is contingent on the data being handled appropriately by the data requester and in accordance with all applicable local requirements. Access to the data may be granted through a third-party request process, subject to approval from the original data holders, relevant privacy and ethics review bodies, and the execution of a formal data-sharing agreement with the requesting organization. Any approved agreement must ensure adherence to terms and conditions that are at least as protective as those outlined in the original provincial and territorial agreements. Requests will be evaluated based on consistency with the original research and ethics approvals, the scientific merit of the proposed work, the feasibility of secure data access arrangements, and compliance with applicable privacy and confidentiality requirements. The data will continue to be securely stored and maintained within the OCCS secure data environment in accordance with institutional policies, jurisdictional agreements, and applicable privacy legislation to ensure long-term preservation and controlled availability for approved research purposes. The research team will facilitate the data access process on behalf of qualified researchers by seeking the necessary permissions from the original data custodians and oversight bodies. Data access requests may be directed to Ashley Gaskin (agaskin@mcmaster.ca) or Magdalena Janus (mjanus@mail.ubc.ca). The authors serve as the points of contact for data access requests because they maintain the secure Canadian data repository and are responsible for ensuring that any sharing of individual-level de-identified data complies with the original legal, ethical, and privacy obligations.
Funding: The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (award number 468556). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Early school experiences play an important role in a child’s life, as they help foster engagement with the educational process. School engagement has been associated with future academic and social success [1]. A key aspect of being engaged is regular school attendance. Research suggests that one benefit of attending school is a function of exposure: greater exposure (i.e., attendance) leads to increased educational gains, whereas less exposure (i.e., frequent absences) can hinder learning and result in fewer gains [2]. Students who are more frequently absent are at greater risk for school difficulty [3–7]. High levels of absenteeism as early as kindergarten are associated with long-term consequences such as low reading proficiency in Grade 3 [8] and low academic achievement in Grade 5 [9,10], both of which have been associated with lower rates of high school graduation and enrollment in post-secondary education.
Some experts maintain that children’s early life experiences are particularly crucial for their long-term school performance [11] as the skills and knowledge learned during these early years lay the groundwork for what they will learn in the future [1]. Consequently, if children are not attending school during this formative time, they may be less likely to succeed later on. Only a small number of studies has looked at the associations between school absences and other dimensions of development, other than academic attainment, such as socioemotional skills. Gottfried et al. [5], for example, found that kindergartners who were more frequently absent exhibited less optimal social skills and greater internalizing problems at the end of the school year. Research has shown that children who frequently miss school are at increased risk of poor academic achievement and socioemotional problems, risky health behaviours, discontinuing education, not attending post-secondary education, as well as lower income, frequent work absences, and poorer health as adults [5,12,13].
School absenteeism starts early and may persist over time [14,15]. Rates of school absenteeism appear to be highest in kindergarten [16,17]. Approximately 10% of children enrolled in kindergarten in the United States are chronically absent, defined as missing school at least 10% of the time [10]. A national survey in the United States found that, on average, 14% of students are chronically absent, with rates varying by jurisdiction from less than 5% to more than 50% [18]. Frequent school absences are often driven by many factors, with illness being the most commonly reported reason for missing school. The prevalence of absenteeism is higher in students with disabilities or low academic achievement [16]. Nevertheless, not all children who are repeatedly absent have a chronic disease or are ill. A number of studies have shown that child, family, community, and school characteristics all contribute to school absenteeism [19–24].
Another factor associated with school absenteeism is the COVID-19 pandemic. The prevalence of school absenteeism has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic and there have been sustained shifts in student attendance rates from kindergarten to Grade 12 since 2020. The percentage of public-school students in the United States who were chronically absent almost doubled between the 2018–19 and 2021–22 school years, from 15% to 28% [25]. In a study in North Carolina, the percentage of students who were chronically absent at least once over the 3-year period increased from 17% pre-pandemic to 38% post-pandemic, while the percentage who were chronically absent in all 3 years quadrupled from 2.4% to 9.6% [26]. Even after public health measures subsided, rates of chronic absenteeism have remained high [27]. While there is clear evidence that school absenteeism rates have increased since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, to our knowledge, no research has examined the association between school absenteeism and children’s concurrent development health, pre- and post-COVID-19. More broadly, research on chronic absenteeism in Canada remains limited.
Current study
The goal of the current study was to examine the chronic absenteeism rates among Canadian kindergartners before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associations with their school readiness.
