1 of 17

Dosage Variability in School-Based Programs: �The Roles of Individual- and Classroom-Level Attendance in Refugee Student Intervention Outcomes

Abigail C. Keim, The Pennsylvania State University

Ha Yeon Kim, Global TIES for Children, New York University

2 of 17

The Education of Syrian Refugee Children in Lebanon�

As of 2018:

An estimated 1 in 5 people in Lebanon is a refugee
Approximately 58% of Syrian children ages 3-18 in Lebanon were out of school (UNHCR, 2018)

Refugee students enrolled in Lebanese public schools are high risk for low attendance and dropout for various reasons including:*

financial strains
high mobility
transportation access
negative social experiences at school

* Jalbout, 2015 , Dryden-Peterson, 2015

https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/65859

2

3 of 17

Cook, et al., 2013

Classrooms as Multilevel Systems

Institutions, social forces

Dyadic or small group interactions

Individual Experiences

3

4 of 17

Average Attendance

Student Level:

Individual Dosage

Classroom Level:

Group Dosage

Attendance Variability

Student Level:

Dosage Consistency

Classroom Level:

Contextual Stability

A Multilevel Approach to Attendance

More exposure to curriculum and skill-building activities

Less consistent practice

More chaotic classroom environment

4

5 of 17

Learning in Healing Classrooms�

Cycle 1 Treatment Conditions:

Learning in a Healing Classroom (LIHC)
LIHC + Mindfulness

Daily mindfulness activities that focus on breathing and mind-body regulation.

3EA Lebanon 2016-17 Program

IRC LIHC

Learning in a Healing Classroom

5

6 of 17

The Present Study�

Question 1: Do student and classroom-level attendance rates and attendance variability have unique effects on student outcomes?

Higher average attendance rates and lower attendance variability will predict more positive outcomes

Student Level: stronger effects for average monthly attendance
Classroom Level: stronger effects for attendance variability

Questions 2: Do the effects of student and classroom-level attendance rates and variability differ depending on treatment condition?

The added component in the LIHC + Mindfulness condition will protect against the negative effects of lower and more variable attendance rates.

6

7 of 17

Student and Classroom Characteristics�

Characteristics	N	% / M (SD)	Range
Student Level (L1)
L1 Average Attendance Rate	1859	0.62 (0.26)	0.02-1
L1 Attendance Variability	1859	0.21 (0.12)	0-0.64
Age	1859	9.75 (2.33)	6-17
Female	1859	49.76%	0-1
Grade	1859	2.59 (1.62)	1-9
Child Labor	1859	15.06%	0-1
Classroom Level (L2)
L2 Average Attendance Rate	150	0.63 (0.13)	0.25-0.90
L2 Attendance Variability	150	0.31 (0.05)	0.17-0.41
LIHC + Mindfulness	150	48.67%	0-1
Mean Student Age	150	10.01 (1.54)	7.47-12.85
Number of Students in Class	150	26.19 (6.23)	12-53
Proportion Female Students	150	0.50 (0.12)	0.12-0.79
School In Tent	150	27.33%	0-1
Region: Bekaa	150	51.66%	0-1

7

8 of 17

Measures

Student Monthly Attendance Rate (November – March)
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Goodman, 2007)

Prosocial Behavior
Emotional/Behavioral Problems

Brain Games Executive Function Survey (Jones, unpublished)

		Baseline	Midline
Measure	Scale	M (SD)	M (SD)
Prosocial Behavior	0-2	1.08 (0.49)	1.13 (0.52)
Emotional/ Behavioral Problems	0-2	0.65 (0.38)	0.59 (0.37)
Executive Function	0-4	2.19 (0.78)	2.32 (0.84)

8

9 of 17

Analysis

Multilevel Models (student < classrooms)
DVs: Midline Student Outcomes

Prosocial Behavior
Emotional/ Behavioral Problems
Executive Function

Key Predictors:

Student Level:

Average Monthly Attendance Rate
Attendance Variability Across Months

Classroom Level:

Average Student Attendance Rate Across Months
Variability in Student Attendance Across Months
Treatment Group (LIHC vs. LIHC + Mindfulness)

Control Variables:

Student Level: Age, Female, Grade, Child Labor, Baseline Score
Classroom Level: Mean Age, % Female, Class Size, School in Tent, Region

9

10 of 17

Results of Main Effects Models

*** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05,⁺p < .1

	Prosocial Behavior			Emotional/ Behavioral Problems			Executive Function
	b		SE	b		SE	b		SE
Student Level (L1)
Average Attendance	0.21	***	0.05	-0.21	***	0.03	0.51	***	0.08
Attendance Variability	-0.07		0.09	0.15	*	0.07	0.13		0.15
Age	-0.01		0.01	0.01	**	0.01	-0.01		0.01
Female	0.15	***	0.02	-0.11	***	0.01	0.22	***	0.03
Grade	0.05	***	0.01	-0.04	***	0.01	0.12	***	0.02
Labor	0.07	*	0.03	-0.07	**	0.02	0.12	*	0.05
Baseline Score	0.21	***	0.02	0.23	***	0.02	0.37	***	0.02
Classroom Level (L2)
Average Student Attendance	0.16		0.26	-0.06		0.18	0.85	*	0.36
Student Attendance Variability	0.48		0.68	0.63		0.47	0.22		0.94
Group: LIHC + Mindfulness	-0.02		0.05	0.04		0.04	0.06		0.07
Mean Student Age	0.00		0.02	0.01		0.01	0.01		0.03
Proportion Female	-0.19		0.21	0.17		0.15	-0.42		0.29
Class Size	0.00		0.00	0.00		0.00	0.00		0.01
School in Tent	-0.18	**	0.06	0.00		0.04	-0.10		0.08
Region: Bekaa	0.00		0.06	-0.15	***	0.04	0.16	+	0.09

10

11 of 17

Student-level average attendance rates consistently predicted more positive outcomes (more prosocial behavior, lower rates of emotional/behavioral problems, higher executive function scores).
Classroom-level average attendance predicted greater gains in executive function .

