essay about pandemic affecting education

The pandemic has had devastating impacts on learning. What will it take to help students catch up?

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, megan kuhfeld , megan kuhfeld senior research scientist - nwea @megankuhfeld jim soland , jim soland assistant professor, school of education and human development - university of virginia, affiliated research fellow - nwea @jsoland karyn lewis , and karyn lewis director, center for school and student progress - nwea @karynlew emily morton emily morton research scientist - nwea @emily_r_morton.

March 3, 2022

As we reach the two-year mark of the initial wave of pandemic-induced school shutdowns, academic normalcy remains out of reach for many students, educators, and parents. In addition to surging COVID-19 cases at the end of 2021, schools have faced severe staff shortages , high rates of absenteeism and quarantines , and rolling school closures . Furthermore, students and educators continue to struggle with mental health challenges , higher rates of violence and misbehavior , and concerns about lost instructional time .

As we outline in our new research study released in January, the cumulative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on students’ academic achievement has been large. We tracked changes in math and reading test scores across the first two years of the pandemic using data from 5.4 million U.S. students in grades 3-8. We focused on test scores from immediately before the pandemic (fall 2019), following the initial onset (fall 2020), and more than one year into pandemic disruptions (fall 2021).

Average fall 2021 math test scores in grades 3-8 were 0.20-0.27 standard deviations (SDs) lower relative to same-grade peers in fall 2019, while reading test scores were 0.09-0.18 SDs lower. This is a sizable drop. For context, the math drops are significantly larger than estimated impacts from other large-scale school disruptions, such as after Hurricane Katrina—math scores dropped 0.17 SDs in one year for New Orleans evacuees .

Even more concerning, test-score gaps between students in low-poverty and high-poverty elementary schools grew by approximately 20% in math (corresponding to 0.20 SDs) and 15% in reading (0.13 SDs), primarily during the 2020-21 school year. Further, achievement tended to drop more between fall 2020 and 2021 than between fall 2019 and 2020 (both overall and differentially by school poverty), indicating that disruptions to learning have continued to negatively impact students well past the initial hits following the spring 2020 school closures.

These numbers are alarming and potentially demoralizing, especially given the heroic efforts of students to learn and educators to teach in incredibly trying times. From our perspective, these test-score drops in no way indicate that these students represent a “ lost generation ” or that we should give up hope. Most of us have never lived through a pandemic, and there is so much we don’t know about students’ capacity for resiliency in these circumstances and what a timeline for recovery will look like. Nor are we suggesting that teachers are somehow at fault given the achievement drops that occurred between 2020 and 2021; rather, educators had difficult jobs before the pandemic, and now are contending with huge new challenges, many outside their control.

Clearly, however, there’s work to do. School districts and states are currently making important decisions about which interventions and strategies to implement to mitigate the learning declines during the last two years. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) investments from the American Rescue Plan provided nearly $200 billion to public schools to spend on COVID-19-related needs. Of that sum, $22 billion is dedicated specifically to addressing learning loss using “evidence-based interventions” focused on the “ disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. ” Reviews of district and state spending plans (see Future Ed , EduRecoveryHub , and RAND’s American School District Panel for more details) indicate that districts are spending their ESSER dollars designated for academic recovery on a wide variety of strategies, with summer learning, tutoring, after-school programs, and extended school-day and school-year initiatives rising to the top.

Comparing the negative impacts from learning disruptions to the positive impacts from interventions

To help contextualize the magnitude of the impacts of COVID-19, we situate test-score drops during the pandemic relative to the test-score gains associated with common interventions being employed by districts as part of pandemic recovery efforts. If we assume that such interventions will continue to be as successful in a COVID-19 school environment, can we expect that these strategies will be effective enough to help students catch up? To answer this question, we draw from recent reviews of research on high-dosage tutoring , summer learning programs , reductions in class size , and extending the school day (specifically for literacy instruction) . We report effect sizes for each intervention specific to a grade span and subject wherever possible (e.g., tutoring has been found to have larger effects in elementary math than in reading).

Figure 1 shows the standardized drops in math test scores between students testing in fall 2019 and fall 2021 (separately by elementary and middle school grades) relative to the average effect size of various educational interventions. The average effect size for math tutoring matches or exceeds the average COVID-19 score drop in math. Research on tutoring indicates that it often works best in younger grades, and when provided by a teacher rather than, say, a parent. Further, some of the tutoring programs that produce the biggest effects can be quite intensive (and likely expensive), including having full-time tutors supporting all students (not just those needing remediation) in one-on-one settings during the school day. Meanwhile, the average effect of reducing class size is negative but not significant, with high variability in the impact across different studies. Summer programs in math have been found to be effective (average effect size of .10 SDs), though these programs in isolation likely would not eliminate the COVID-19 test-score drops.

Figure 1: Math COVID-19 test-score drops compared to the effect sizes of various educational interventions

Source: COVID-19 score drops are pulled from Kuhfeld et al. (2022) Table 5; reduction-in-class-size results are from pg. 10 of Figles et al. (2018) Table 2; summer program results are pulled from Lynch et al (2021) Table 2; and tutoring estimates are pulled from Nictow et al (2020) Table 3B. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals are shown with vertical lines on each bar.

Notes: Kuhfeld et al. and Nictow et al. reported effect sizes separately by grade span; Figles et al. and Lynch et al. report an overall effect size across elementary and middle grades. We were unable to find a rigorous study that reported effect sizes for extending the school day/year on math performance. Nictow et al. and Kraft & Falken (2021) also note large variations in tutoring effects depending on the type of tutor, with larger effects for teacher and paraprofessional tutoring programs than for nonprofessional and parent tutoring. Class-size reductions included in the Figles meta-analysis ranged from a minimum of one to minimum of eight students per class.