This was done by conducting analyses to answer the following research questions:
- Did rates of chronic absenteeism change in Canadian kindergarten students from pre- to post-COVID-19 onset?
- Has the demographic composition of chronically absent children changed between the pre- and post-COVID-19 cohorts of Canadian kindergarten children?
- Has the association between chronic absenteeism and children’s developmental vulnerability changed between the pre- and post-COVID-19 cohorts?
Examining this association in kindergarten children pre- and post-COVID-19 is important, as development at that age is associated with future academic and socioemotional outcomes [8,28,29]. Previous research has established that the numbers of days absent from school have increased since the onset of COVID-19 [30], however, it is not known is whether the association between school absenteeism and children’s development and school readiness has changed. In fact, very little research on chronic absenteeism has been conducted in Canada, in any age group, potentially due to the difficulty in acquiring information on school absenteeism [31].
Materials and methods
Study population and design
This was a population-level, repeated cross-sectional cohort study which consisted of two population-level cohorts of children, one who attended kindergarten before the onset of COVID-19 and another one attending kindergarten post-COVID-19 onset. The study population included for children attending publicly-funded schools from 8 of Canada’s 13 provinces and territories. Over 90% of Canadian children attend publicly-funded schools [32]. The kindergarten teachers completed the Early Development Instrument (EDI) for every child in their classroom between 2017 and 2020 (pre-COVID-19) and 2020 and 2023 (post-COVID-19). Data accessed for this study were de-identified during data collection and were accessed as of May 14th, 2025. Inclusion criteria were being enrolled in kindergarten, being in their current classroom for at least one month, having an EDI questionnaire with no more than 25% of items missing, and not missing data for any of the variables of interest. The study received approval from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board. Consent was waived for the study as it involved analysis of de-identified data, posing minimal risk to participants and precluding the need for individual informed consent.
Measures
This study utilized data from the EDI, a 103-item, teacher-completed measure of children’s abilities to meet age-appropriate abilities and behaviours [33]. As a measure of child’s developmental health, the EDI questions focus on developmental skills easily observable in the kindergarten classroom crucial for child’s successful transition to primary school. Thus, the EDI outcomes are often conceptualized as school readiness [34].
COVID-19 onset
Our study population was divided into two groups: those who attended school before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (2017−2020) and those who attended school after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020−2023). Table 1 lists the provinces and territories included in the current study. A COVID-19 onset variable was created based on when the EDI data was collected in each jurisdiction (pre-COVID-19 = 1, post-COVID-19 = 2). It should be noted that EDI data collected in 2020 in British Columbia were considered part of the post-COVID-19 pandemic as it was part of their 8th wave of data collection, which included the years 2020, 2021, and 2022. Data collected in Nova Scotia and Northwest Territories in 2020 occurred just before COVID-19 was considered a global pandemic and was therefore included in the pre-COVID-19 cohort.
Days absent
Teachers were asked to indicate the number of days the students in their class have been absent since the beginning of the school year. The number of days absent was categorized into two categories: 0–13 days absent and 14 or more days absent. These categories were based on the current definition of chronic absenteeism, which is defined as missing at least 10% of the school days, or two days a month [35]. Given that EDI data were collected between February and April of a given school year, anyone absent for 14 days or more would be considered chronically absent thus far in the school year. An upper limit of 140 days absent was applied to the chronically absent category to align with the number of instructional days that had elapsed at the time of EDI completion.
Developmental health
Children’s developmental health outcome was measured using overall developmental vulnerability (i.e., vulnerability in any of the developmental domains of the EDI [36]). Teachers rate each child’s abilities and behaviours that are expected of typically developing 5- to 6-year-olds in five general areas of their development using dichotomous (No/Yes; scored as 0 and 10) or 3-point scales (scored as 0, 5, 10). These five areas are physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication skills and general knowledge. Items on the EDI are then averaged to create a composite score for each developmental domain (ranging from 0 to 10), with higher scores reflecting greater levels of ability in each domain. Using cut-off scores derived from a national baseline collection of EDI data, developmental vulnerability scores (0 = not vulnerable, 1 = vulnerable) are then calculated for each domain. Children falling below the 10th percentile cut-off for a given domain are classified as vulnerable in that area. Domain-specific vulnerability scores are then used to calculate an overall developmental vulnerability score: 0 = not vulnerable in any domain, 1 = vulnerable in at least one domain, which is the variable used in the current study.
