School Attendance Hubs: Plan to Fix Classrooms

Government strategies usually involve complex funding formulas, but the latest attempt to solve the classroom crisis relies on a simpler, older concept: imitation. Instead of broad financial reform, the Department for Education (DfE) is betting that the best way to fix a struggling school is to introduce it to a winning one. This peer-to-peer strategy drives the expansion of school attendance hubs. The program assumes that culture, not cash, solves absenteeism. By pairing lead schools with those facing high absence rates, the system attempts to clone success across the country without building new infrastructure.

The initiative, formally known as the Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence (RISE), is rapidly scaling up. According to data reported by Tes, 57 hubs are already operational, with a clear target to reach 90 total hubs across England. The premise is straightforward: take institutions with excellent attendance records and use them to mentor schools that are falling behind. This creates a network where advice flows directly from headteacher to headteacher rather than coming solely from government officials. However, beneath the surface of this mentorship model lies a sharp debate about whether behavioral culture or economic reality drives students away from the classroom.

The Strategy Behind the Hubs

Sometimes the solution isn't a new invention, but simply pointing at someone else who is already doing it right. The core operational model of school attendance hubs relies on identifying schools with strong track records and turning them into training centers. The DfE has tasked these lead schools with sharing their secrets. They must demonstrate exactly how they keep students in class and behavior in check.

This is not a casual suggestion system. It is a structured hierarchy where successful academies and maintained schools guide their peers. The program currently aims to support around 5,000 schools through its "Regional" pathway. This massive reach depends entirely on the capacity of the lead schools to effectively transmit their methods. The strategy assumes that poor attendance is often a failure of process or culture that can be fixed by adopting the right "blueprint" from a neighbor.

A Split Approach to Support

You don't treat a broken arm the same way you treat a papercut, yet administrative systems often try to apply one fix to everyone. Recognizing that different schools have different levels of need, the school attendance hubs program splits its support into two distinct lanes. This bifurcation ensures resources go where they are most needed without wasting time on schools that just need a quick refresh.

The first lane is the "Regional" pathway. This as a light-touch option where partner schools access termly open day events to network, share effective practice, and observe successful systems in action. It is accessible to most institutions that want minimal intervention.

The second lane is the "Enhanced" pathway. This is far more intensive. It targets around 500 schools that require deep structural changes. Schools in this bracket receive 10 days of dedicated leadership support spread over three terms. This isn't just a chat; it involves deep-dive diagnosis, staff surveys, and pupil surveys to establish a baseline. From there, the lead school helps implement a rigorous action plan.

Leadership and the "Culture" Focus

A rule is only as strong as the person enforcing it, which is why personality often matters more than policy. The philosophical direction of school attendance hubs comes heavily from specific figures appointed to guide the program. As reported by Schools Week, Tom Bennett, known as the government's behaviour tsar, and Jayne Lowe, a former headteacher, have been appointed as ambassadors for the scheme. Their involvement signals a specific focus: behavior and culture are the primary tools for improvement.

Bennett’s reputation involves a focus on strict behavioral standards and clear routines. By placing him in a leadership role, the DfE signals that attendance issues are inextricably linked to school behavior policies. The hub system pushes the idea that creating safe cultures fostering belonging will naturally pull students back into class. The lead schools are expected to model this culture.

This leadership structure also influences how schools diagnose problems. The "Enhanced" pathway uses surveys to identify strengths and weaknesses in attendance and behavior simultaneously. The goal is to pinpoint exactly where the school culture is failing to engage students. This cultural audit is the first step before any physical changes or sanctions are applied.

The Financial Reality

Efficiency often disguises itself as innovation when the real driver is a lack of funds. While the scope of the project is national, the budget assigned to it tells a story of constraint. The total program investment stands at £1.5 million. When you ask what is a school attendance hub funded by, the answer is a relatively tight government purse compared to predecessor schemes. Critics and reports from Tes note that this funding allocation is notably reduced compared to prior initiatives.

This lean budget necessitates the peer-to-peer model. Hiring external consultants or building new agencies costs millions. Using existing headteachers to train other headteachers costs a fraction of that amount. The government is effectively leveraging the existing workforce to fix itself. This financial context explains why the "Regional" pathway focuses on large-scale open days rather than individual consulting for every school. The system requires high efficiency to reach its target of 90 hubs without blowing the budget.

