School Connection / Flagship analysis
Attendance improved at the headline. Severe absence and belonging tell the harder story
Accredited absence data show small improvements in overall and persistent absence, but severe absence rose. New DfE research adds a different kind of evidence: belonging is built through whole-school culture, relationships and recognition, not a single attendance intervention.
The answer in brief
The attendance judgment
The latest accredited statistics contain two truths. Overall absence fell from 6.63% to 6.60% and persistent absence from 17.63% to 17.50% across the combined autumn and spring terms. At the same time, severe absence increased from 2.26% to 2.32%, representing 168,000 pupil enrolments. A small improvement in the national average should not obscure greater disconnection at the deepest edge.1
DfE's new belonging study offers a complementary, not causal, lens. Across 16 selected mainstream schools, researchers identified safety, inclusion, collective identity, individual recognition and positive relationships as core dimensions, with six broad themes for practice. The research cannot prove that a belonging programme will raise attendance. It can help leaders ask whether the daily school experience supports return, participation and learning.23
- Report severe absence beside overall and persistent absence so the deepest disconnection remains visible.
- Treat belonging as culture and practice across the school, not a product or isolated intervention.
- Use attendance and experience evidence together without claiming that association establishes cause.
01 / 01
The national picture improved slightly and worsened at its deepest edge
Persistent absence affected 1.27 million pupil enrolments, while severe absence affected 168,000. Special schools recorded an increase in overall absence, and severe absence rose in primary and special schools while falling slightly in secondary. Pupils with an EHC plan were more than seven times as likely to be severely absent as pupils with no identified SEN; those receiving SEN support were almost four times as likely.1
These figures identify concentration, not explanation. A national or school-level rate cannot establish whether absence is driven by health, unmet need, anxiety, transport, safeguarding, exclusion from learning, family circumstances or several connected barriers. Improvement work needs the rate, the reason, the pupil's account, provision evidence and the response history to meet in one review.
02 / 02
Belonging is described as a culture, not an attendance scheme
The case-study schools did not present belonging as one purchased programme. Researchers identified relational practice, pupil voice and agency, celebration of diversity, strong school identity, individualised approaches and connection beyond the school gates. The summary also emphasises staff wellbeing, sustained leadership attention and visible pupil influence rather than token consultation.2
That makes belonging a cross-system issue. Timetable design, behaviour, SEND support, physical space, curriculum representation, staff stability and family contact can all affect whether a pupil feels recognised and able to participate. A belonging survey may reveal a signal, but it cannot replace direct discussion or explain an individual absence by itself.
03 / 03
Connect attendance and belonging without manufacturing causation
Participants in the research perceived belonging, attendance and attainment as reciprocal: belonging can support attendance, regular attendance enables engagement, and success can reinforce belonging. That is an account of experience and practice across selected schools, not an experimental estimate of impact. Leaders should resist converting it into a promise that one intervention will produce a specified attendance gain.2
A more defensible school test is whether changes are implemented and whether several signals move in a coherent direction. If a year group introduces a new relational routine, leaders might review reach, pupil experience, repeat absence, internal removal, lesson participation and staff consistency. Any change should still be interpreted against context and alternative explanations.
04 / 04
Use cohort analysis to find the problem, then case review to understand it
Segment attendance by severity, phase, SEND, disadvantage and other relevant characteristics, with appropriate privacy controls. Look for repeat episodes and transitions rather than only a cumulative percentage. The accredited release shows that absence peaks in Years 10 and 11, while patterns for EHC plans, FSM eligibility and alternative provision demand distinct questions.1
Then return to individual experience. Check whether provision in an EHC plan is available, whether reduced or alternative arrangements are reviewed, whether the pupil has a trusted adult and whether family contact leads to action. Belonging should sharpen the inquiry; it must not become a softer label that hides unmet statutory or clinical need.4
05 / 05
Put belonging inside the attendance review cycle
Boards should receive a joined view: the attendance distribution, severe and repeat absence, provision status, pupil and family experience, workforce capacity and the implementation of agreed action. This allows governors to see whether the school is reducing barriers or simply moving pupils between codes and interventions.
The next plan should name a small number of observable practices, the adults responsible and the evidence expected. Protect universal belonging work while targeting additional support where the data and case record justify it. A credible strategy can acknowledge national improvement, remain dissatisfied with severe absence and avoid claiming that culture alone can resolve every barrier.24
Leadership questions
Questions that turn the development into a governing conversation.
Board test
Does our headline attendance report show the number and characteristics of pupils at the severe edge?
Board test
What would pupils say demonstrates that feedback changes their daily experience?
Board test
Where are absence, SEND provision, behaviour, safeguarding and pupil-experience evidence reviewed together?
Evidence boundary
What this analysis does not prove.
- The absence release is based on school-census data and differs in timing, coverage and revision from DfE's daily attendance series.
- The belonging research is an in-depth qualitative study of 16 selected schools; it is not nationally representative and does not establish causal effects.
- National associations cannot diagnose an individual pupil or assess a school's provision. Sensitive analysis requires lawful access, suppression and professional judgment.
What we are monitoring next
Publication is the beginning of the watch.
- The full-year accredited absence release, 2026/27 attendance data, any DfE guidance developed from the belonging research and evidence on implementation across different school contexts.
Approved public intelligence
What the live evidence is showing now.
School Connection continues to monitor inclusion, attendance & safeguarding evidence. New machine-detected signals remain private editorial candidates until a human editor investigates and approves them for publication.
This panel reads only the editor-approved School Connection public feed. It never exposes raw Observatory records, private candidates, contacts, commercial opportunities or internal scores.
Continue the evidence trail
How this develops our earlier coverage
Sources and methodology
Evidence used in this analysis
School Connection links to the primary source behind each material claim. Source status, period and limitations are stated so readers can reproduce the evidence trail.
- 01
Department for Education · Published 15 October 2026
Pupil absence in schools in England: autumn 2025 and spring 2026
Accredited school-census statistics with pupil-characteristic and geographic breakdowns. They are different from the more timely daily attendance series. - 02
Department for Education · Published 16 October 2026
School belonging case studies research: summary
Commissioned qualitative research across 16 case-study schools. It offers principles and practice insight, not nationally representative effect estimates. - 03
Department for Education · Published 16 October 2026
School belonging case studies research
Landing page for the 90-page report and summary, including the study scope of eight primary and eight secondary schools. - 04
Department for Education · Current statutory guidance reviewed 16 October 2026
Working together to improve school attendance
The current attendance framework. The belonging study does not replace statutory attendance responsibilities or individual support planning.