Child demographics
Child-level demographic information was also collected through the EDI and included: age at time of EDI completion, sex at birth, whether a child has a designation of special needs (SN; yes/no), presence of any functional impairment (yes/no; teachers are asked to indicate whether they feel a given student in their classroom has a problem that influences their ability to participate in the classroom and if they say yes, they can choose from a list of 11 different impairments, ranging from visual and hearing impairments, to emotional and behavioural problems), and whether the teacher felt the child needed further assessment (yes/no).
Neighbourhood-level SES
Information on neighbourhood-level socioeconomic status (SES) was derived using variables from the 2016 Canadian Census and 2015 Taxfiler datasets capturing a range of socioeconomic characteristics. The index used in this study, called the Canadian Neighbourhoods Early Child Development (CanNECD) SES Index [37], is a composite score of 10 variables from these two datasets (Table 2). The SES index was transformed into Z-scores (mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1), with higher SES index representing higher overall neighbourhood SES. The CanNECD SES Index was linked to the EDI data using children’s residential postal codes, and was already categorized into quintiles.
Analytic strategy
To start, descriptive statistics including means and proportions were examined for children chronically absent and those who were not, in both pre- and post-COVID-19 onset cohorts. Children’s age, sex, special needs designation, functional impairments, reports of needing further assessment, neighbourhood-level SES, and jurisdiction were compared between children with and without chronic absenteeism, pre- and post-COVID-19 onset using contingency tables. Chi-squared analyses and analyses of variance were conducted to examine differences in sociodemographic characteristics in children not chronically absent and chronically absent children, pre- and post-COVID-19. While statistical significance was considered, because of the size of the study population, emphasis was placed on effect sizes (e.g. Cramer’s V), as they better reflect the magnitude of the differences. Following this, rates of chronic absenteeism between the pre- and post-COVID-19 onset cohorts was compared by conducting an unadjusted binary logistic regression (BLR), followed by adjusted BLRs, controlling for the sociodemographic variables mentioned above, and then including interactions between COVID-19 onset and neighbourhood SES and between COVID-19 onset and jurisdiction. Lastly, to answer the third research question, BLR models were used to examine the association between chronic absenteeism, COVID-19 onset, and developmental vulnerability, first, and then adjusting for the same variables as in the previous BLR models, and last, adjusting for interactions between COVID-19 onset and neighbourhood SES and between COVID-19 onset and jurisdiction.
Results
Chronic absenteeism pre- and post-COVID-19
Of a total of 540,005 kindergarten children who were part of the provincial/territorial EDI data collections, 526,850 were considered valid for analysis (97.6%). Of those children, 513,159 (97.4%) were not missing data on any of the variables of interest in this study and were included in the final analytic sample. Of the children included in the analyses, 284,712 (55.5%) were in the pre-COVID-19 cohort and 228,447 (44.5%) were in the post-COVID-19 cohort. Fig 1 shows a flowchart of participants.
We examined the demographic characteristics of children who were chronically absent and those who were not, pre- and post-COVID-19 (Table 3). As can be seen, most of the demographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for neighbourhood-level SES. There appeared to be a greater proportion of chronically absent students living in higher SES neighbourhoods post-COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19.
Chi-square tests and analyses of variance were then conducted to examine whether there were differences between the socio-demographic composition of chronically absent children in kindergarten, pre- and post-COVID-19. While statistically significant differences were observed between the two cohorts on all socio-demographic characteristics (Table 4), all effect sizes were small, with the exception of the differences between cohorts for neighbourhood SES and jurisdictions.
Across Canada, rates of chronic absenteeism increased significantly from pre- to post-COVID-19 onset, from 17.7% to 41.3%. Differences in rates of chronic absenteeism were also observed by jurisdiction (Fig 2). The greatest increase was seen in Ontario, while the smallest increase was seen in British Columbia.
Results of an unadjusted BLR revealed that children who attended kindergarten after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic had 3.26 times greater odds of being chronically absent, compared to their peers who attended kindergarten before the pandemic (Table 5).
After adjusting for the socio-demographic characteristics, including interactions between COVID-19 onset and SES and between COVID-19 onset and jurisdiction, the odds of being chronically absent post-COVID-19 onset changed to 3.02.
Association between chronic absenteeism and developmental vulnerability, pre- and post-COVID-19
Fig 3 displays the numbers and percentages of children developmentally vulnerable overall, by chronic absenteeism in both cohorts of kindergarten students. A smaller percentage of children chronically absent was vulnerable on one or more developmental domains after the COVID-19 pandemic onset, compared to their peers attending kindergarten before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas rates for non-chronically absent children were fairly similar.
