There is a growing concern for pupils’ school absences in Norwegian compulsory (primary and lower secondary) schools (Kunnskapsdepartementet, 2024, p. 22)  as is the case in other European countries (Corcoran, et al., 2022). Pupils with school absences miss out of both social and academic experiences, and are in risk of experiencing loneliness and mental health problems (Malcolm et al., 2003). In existing knowledge of school absences, individual- and family factors are particularly emphasized ( Ek & Eriksson, 2013). There are also studies showing relations between pupils' absence and various factors in the school environment, such as bullying, loneliness, poor pupil - teacher relationships, deficient structure and a high level of disturbances in the classroom, as well as lack of inclusive education (Amundsen & Møller, 2022; Ingul et al., 2019). Pupils who develop school absences are not a uniform group (Havik & Ingul, 2021), and various terms are used to describe school absenteeism, such as school refusal or involuntarily school absences, pointing at different understandings of causal relationships. The lack of unified language use and understandings can lead to conflicts between school staff, pupils and parents, joint powerlessness and hinder effective collaboration (Frydenlund & Strand, 2024).

Collaboration among pupils, parents, and school staff is recognized as crucial for supporting pupils' health and well-being, especially when they struggle with school attendance (Berg & Rogstad, 2024; Brand & O'Conner, 2004). However, a Danish study reveals that teachers encounter significant organizational challenges when attempting to assist their pupils. This study also highlights a discrepancy in focus: school staff often prioritize increased attendance, while parents emphasize well-being. Consequently, the relationship between parents and the school can become increasingly strained and negative as parents feel they are not receiving adequate support (Nielsen & Thastum, 2023). These findings underscore the need for a deeper understanding of why collaboration between school staff and parents is so problematic and how the collaborative processes can be improved, which is the primary focus of the current study.

The study comprises two parts. The first part involves a discourse analysis of documents created by Norwegian municipalities to guide compulsory school staff on managing pupils' school absences. These documents also detail how schools are supposed to collaborate with pupils, parents, and other professionals, such as educational-psychological advisers and school nurses. The aim of this part of the study is to explore the following question: How are pupils' school absences and strategies for collaboration to increase school attendance presented in municipal guidance documents for Norwegian compulsory schools? By examining these documents, the study seeks to illuminate some of the prerequisites for collaborative processes.

The second part of the study is a narrative inquiry aimed at exploring participants' experiences with collaborative processes. This segment employs an approach known as "positive deviance" (PD), which seeks to identify uncommon, positively deviant, and successful behavioral strategies or practices that already exist within a given context, and can be described as tacit knowledge and authentic experiences that can be uncovered by shifting the focus from challenges to positively deviant practices (Singhal & Svenkerud, 2019). This approach shares many similarities with the concept of resilience, which Masten (2018, p. 12) defines as "the capacity of a system to adapt successfully to significant challenges that threaten its function, viability, or development." Consistent with this theoretical framework, this part of the study focuses on exploring examples of positively experienced collaboration by addressing the following question: What characterizes collaborative practices to support pupils with school absences, that are perceived as positive processes by parents, school staff and/or other professionals? 

Part 1 Discourse-analysis Fifteen municipal guidance documents were included in the study, all publicly available on municipal websites. To ensure geographical diversity, one document from each of the fifteen Norwegian counties was selected. Discourse analysis was the preferred method, allowing for a critical examination of established ways of thinking and writing (Johannessen et al., 2018, p. 51). The analysis followed three steps (Neumann, 2021): 1. Selection and delimitation of discourses 2. Examination of discourse representations: Identifying what concepts are used in the documents and the understandings they represent. 3. Layering of discourses: Analyzing power relations, dominant narratives, and the descriptions of participants' roles. Part 2 Analysis of Narratives In the second part of the project, collaborators - including parents, school staff, and other professionals - are interviewed to reveal narratives of their subjective experiences with collaborative processes. Narratives are understood as collaborative constructs involving all participants in the inquiry (Bathmaker & Harnett, 2010). These narratives will be analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and an inductive approach (Clarke & Braun, 2017). Consistent with the theoretical framework, the focus is on "positive deviant" practices. However, recruitment has been challenging, as many collaborators report negative experiences, finding collaborative processes difficult and often contentious. Consequently, the data collection process has been delayed, and several interviews will be conducted over the next few months (January – April 2025), The process of analyzing the data will be completed in May-June 2025.

