IT IS CLEAR that whatever South Carolina does to improve performance in its public schools, these reforms can never take full hold if all kids aren't going to class. This is just one reason why the critical problem of truancy must be addressed aggressively by our state and local school districts.

The State's education writer Nicole Sweeney detailed the negative effects of truancy in a three-part series exploring the problem. The students who don't attend fall behind in class. Their school districts, already strapped, lose more state money that is tied to attendance rates. State taxpayers are burdened when chronic truants are sentenced to the more expensive environment of juvenile jail. Children who don't successfully complete school can grow into adults with a life-long dependence on public assistance.

In the immediate term, if the state doesn't find a better way than jail to handle its chronic truants, the federal government is likely to cut $1 million in grants. South Carolina has been losing federal grant money because of this problem every year since 1999‘.

In addition to the financial concerns, truants are vulnerable to becoming victims or instigators of crime. And while a jail sentence does guarantee perfect attendance in a Department of Juvenile Justice school, it also ensures these non-violent offenders meet their tougher peers, hardly the kind of experience the state should promote.

Forging strong connections between home and school is the best way to combat truancy. But that's hard to do when any number of obstacles get in the way. Truants often don't have adequate parental supervision. Their family life may be chaotic, and problems such as poverty or domestic violence are often present. Alcohol and drug abuse contribute to missed school days, as can sleeping problems or academic failures. Students who don't get to school every day may have transportation problems or be afraid of something at school, such as threats from gangs.

Needless to say, a problem with so many causes is not easy to fix. State officials aren't even sure of the scope of truancy, as record-keeping practices for school absences have not been standard statewide. They do know the state juvenile justice agency processed 2,334 truancy cases in fiscal year 2001-2002. The total number of truants is likely much higher.

A state task force has been working on the issue since October 2001. The panel suggests a uniform method of defining and reporting truancy. The panel would like the state to identify local truancy prevention and intervention programs that are working and find ways to implement them elsewhere. Successful initiatives have used techniques such as home visits by social workers, partnerships with mentors and mediation sessions with school officials. Schools also report success with programs that reward good or improved attendance.

It's clear that punishing truancy after it becomes a debilitating roadblock to students' progress hasn't worked. Preventive efforts, including the employment of more social workers in our schools, are essential. The truancy crisis will only grow worse if ignored, having severe negative consequences for our state and many of our children's future.