To empirically test the significance of these changes, we conducted an unadjusted BLR to examine the association between chronic absenteeism and developmental vulnerability, pre- and post-COVID-19. We examined the odds of being developmentally vulnerable overall by chronic absenteeism, attending kindergarten post-COVID-19 onset, and by the interaction between these two variables. As can be seen in Table 6, children who were chronically absent from school had 1.96 greater odds of being developmentally vulnerable compared to their peers who were not chronically absent, while children attending kindergarten post-COVID-19 onset had 1.03 greater odds of being developmentally vulnerable compared to their peers who attended school before the pandemic started. Interestingly, the interaction between these two variables resulted in decreased odds of being developmentally vulnerable. Once we controlled for socio-demographic variables, the odds of chronically absent children being vulnerable changed to 1.72, and the odds of being developmentally vulnerable for children attending school post-COVID-19 onset became non-significant. We also observed a reduction in the odds of being developmentally vulnerable post-COVID-19 onset for children who were chronically absent and controlling for other covariates and interactions between COVID-19 onset and SES and between COVID-19 onset and jurisdiction, the reduction in odds of being developmentally vulnerable did not change.
Discussion
In this population-level study of kindergarten children in Canada in a pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic onset cohorts, we found that children attending school after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic were three times more likely to be chronically absent compared to their peers attending kindergarten before the pandemic. Changes in rates of chronic absenteeism differed by jurisdiction. Even though its rates increased across the board, chronic absenteeism in the post-COVID-19 period was linked to reduced odds of overall developmental vulnerability – poor school readiness – a pattern that is likely attributable to shifts in the demographic characteristics of chronically absent children. In the post-COVID-19 cohort, a greater percentage of those children lived in higher SES neighbourhoods compared to their chronically absent peers attending school before the onset of the pandemic.
Previous research has reported increases in rates of chronic absenteeism in children in all grades since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, rates of chronic absenteeism in publicly-funded schools in the United States increased from approximately 15 percent of students from kindergarten to Grade 12 in 2018−2019–28 percent in 2021−22 [25]. Even after the pandemic and related-public health measures subsided, rates of chronic absenteeism still remained higher than pre-pandemic levels [38]. Our study adds to the evidence on rates of chronic absenteeism increasing after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic by focusing on the youngest students, who, in the post-pandemic cohort, were not even in school during the closures.
Our study demonstrated the highest increase in rates of kindergarten chronic absenteeism was in Ontario, while the smallest increase was in British Columbia. Several factors can potentially explain this difference. Firstly, the jurisdictional differences in rates of chronic absenteeism could be due to the various public health measures put in place. Healthcare and education are predominantly a provincial and territorial responsibility in Canada, and with some exceptions, the majority of pandemic-related public health policy restrictions were introduced by provincial governments [39]. For example, Ontario had the greatest number of full and partial school closures in 2020 and 2021 [40], which could have led to challenges with re-engaging in school once in-person instruction resumed. A common assumption is that the increased use of remote instruction in public schools during the 2020–2021 closures contributed to higher chronic absenteeism by interrupting established routines and reducing students’ engagement with schoolwork [25]. Increased rates of chronic absenteeism may also be a result of how attendance differed in response to heightened illness and infection risks as students returned to in-person learning. Many schools had strict public health policies when it came to cold and flu symptoms once schools reopened for in-person learning [41], such as dismissing symptomatic students or isolating if symptomatic, which could have resulted in children potentially missing more school compared to before the pandemic when students were more likely to attend school still symptomatic. Furthermore, parental anxiety about illness could also explain an increase in chronic absenteeism since COVID-19. Approximately one-third of parents reported being a little anxious, while 13% and 16% of primary and secondary school parents, respectively, reported being extremely anxious about their children returning to school [42]. Hundreds of parents expressed their concerns about their children’s inability to prevent the spread of the disease and their lack of self-consciousness, fearing that children would not respect public health measures, such as wearing their masks while at school [43]. Thus, patterns of absenteeism may have been influenced, in part, by how parents and students responded to masking policies and other public health measures during the reopening period [43–45]. Another study examining parents’ willingness to send their children back to school following COVID-19-related school closures found that 31% preferred to keep their children at home, whereas 49% intended to return them to in-person schooling. Decisions about returning to school were influenced by parents’ confidence in the school, the difficulties associated with distance learning, and work-related factors [46], not to mention parents’ concerns about their children’s health and safety [47]. Parental attitudes toward school attendance appear to have changed since the pandemic. Since the onset of the pandemic, some parents no longer view daily attendance as essential but instead view it as one of several competing demands in their child’s daily life [48,49].
