In response to budget problems, many urban school systems reduced resources for getting students to come to school, such as truancy officers. Chicago, for instance, in 1991, went from 150 truancy officers down to a total of zero. Is that a good idea? In this study, we explore the effects of increased support by a pro‐social adult, or “social capital,” delivered through a structured student monitoring and mentoring program called Check & Connect (C&C). We carried out a large‐scale randomized controlled trial with C&C in partnership with the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) to students in grades 1 to 8. Program participation decreased absences in grades 5 to 7 by 4.2 days, or 22.9 percent, but had no detectable effects on students in grades 1 to 4. We also did not find statistically significant effects on learning outcomes such as test scores or GPA, or any detectable spillovers to other students within the schools where the program was administered. The modest impacts per dollar spent, compared to previous evidence on either low‐cost “nudges” or relatively intensive, higher‐cost interventions, raise the possibility that, for very disadvantaged students, there may be decreasing returns that are then followed by increasing returns to program intensity for the problem of student disengagement.

中文翻译：

---

指导对学校出勤率和学业成绩的影响：“检查与联系”计划的随机评估

为了应对预算问题，许多城市学校系统（例如，逃学人员）减少了让学生上学的资源。例如，在1991年，芝加哥的逃学人员从150名减至零。这是一个好主意吗？在本研究中，我们探讨了通过名为Check＆Connect（C＆C）的结构化学生监督和指导计划提供的亲社会成人或“社会资本”增加支持的效果。我们与芝加哥公立学校（CPS）合作，与C＆C一起针对1至8年级的学生进行了一项大规模的随机对照试验。计划参与将5至7年级的缺勤人数减少了4.2天，即22.9％，但没有对1-4年级的学生有明显的影响。我们也没有发现对考试成绩或GPA等学习成果的统计显着影响，也没有发现对管理该计划的学校内其他学生的任何可测溢出。与以前有关低成本“微动”或相对密集，成本较高的干预措施的证据相比，每美元支出的影响不大，这增加了以下可能性：对于处境非常不利的学生，回报可能会下降，然后收益增加计划解决学生脱离接触的问题的强度。