The discourse analysis revealed four main discourses: 1. The discourse of definition, 2. The discourse of delimitation, 3. The mapping discourse 4. The discourse of collaboration The analysis indicates that the school's perspective predominates, characterized by a linear understanding that may lead to a one-sided focus on individualized measures. Additionally, the analysis shows that both pupils and parents are often relegated to passive roles, with their perspectives receiving insufficient attention. The second part of the study has not been completed within the timeline of this abstract. Supplemental interviews will be conducted during the next months, and findings will be presented at the conference in September 2025. Preliminary findings suggest that both school staff and parents feel inadequate in their efforts to support the child/pupil, describing their situation with a mix of despair and shame. However, establishing dialogue between parents and teachers before the pupil’s non-attendance escalates appears to be crucial for effective home-school collaboration and conflict prevention.

Amundsen, M.-L., & Møller, G. H. (2022). Faglig mestring og prestasjonsangst hos elever med ufrivillig skolefravær. [Academic mastery and performance anxiety in pupils with involuntary school absences]. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 25(4), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.18261/tfv.25.4.6 Bathmaker, A.-M., & Harnett, P. (2010). Exploring learning, identity, and power through life history and narrative research. Routledge. Berg, A., & Rogstad, J. (2024). Skolevegring tilhører ikke skolen alene: Betydningen av kvaliteten på skole–hjem-samarbeidet i tilrettelegging for et inkluderende skolemiljø [School refusal does not belong to the school alone]. Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 8(2-3), 38-52. https://doi.org/10.18261/nost.8.2-3.4 Brand, C., & O'Conner, L. (2004). School Refusal: It Takes a Team. Children & Schools, 26(1), 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/26.1.54 Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The journal of positive psychology, 12(3), 297-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 Corcoran, S., Bond, C. & Knox, L. (2022) Emotionally based school non-attendance: two successful returns to school following lockdown. Educational Psychology in Practice, 38 (1), 75-88, DOI: 10.1080/02667363.2022.2033958 Ek, H., & Eriksson, R. (2013). Psychological Factors Behind Truancy, School Phobia, and School Refusal: A Literature Study. Child & family behavior therapy, 35(3), 228-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317107.2013.818899 Frydenlund, J. H., & Strand, A. H. (2024). Kampen om skolefraværet: En felles opplevelse av avmakt [A common experience of powerlessness]. Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 8(2-3), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.18261/nost.8.2-3.1 Havik, T., & Ingul, J. M. (2021). How to Understand School Refusal. Frontiers in education 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.715177 Johannessen, L. E. F., Rafoss, T. W., & Rasmussen, E. B. (2018). Hvordan bruke teori?: nyttige verktøy i kvalitativ analyse. [How to use theory?] Universitetsforlaget Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2024). En mer praktisk skole. [A more practical school] (Meld.st. 34 (2023-2024) https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-34-20232024/id3052898/ Malcolm, H., Wilson, V., Davidson, J., & Kirk, S. (2003). Absence from School: A study of its causes and effects in seven LEAs. University of Glasgow. Masten, A. S. (2018). Resilience Theory and Research on Children and Families: Past, Present, and Promise. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 10(1), 12-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12255 Neumann, I. B. (2021). Innføring i diskursanalyse: mening, materialitet, makt [Introduction to discourse analysis] (2. ed.). Fagbokforlaget. Nielsen, K., & Thastum, M. (2023). School Absence Seen from a School Perspective and a Parent Perspective. Nordic studies in education, 43(4), 325-343. https://doi.org/10.23865/nse.v43.4080 Singhal, A., & Svenkerud, P. J. (2019). Flipping the Diffusion of Innovations Paradigm: Embracing the Positive Deviance Approach to Social Change. Asia Pacific Media Educator, 29(2), 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1326365x19857010