High rates of school absenteeism are generally seen as an early warning sign for schools, suggesting that children might be struggling either at school or at home [50]. Our study showed that, after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, chronically absent children had lower odds of being developmentally vulnerable compared to pre-pandemic. Similar findings have also been reported by others [26,51]. Chronic school absenteeism has historically been more common among children living in poverty or in lower SES areas [6,52]. In our study, however, the socioeconomic profile of chronically absent kindergarten children shifted following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a greater proportion residing in higher-SES neighbourhoods. This compositional change may help explain why post-pandemic chronic absenteeism was associated with decreased odds of developmental vulnerability, suggesting that the observed association may reflect differences in the characteristics of children who were absent rather than a change in the effect of absenteeism itself, given the well-established positive association between SES and children’s developmental health. Several studies have found positive associations between neighbourhood-level SES and children’s developmental outcomes in kindergarten children, where living in higher SES neighbourhoods was associated with better developmental outcomes [37,53,54]. It is possible that children from higher SES neighbourhoods missed more school after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic because their parents had the capability to work from home, making it easier to keep their child(ren) home from school. Work-from-home job postings quadrupled across 20 countries from 2020 to 2023 [55], nevertheless, this increase was not seen across all jobs. Labour market statistics show that the ability to work from home varied, with individuals working in higher income positions and with higher levels of education being more likely to work from home [56].
Another possible explanation for the decreased association between chronic absenteeism and children’s developmental vulnerability post-COVID-19 is that the increased availability and access to online resources may have mitigated some of the academic consequences of absenteeism, potentially allowing students to remain more engaged with coursework from home [26]. In line with this, one research study found that a third (32%) of caretakers were not concerned about their child missing school because, according to them, everything the child needs to know was available online [57]. The frequency of children’s participation in academic activities at home during the pandemic, however, varied by parents’ educational attainment. Among parents with at least a bachelor’s degree, 80% reported that their children engaged in structured academic activities at least three times per week, compared to 72% among parents with a college certificate or diploma, 69% among those with a trades certificate or diploma, and 67% among those with a high school diploma or less [58]. The reduced strength of association between chronic absenteeism and school readiness in kindergartners following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic may reflect a combination of factors, including differences in family resources – where more affluent parents may be more likely to support structured academic activities at home – and changes in school practice, such as providing better resources to support absent students. Future research could address disentangling these possibilities.
Strengths and limitations
The current study has several strengths. First, we used population-level data from most provinces/territories across Canada, collected over several years, which gave us good insight into chronic absenteeism in kindergarten students across the country before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in absenteeism data for kindergarten children across most of the country, making it the most comprehensive study of the prevalence of chronic absenteeism in young children in Canada to date. Second, the use of a neighbourhood-level SES index developed to account for the greatest possible variance in children’s developmental outcomes provided the opportunity to examine the association with SES. Finally, focusing on population-level changes in chronic absenteeism and its association with developmental vulnerability in light of the COVID-19 pandemic provides valuable insight into potential shifts in school absenteeism in cohorts of kindergarten children.
The current study also has limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. Despite a large sample size and a coverage of two-thirds of Canadian jurisdictions, we were unable to include all jurisdictions of the country, which may decrease the generalizability of our findings. We have little empirical evidence to speculate how post-COVID-19 pandemic outcomes could differ for the regions that did not collect EDI data, and most specifically for territories such as Yukon and Nunavut which have very small populations living in very large, remote regions. The absence of data from these territories raises the possibility that the observed associations may not fully capture patterns in more remote or underserved areas. As such, the findings may, in part, reflect the composition of the included regions rather than pan-Canadian trends. We also relied on teacher reports of children’s absenteeism. School boards collect their own attendance data, which may not be collected the same way for all boards/districts, as previously noted [31], potentially leading to differences in the number of days absent reported on the EDI questionnaires. This could introduce measurement variability that may influence the observed associations, potentially attenuating or inflating estimates in ways that are difficult to predict. The lack of family-level SES data is another important limitation, as it restricts our ability to fully account for potential confounding. Neighbourhood-level SES may not adequately capture within-neighbourhood heterogeneity, and unmeasured family-level factors could contribute to both school absenteeism and developmental outcomes. As a result, the associations observed may be partially influenced by residual confounding. Finally, to address missing data, we opted to use a complete case analysis. Although multiple imputation is an alternative method for handling missingness, the overall proportion of missing data was small (2.6%), and we therefore proceeded with the complete case approach. We acknowledge, however, that this decision may introduce some degree of bias, if the missingness is not completely random. This approach may also alter the composition of the analytic sample in subtle ways, which could influence the strength or direction of the observed associations.
