Problematic school absenteeism has increased post-Covid-19 (Nathwani et al., 2021) but has been a long-standing issue (Hall, 1921). Education is essential for future opportunities, making absenteeism a major concern. Absenteeism is linked to lower academic performance, [SJ1] mental health issues, and risky behaviors (Ramberg et al., 2019), but punitive measures can worsen the problem (Højgaard Frydenlund, 2022).

Identifying [SJ2] absenteeism is complex, as students may be physically present but mentally disengaged, demonstrating that attendance does not necessarily equate to learning (Bodén, 2016). Students often cite a lack of connection to lessons as a reason for truancy (Baskerville, 2020), with peer influence playing a significant role (Escario, 2022). Addressing absenteeism requires understanding both physical and mental disengagement.

Nearly all Swedish students enroll in upper secondary school, which includes 18 national programs and the Introductory Program (IP). However, in 2021/22, 15% of ninth graders lacked eligibility for a three-year program, a challenge linked to strict admission requirements and high numbers of newly arrived migrants (Schmid, 2020; Holmlund et al., 2020). Since 2011, students who did not complete compulsory school have been placed in the IP to gain eligibility for upper secondary education (USE) or prepare for employment (Olofsson, 2016). The IP lacks national course objectives, relying on municipal education plans and individual study plans. Common features include small teaching groups, personalized instruction, and high staff-to-student ratios, though rural schools often face greater challenges (Lundahl et al., 2020).

This study aims to explore IP students’ experiences within the introductory program and understand how and why they break the cycle of problematic absenteeism. The research questions are:

1. What explanations do students provide for failures in their earlier schooling, and what reasons do they give for returning?
2. What are students’ experiences and perceptions of schooling, teaching, and learning within the introductory program?
3. What variations in students’ actions and attendance are observed in the two introductory programs (School A and School B) studied?

Observations and interviews revealed relationships as a key factor in students' school experiences—between students, between students and schoolwork, and between students and staff. Additionally, intrinsic and extrinsic motivations shaped their attendance behaviors and school perceptions.

Relational pedagogy emphasizes relationships as central to learning (Aspelin, 2020), differing from traditional models that prioritize either teacher authority or student autonomy. Instead, it focuses on mutual interactions where knowledge and change emerge (Ohlsson & Granberg, 2005; Gren Landell & Backlund, 2017). However, relationships are not always positive; negative teacher-student relationships can hinder engagement (Bingham et al., 2004). Teachers must form meaningful connections with students, especially those prone to absenteeism, while balancing authority and approachability (Biesta & Stegel, 2016).

To analyze student perceptions of school and attendance, this study also applies Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 1985), which identifies three psychological needs. To begin with: autonomy, that is students are more motivated when they have control over their learning, such as choosing project topics or setting goals. Strict, inflexible instruction can lead to disengagement. Secondly, Competence, that is feeling capable and seeing progress which fosters motivation. Constructive feedback and achievable goals build confidence, while repeated failure without support leads to withdrawal. Finally, relatedness – that is, a sense of belonging, through connections with teachers and peers which enhances engagement. Isolation or lack of support can drive absenteeism.

Schools that support autonomy, competence, and relatedness create environments where students are more likely to stay engaged and persist despite challenges (Reeve, 2012; Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Applying SDT helps explore how students’ educational experiences and introductory programs influence their motivation, engagement, and attendance

This interdisciplinary research project between Health and Welfare and School of Education explores students’ lived experiences of schooling and absenteeism through ethnographically inspired research (Ploder & Hamann, 2021). Data collection included field notes and interviews with students. At School A, two researchers gathered data due to the large size of the introductory program, while at School B, one researcher conducted data collection in a more intimate setting that facilitated stronger relational bonds. Field Notes Collection Researchers participated in four school days, spaced weeks apart, to observe interactions and gain insights into school attendance. Field notes documented both student experiences and the broader school context. Notes were initially handwritten, later transcribed, and shared for collective review. This process informed the development of interview questions. Researchers regularly discussed and refined observations, ensuring consistency and depth in data interpretation. While researchers did not participate in teaching, they engaged in informal conversations with students and staff during breaks and meals. Their presence did not seem to disrupt normal school interactions, even during incidents like conflicts or uninvited guests. Although field notes are common in ethnographic research, this study focuses specifically on problematic absenteeism. The challenge of studying absenteeism among present students was addressed by noting instances where absenteeism was discussed or observed in various forms. Interviews Thirteen students (eight boys, five girls) were interviewed—seven from School B and nine from School A. However, one interview involving three students was excluded due to irrelevant content. Many students from School A declined participation, so the final analysis includes interviews with six students from School A. The interviews were conducted over several months alongside teacher and staff interviews, which will be analyzed in a separate study. Interview questions were shaped by field observations. Since all participants had experienced school failure and absenteeism, discussions centered on their challenges and the factors that helped them overcome difficulties. This approach provided deeper insights into the complexities of absenteeism and engagement in school. Analytical Approach A phenomenological and abductive approach guided the interpretation of field notes and interviews. Analysis followed Clarke and Braun’s (2007, 2017, 2022) six-stage thematic model. Data was categorized through continuous discussion within the research team, refining themes through repeated transcript reviews.