The Numbers Failing the Test

A grand plan looks impressive on paper until you measure the gap between the goal and the current reality. The urgency behind the expansion of school attendance hubs comes from stark data. The persistent absence rate for the 2022-23 period stood at 22.3% overall. The breakdown shows 17.2% for primary schools and a worrying 28.3% for secondary schools. These aren't just marginal dips; they represent a significant portion of the student body missing from education.

The gap widens further when looking at disadvantaged pupils. Approximately 40% of disadvantaged students are persistently absent. This statistic suggests that the problem might be more about resources outside the school gates than the culture within them. When people wonder why is school attendance dropping, analysis from Research Briefings suggests the answer often involves different drivers of the problem, such as mental health concerns and the cost-of-living crisis affecting families across the country.

To combat this, the DfE has added 36 new lead schools to the roster. This cohort includes 27 academies and 9 Local Authority-maintained schools. Major names like Charnwood College, Webster Primary, and The Langley Academy have joined the list. The expansion includes 24 secondary schools and 12 primary schools, showing a clear effort to tackle the higher absence rates in older student groups.

The Clash: Culture vs. Poverty

Focusing on strict discipline risks ignoring the biological or economic realities that make compliance impossible for some. A significant tension exists between the school attendance hubs strategy and the feedback from union leaders and charities. The DfE frames attendance as a matter of school culture. They argue that if you build a safe, structured environment, students will come.

However, leaders from the NAHT union and charities like Contact argue that this ignores the root causes. They point to poverty and Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) as the real drivers of absence. A child might miss school not because they dislike the culture, but because they cannot afford transport or lack necessary medical support.

This friction appears in the debate over sanctions. School policies often use sanctions to punish poor attendance. However, the Equality Act 2010 creates a legal duty for reasonable adjustments. The charity Contact warns that mainstream support gaps cause reduced attendance for SEND children. If a student misses school due to anxiety or medical appointments, standard sanctions might be inappropriate. The hub model must navigate this minefield, ensuring that "strong culture" does not morph into "discrimination."

Technology and Targets

Modern problems eventually attract digital solutions, even if the human element remains the most critical variable. The school attendance hubs are not just relying on meetings and handshakes; they are integrating technology to sharpen their aim. The program outlines that individual school targets will be powered by AI. This suggests a move toward data-driven accountability where numbers dictate the intervention.

By using AI to set targets, the system attempts to remove human bias from the goal-setting process. It looks at the raw data of a school's demographics and past performance to determine what "good" looks like for that specific location. This aligns with the "Enhanced" pathway's focus on deep-dive diagnosis. The surveys and data collection establish a baseline, and the AI helps set the trajectory for improvement.

The Gap in the System

Designing a system for the majority inevitably leaves the most vulnerable outliers without a safety net. The current rollout of school attendance hubs heavily prioritizes mainstream education. The DfE spokesperson confirmed an initial focus on mainstream primary and secondary sectors. While this covers the largest number of students, it leaves a glaring hole regarding Alternative Provision (AP) and special schools.

Investigations by Tes highlight an urgent need in the Special and AP sectors, revealing that the first wave of hubs still only includes mainstream settings. These schools often deal with the most complex attendance challenges, yet the government confirms that plans to bolster support for AP and special schools will follow only "in due course."

This creates a scenario where the schools with the highest concentration of high-needs students might receive the least immediate help from this specific program. The "Regional" and "Enhanced" pathways are designed for the rhythm and structure of mainstream education. Adapting them to the bespoke needs of AP schools requires more than just a template; it requires specialized knowledge that the current mainstream lead schools may not possess.

Will the Hubs Hold?

The expansion of school attendance hubs represents a distinct shift in how the UK government handles educational failure. By trading expensive intervention squads for peer-to-peer mentorship, the DfE is betting on the power of influence over the power of investment. The success of this model depends entirely on whether the "culture first" philosophy can actually override the structural barriers of poverty and disability.

If the lead schools can successfully export their methods, thousands of students may return to the classroom. However, if the root causes of absence are economic rather than cultural, no amount of networking days or open houses will close the gap. The coming terms will reveal whether this strategy is a masterstroke of efficiency or a misunderstanding of why empty desks exist in the first place.