Despite these limitations, this study is an important first step in investigating the prevalence of chronic absenteeism across Canadian kindergarten classes, pre- and post-COVID-19, and its association with children’s developmental vulnerability. Considering our somewhat counter-intuitive findings of decreased association between chronic absenteeism and children’s developmental vulnerability post-COVID-19, future research should examine the associations found in the current study in subsequent cohorts, as well as in primary school among children who did not experience pandemic closures.
Conclusion
Chronic absenteeism is a well-established early risk factor for school dropout, mental health challenges, financial instability, and academic difficulty [50], often serving as an important early warning sign that students may be experiencing underlying struggles. Although rising rates of chronic absenteeism warrant careful attention, our findings suggest that patterns observed following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic may be more nuanced than seen previously, potentially reflecting shifts in the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of students who are chronically absent rather than changes in the consequences of absenteeism itself. As such, these findings should be interpreted with caution. The full implications of the pandemic for children’s education and development, however, are still emerging.
A deeper understanding of the factors driving school absences is needed, as are policies aimed at reducing the number of missed days. At the same time, recognizing that some degree of legitimate absenteeism is inevitable, there may be value in developing strategies to mitigate the learning consequences of missed instructional time – an area that has received comparatively limited empirical and policy focus to date. Supporting schools in responding to absenteeism in the post-pandemic context, which intensified or introduced many challenges, will likely require thoughtful and sustained context-sensitive approaches to school attendance that account for the diverse circumstances of students and their families. Such efforts may play an important role in supporting and promoting children’s academic and socioemotional well-being.
Acknowledgments
We would like to extend our gratitude to our provincial and territorial partners for their hard work and commitment to the EDI data collections, as well as to the teachers across Canada who committed their time and energy in completing the EDI questionnaires and who have made this work possible. We would also like to thank Paul Lefebvre for his assistance with the analysis and interpretation of the results of the study.
References
- 1. Duncan GJ, Dowsett CJ, Claessens A, Magnuson K, Huston AC, Klebanov P, et al. School readiness and later achievement. Dev Psychol. 2007;43(6):1428–46. pmid:18020822
- 2. Entwistle DR, Alexander KL, Olson LS. Keep the faucet flowing. Educ Healthc Public Serv. 2001;25(3).
- 3. Ansari A, Purtell KM. Absenteeism in head start and children’s academic learning. Child Dev. 2018;89(4):1088–98. pmid:28508590
- 4. Gershenson S, Jacknowitz A, Brannegan A. Are student absences worth the worry in U.S. primary schools?. Educ Finance Policy. 2017;12(2).
- 5. Gottfried MA. Chronic absenteeism and its effects on students’ academic and socioemotional outcomes. J Educ Stud Placed Risk. 2014;19(2):53–75.
- 6. Morrissey TW, Hutchison L, Winsler A. Family income, school attendance, and academic achievement in elementary school. Dev Psychol. 2014;50(3):741–53. pmid:23914750
- 7. Smerillo NE, Reynolds AJ, Temple JA, Ou S-R. Chronic absence, eighth-grade achievement, and high school attainment in the Chicago Longitudinal Study. J Sch Psychol. 2018;67:163–78. pmid:29571532
- 8. Davies S, Janus M, Duku E, Gaskin A. Using the Early Development Instrument to examine cognitive and non-cognitive school readiness and elementary student achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2016;35:63–75.
- 9. Attendance Works, Everyone Graduates Center. Preventing missing opportunities: taking collective action to confront chronic absence. 2016. https://www.attendanceworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Preventing-Missed-Opportunity-Full_FINAL9_8_16_2.pdf
- 10.
Chang H, Romero M. Present, engaged, and accounted for: the critical importance of addressing chronic absence in the early grades. New York, NY, US: National Centre for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University; 2008. https://www.nccp.org/publication/present-engaged-and-accounted-for-the-critical-importance-of-addressing-chronic-absence-in-the-early-grades/
- 11. Heckman JJ. Schools, skills, and synapses. Econ Inq. 2008;46(3):289. pmid:20119503
- 12. Eaton DK, Brener N, Kann LK. Associations of health risk behaviors with school absenteeism. Does having permission for the absence make a difference?. J Sch Health. 2008;78(4):223–9. pmid:18336682
- 13. Hickman GP, Bartholomew M, Mathwig J, Heinrich RS. Differential developmental pathways of high school dropouts and graduates. J Educ Res. 2008;102(1):3–14.