Students in introductory programs emphasize the importance of teacher-student relationships in their return to school. Social relationships are foundational to learning (Margonis, 2004; Aspelin, 2020), making it difficult to assess when genuine learning occurs. When students explain how they overcame absenteeism, strong connections with teachers and peers are central. Adults must first establish social relationships before forming educational ones. However, field notes suggest that peer relationships sometimes take precedence over academics. Encouraging students to return to school is the primary goal, with academic progress being secondary. Autonomy-supportive teaching fosters engagement and motivation (Reeve, 2012). Students’ perceptions of their learning environment—whether it supports autonomy, competence, and relatedness—shape their motivation. Many students desire self-directed learning, reflecting a need for autonomy, but some struggle with excessive independence due to limited teacher guidance. In school B, students prefer structured lessons, leading to lower autonomy but stronger reliance on external regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Regarding competence, many students feel unsupported, reducing their confidence. In school B, they express frustration when teachers do not intervene in classroom management, while in school A, students feel abandoned in independent study (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). This suggests that competence is linked to teacher support and structured lessons. Social relationships also influence school engagement. In school A, students report avoiding school due to negative social experiences, whereas in school B, classroom distractions hinder learning. This highlights the need to foster a positive school climate to meet students’ relatedness needs (Reeve, 2012).

Baskerville, D. (2020). Mattering; changing the narrative in secondary schools for youth who truant. Journal of Youth Studies, 24(6), 834-849. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2020.1772962. Bingham, C, & Sidorkin, A (2004). No Education without Relation. Peter Lang. Bodén, L. (2016). Present absences : Exploring the posthumanist entanglements of school absenteeism (PhD dissertation, Linköping University Electronic Press). https://doi.org/10.3384/diss.diva-130460. Aspelin, J. (2020). Teaching as a way of bonding: a contribution to the relational theory of teaching. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(6), 588–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1798758 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media. Escario, J-J. (2022). Predictors of adolescent truancy: The importance of cyberbullying, peer behavior, and parenting style. Children and Youth Services Review, 143(4). Doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106692 Gren Landell, M. (2021). (Ed.). School Attendance Problems - A Research Update and Where To Go. Jerringfonden Hall, B.R. (red.) (1921). Sveriges allmänna läroverksstadgar 1561-1905 1/3 1561, 1611 och 1649 års skolordningar: i avtryck och, de båda senare, i översättning. Lund: Fören. för svensk undervisningshistoria. Højgaard Frydenlund, J. (2022). How an Empty Chair at School Becomes. Lundahl, L., Linde, J., Lindgren, J., Rosvall, P.-Å., & Sundelin, Å. (2020). Locality and the prevention of early school leaving: Supporting youth transitions to upper secondary school in a highly decentralised education system. Nordic Journal of Transitions, Careers and Guidance, 1(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.16993/njtcg.27 Margonis, F. (2004). From Student Resistance to Educative Engagement: A Case Study in Building Powerful Student-Teacher Relationships. Counterpoints, 259, 39–53. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42978492 Nathwani, G., Shoaib, A., Shafi, A., Furukawa, T. A., & Huy, N. T. (2021). Impact of COVID-2019 on school attendance problems. Journal of global health, 11, 03084. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.11.03084. Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. Olofsson, J. (2016). Utbildning motsvarande gymnasieskolan i sex läander [Education corresponding to gymnasieskolan in six countries]. In SOU 2016:77 Measures enabling all youths to start and complete upper secondary education]. https://www. regeringen.se/contentassets/9caa7eb8000e4354b06473e31d2ddbeb/en-gymnasieutbildning-for-alla–atgarder-for- att-alla-unga-ska-paborja-och-fullfolja-en-gymnasieutbildning-volym-2-del-2-av-2-sou-201677/. Ploder, A., & Hamann, J. (2021). Practices of Ethnographic Research: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 50(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241620979100 Ramberg, J., Brolin Låftman, S., Fransson, E., & Modin, B. (2018). School effectiveness and truancy: a multilevel study of upper secondary schools in Stockholm. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 24(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2018.1503085. Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. Handbook of research on student engagement, 149-172.