Question 1: Do student and classroom-level attendance rates and attendance variability have unique effects on student outcomes?

11

12 of 17

Results: Impact Variation Models

*** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05,⁺p < .1

Note: All models additionally controlled for: age, female, grade, child labor, and baseline scores at the student level as well a mean student age, the proportion of female students, class size, school in tent, and region at the classroom level.

	Prosocial Behavior			Emotional/ Behavioral Problems			Executive Function
	b		SE	b		SE	b		SE
Student Level (L1)
Average Attendance	0.31	***	0.07	-0.20	***	0.05	0.64	***	0.12
Attendance Variability	-0.15		0.13	0.18		0.09	0.26		0.21
Classroom Level (L2)
Average Student Attendance	0.01		0.31	0.03		0.21	1.01	**	0.42
Student Attendance Variability	-0.37		0.86	1.36	*	0.58	-1.51		1.17
Treatment: LIHC + Mindfulness	0.00		0.05	0.04		0.04	0.04		0.07
Interactions
L1 Average Attendance:Treatment	-0.16	+	0.09	-0.02		0.07	-0.22		0.15
L1 Attendance Variability: Treatment	0.19		0.18	-0.08		0.13	-0.23		0.30
L2 Average Attendance: Treatment	0.61		0.50	-0.42		0.34	0.06		0.68
L2 Attendance Variability: Treatment	2.10	+	1.23	-1.73	*	0.84	3.70	*	1.68

12

13 of 17

Interaction Effects

13

14 of 17

Classroom-level attendance variability predicted more negative outcomes for students in the LIHC program.
The LIHC + Mindfulness program protected against the effects of classroom-level attendance variability on emotional/behavioral problems and executive function.

Questions 2: Do the effects of student and classroom-level attendance rates and variability differ depending on treatment condition?

14

15 of 17

Future Directions

Exploring Selection Effects

What predicts variability in student attendance?
Profiles of classrooms with higher attendance variability

Analyzing Cycle 2 Data (LIHC + Brain Games)

Analyzing Effects on Academic Outcomes

15

16 of 17

Acknowledgements

Training Interdisciplinary Educational Scientists

The first author was supported by the Department of Education IES training grant (R305B090007).

RC Lebanon 2016-2017:

In alphabetical order: Samer Houshaimi, Michele Boujikian, Mahmoud Bwary, & AnasTahhan

NYU 3EA Team 2016-2017

Mayari Montes De Oca, Sima Shabaneh

IRC HQ Team:

Drs. Jeannie Annan, Paul Frisoli, and Sarah Smith, & Autumn Brown, Rebecca Fernandes, Bryan Plummer, Jamie Weiss-Yagoda

NYU Global TIES Colleagues:

Drs. Peter Halpin, Alice Wuermli, Hiro Yoshikawa, & Shirley Archer-Fields, Marian Haji-Mohammed, Nikki Hill

Funders 2016-2017

NYU Abu Dhabi, Dubai Cares, US State Department (PRM)

16

17 of 17

	Prosocial Behavior			Emotional/ Behavioral Problems			Executive Function
	b		SE	b		SE	b		SE
Student Level (L1)
Average Attendance	0.31	***	0.07	-0.20	***	0.05	0.64	***	0.12
Attendance Variability	-0.15		0.13	0.18		0.09	0.26		0.21
Age	-0.01		0.01	0.01	**	0.01	-0.01		0.01
Female	0.15	***	0.02	-0.11	***	0.01	0.22	***	0.03
Grade	0.06	***	0.01	-0.04	***	0.01	0.12	***	0.02
Labor	0.06	*	0.03	-0.07	**	0.02	0.11	**	0.05
Baseline Score	0.21	***	0.02	0.23	***	0.02	0.37	***
Classroom Level (L2)
Average Student Attendance	0.01		0.31	0.03		0.21	1.01	**	0.42
Student Attendance Variability	-0.37		0.86	1.36	*	0.58	-1.51		1.17
Treatment: LIHC + Mindfulness	0.00		0.05	0.04		0.04	0.04		0.07
Mean Student Age	0.00		0.02	0.01		0.01	0.02		0.03
Proportion Female	-0.24		0.22	0.21		0.15	-0.43		0.29
Class Size	0.00		0.00	0.00		0.00	0.01		0.01
School in Tent	-0.18	**	0.06	0.00		0.04	-0.12		0.08
Region: Bekaa	0.00		0.06	-0.16	***	0.04	0.17	+	0.09
Interactions
L1 Average Attendance:Treatment	-0.16	+	0.09	-0.02		0.07	-0.22		0.15
L1 Attendance Variability: Treatment	0.19		0.18	-0.08		0.13	-0.23		0.30
L2 Average Attendance: Treatment	0.61		0.50	-0.42		0.34	0.06		0.68
L2 Attendance Variability: Treatment	2.10	+	1.23	-1.73	*	0.84	3.70	*	1.68

17