- 14.
Connolly F, Olson LS. Early elementary performance and attendance in baltimore city schools’ pre-kindergarten and kindergarten. Baltimore Education Research Consortium; 2012. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED535768
- 15.
Ehrlich SB, Gwynne JA, Pareja AS, Allensworth E, Moore PT, Jagesic S. Preschool attendance in Chicago public schools. Chicago, IL: UChicago Consortium on School Research; 2014. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/preschool-attendance-chicago-public-schools-relationships-learning-outcomes-and-reaso-0
- 16. Allen CW, Diamond-Myrsten S, Rollins LK. School Absenteeism in Children and Adolescents. Am Fam Physician. 2018;98(12):738–44. pmid:30525360
- 17. Balfanz R, Byrnes V. The importance of being in school: a report on absenteeism in the nation’s public schools. 2012. https://new.every1graduates.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/FINALChronicAbsenteeismReport_May16.pdf
- 18. Education Commission of the States (ECS). Encyclopedia of Educational Reform and Dissent. SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2010.
- 19.
Chang HN, Davis R. Mapping the early attendance gap. Attendance Works; 2015. https://www.attendanceworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Mapping-the-Early-Attendance-Gap_Final-4.pdf
- 20. Gottfried MA. Quantifying the consequences of missing school: linking school nurses to student absences to standardized achievement. Teach Coll Rec. 2013;115(6):1–30.
- 21. Gottfried MA. Can neighbor attributes predict school absences?. Urban Educ. 2014;49(2):216–50.
- 22. Gottfried MA, Gee KA. Identifying the determinants of chronic absenteeism: a bioecological systems approach. Teach Coll Rec. 2017;119(7):1–34.
- 23. Ready DD. Socioeconomic disadvantage, school attendance, and early cognitive development: the differential effects of school exposure. Sociol Educ. 2010;83(4):271–86.
- 24. Van Eck K, Johnson SR, Bettencourt A, Johnson SL. How school climate relates to chronic absence: a multi-level latent profile analysis. J Sch Psychol. 2017;61:89–102. pmid:28259246
- 25. Dee TS. Higher chronic absenteeism threatens academic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2024;121(3):e2312249121.
- 26. Swiderski T, Fuller SC, Bastian KC. The relationship between student attendance and achievement, pre- and post-COVID. AERA Open. 2025;11:23328584251371041.
- 27. Malkus N. Lingering absence in public schools: tracking post-pandemic chronic absenteeism into 2024. 2025. https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/lingering-absence-in-public-schools-tracking-post-pandemic-chronic-absenteeism-into-2024/
- 28. Gagné M, Janus M, Milbrath C, Gadermann A, Guhn M. Early emotional and communication functioning predicting the academic trajectories of refugee children in Canada. Educ Psychol. 2018;38(8):1050–67.
- 29. Guhn M, Gadermann AM, Almas A, Schonert-Reichl KA, Hertzman C. Associations of teacher-rated social, emotional, and cognitive development in kindergarten to self-reported wellbeing, peer relations, and academic test scores in middle childhood. Early Childhood Res Quart. 2016;35:76–84.
- 30. Carman T, Wesley A. Kids missing more school since pandemic, CBC analysis finds. CBC News. 2024. Accessed 2025 May 30. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/school-absence-data-1.7156254
- 31. Carman T. Why measuring school absences in Canada is so hard. CBC News. 2025. Accessed 2025 December 4. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/school-absences-data-9.6988718
- 32.
Statistics Canada. Elementary–Secondary Education Survey, 2020/2021. 2022. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/221013/dq221013a-eng.htm
- 33. Janus M, Offord DR. Development and psychometric properties of the Early Development Instrument (EDI): a measure of children’s school readiness. Can J Behav Sci. 2007;39(1):1–22.
- 34. Janus M, Gaskin A, Reid-Westoby C. School Readiness. In: Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Cham: Springer; 2022. 1–6.
- 35.
U.S. Department of Education. Chronic Absenteeism. Accessed 2025 June 19. http://www.ed.gov/teaching-and-administration/supporting-students/chronic-absenteeism
- 36. Janus M, Duku E. The school entry gap: socioeconomic, family, and health factors associated with children’s school readiness to learn. Early Edu Develop. 2007;18(3):375–403.
- 37. Forer B, Minh A, Enns J, Webb S, Duku E, Brownell M, et al. A Canadian neighbourhood index for socioeconomic status associated with early child development. Child Ind Res. 2019;13(4):1133–54.
- 38.
Malkus N. Long COVID for public schools: Chronic absenteeism before and after the pandemic. American Enterprise Institute. 2024. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED674001
- 39. Cameron-Blake E, Breton C, Sim P, Tatlow H, Wood A, Smith J, et al. Variation in the Canadian provincial and territorial responses to COVID-19. 2021. www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/covidtracker
- 40. Akanteva A, Dick DW, Amiraslani S, Heffernan JM. Canadian Covid-19 pandemic public health mitigation measures at the province level. Sci Data. 2023;10(1):882. pmid:38066033
- 41.
Public Health Ontario. Environmental scan: school-based public health measures in select jurisdictions and guidance from public health organizations. 2022. https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/Documents/nCoV/phm/2022/08/school-public-health-measures-pho-guidance.pdf?rev=a4b8227db0c6426dacd74a92d4b0f2e2&sc_lang=en
- 42. Amin-Chowdhury Z, Bertran M, Kall M, Ireland G, Aiano F, Powell A. Parents’ and teachers’ attitudes to and experiences of the implementation of COVID-19 preventive measures in primary and secondary schools following reopening of schools in autumn 2020: a descriptive cross-sectional survey. 2022.
- 43. Zhan Z, Li Y, Yuan X, Chen Q. To be or not to be: parents’ willingness to send their children back to school after the COVID-19 outbreak. Asia-Pac Educ Res. 2022;31(5):589–600.
- 44. Stripp M. Concerns about reopening schools loom large. AP-NORC. 2020. Accessed 2026 April 22. https://apnorc.org/projects/concerns-about-school-re-openings-loom-large/
- 45. Kroshus E, Hawrilenko M, Tandon PS, Christakis DA. Plans of US parents regarding school attendance for their children in the fall of 2020. JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174(11):1093.
- 46. Hageman JR. Can students safely return to school in the age of COVID-19?. Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(9):e363-4.
- 47. Limbers CA. Factors associated with caregiver preferences for children’s return to school during the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Sch Health. 2021;91(1):3–8. pmid:33140434
- 48. Lester KJ, Michelson D. Perfect storm: emotionally based school avoidance in the post-COVID-19 pandemic context. BMJ Ment Health. 2024;27(1). pmid:10.1136/bmjment-2023-300944
- 49.
Weale S. Parents in England no longer see daily school attendance as vital, report finds. The Guardian. 2023. Accessed 2026 January 7.
- 50. Kearney CA, Dupont R, Fensken M, Gonzálvez C. School attendance problems and absenteeism as early warning signals: review and implications for health-based protocols and school-based practices. Front Educ. 2023;8.
- 51. Fuller SC, Swiderski T, Mikkelsen C, Bastian KC. In school, engaged, on track? The effect of the pandemic on student attendance, course grades, and grade retention in North Carolina. Educ Res. 2025;54(2):78–90.
- 52. Gottfried MA. Can neighbor attributes predict school absences?. Urban Educ. 2014;49(2):216–50.
- 53. Halfon N, Aguilar E, Stanley L, Hotez E, Block E, Janus M. Measuring equity from the start: disparities in the health development of US kindergartners. Health Aff (Millwood). 2020;39(10):1702–9. pmid:33017235
- 54. Janus M, Reid-Westoby C, Raiter N, Forer B, Guhn M. Population-level data on child development at school entry reflecting social determinants of health: a narrative review of studies using the early development instrument. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(7):3397. pmid:33805965
- 55. Adrjan P, Ciminelli G, Judes A, Koelle M, Schwellnus C, Sinclair TM. Working from home after COVID-19: evidence from job postings in 20 countries. Labour Economics. 2025;96:102751.
- 56.
Government of Canada. Running the economy remotely: potential for working from home during and after COVID-19. 2020. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2020001/article/00026-eng.htm
- 57. Saavedra A, Polifkoff M, Silver D. Parents are not fully aware of, or concerned about, their children’s school attendance. Brookings. 2024. Accessed 2025 September 26. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/parents-are-not-fully-aware-of-or-concerned-about-their-childrens-school-attendance/
- 58.
Government of Canada. School closures and COVID-19: Interactive Tool. 2021. Accessed 2025 November 18. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2021009-eng.htm