Figure 2 displays a similar comparison using effect sizes from reading interventions. The average effect of tutoring programs on reading achievement is larger than the effects found for the other interventions, though summer reading programs and class size reduction both produced average effect sizes in the ballpark of the COVID-19 reading score drops.

Figure 2: Reading COVID-19 test-score drops compared to the effect sizes of various educational interventions

Source: COVID-19 score drops are pulled from Kuhfeld et al. (2022) Table 5; extended-school-day results are from Figlio et al. (2018) Table 2; reduction-in-class-size results are from pg. 10 of Figles et al. (2018) ; summer program results are pulled from Kim & Quinn (2013) Table 3; and tutoring estimates are pulled from Nictow et al (2020) Table 3B. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals are shown with vertical lines on each bar.

Notes: While Kuhfeld et al. and Nictow et al. reported effect sizes separately by grade span, Figlio et al. and Kim & Quinn report an overall effect size across elementary and middle grades. Class-size reductions included in the Figles meta-analysis ranged from a minimum of one to minimum of eight students per class.

There are some limitations of drawing on research conducted prior to the pandemic to understand our ability to address the COVID-19 test-score drops. First, these studies were conducted under conditions that are very different from what schools currently face, and it is an open question whether the effectiveness of these interventions during the pandemic will be as consistent as they were before the pandemic. Second, we have little evidence and guidance about the efficacy of these interventions at the unprecedented scale that they are now being considered. For example, many school districts are expanding summer learning programs, but school districts have struggled to find staff interested in teaching summer school to meet the increased demand. Finally, given the widening test-score gaps between low- and high-poverty schools, it’s uncertain whether these interventions can actually combat the range of new challenges educators are facing in order to narrow these gaps. That is, students could catch up overall, yet the pandemic might still have lasting, negative effects on educational equality in this country.

Given that the current initiatives are unlikely to be implemented consistently across (and sometimes within) districts, timely feedback on the effects of initiatives and any needed adjustments will be crucial to districts’ success. The Road to COVID Recovery project and the National Student Support Accelerator are two such large-scale evaluation studies that aim to produce this type of evidence while providing resources for districts to track and evaluate their own programming. Additionally, a growing number of resources have been produced with recommendations on how to best implement recovery programs, including scaling up tutoring , summer learning programs , and expanded learning time .

Ultimately, there is much work to be done, and the challenges for students, educators, and parents are considerable. But this may be a moment when decades of educational reform, intervention, and research pay off. Relying on what we have learned could show the way forward.

Related Content

Megan Kuhfeld, Jim Soland, Beth Tarasawa, Angela Johnson, Erik Ruzek, Karyn Lewis

December 3, 2020

Lindsay Dworkin, Karyn Lewis

October 13, 2021

Education Policy K-12 Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

Kelli Bird, Ben Castleman

April 23, 2024

Ariell Bertrand, Melissa Arnold Lyon, Rebecca Jacobsen

April 18, 2024

Modupe (Mo) Olateju, Grace Cannon

April 15, 2024

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Lawyers reap big profits lobbying government regulators under the radar

Younger votes still lean toward Biden — but it’s complicated

Posting your opinion on social media won’t save democracy, but this might

Rubén Rodriguez/Unsplash

Time to fix American education with race-for-space resolve

Harvard Staff Writer

Paul Reville says COVID-19 school closures have turned a spotlight on inequities and other shortcomings

This is part of our Coronavirus Update series in which Harvard specialists in epidemiology, infectious disease, economics, politics, and other disciplines offer insights into what the latest developments in the COVID-19 outbreak may bring.

As former secretary of education for Massachusetts, Paul Reville is keenly aware of the financial and resource disparities between districts, schools, and individual students. The school closings due to coronavirus concerns have turned a spotlight on those problems and how they contribute to educational and income inequality in the nation. The Gazette talked to Reville, the Francis Keppel Professor of Practice of Educational Policy and Administration at Harvard Graduate School of Education , about the effects of the pandemic on schools and how the experience may inspire an overhaul of the American education system.

Paul Reville

GAZETTE: Schools around the country have closed due to the coronavirus pandemic. Do these massive school closures have any precedent in the history of the United States?

REVILLE: We’ve certainly had school closures in particular jurisdictions after a natural disaster, like in New Orleans after the hurricane. But on this scale? No, certainly not in my lifetime. There were substantial closings in many places during the 1918 Spanish Flu, some as long as four months, but not as widespread as those we’re seeing today. We’re in uncharted territory.

GAZETTE: What lessons did school districts around the country learn from school closures in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, and other similar school closings?

REVILLE:   I think the lessons we’ve learned are that it’s good [for school districts] to have a backup system, if they can afford it. I was talking recently with folks in a district in New Hampshire where, because of all the snow days they have in the wintertime, they had already developed a backup online learning system. That made the transition, in this period of school closure, a relatively easy one for them to undertake. They moved seamlessly to online instruction.

Most of our big systems don’t have this sort of backup. Now, however, we’re not only going to have to construct a backup to get through this crisis, but we’re going to have to develop new, permanent systems, redesigned to meet the needs which have been so glaringly exposed in this crisis. For example, we have always had large gaps in students’ learning opportunities after school, weekends, and in the summer. Disadvantaged students suffer the consequences of those gaps more than affluent children, who typically have lots of opportunities to fill in those gaps. I’m hoping that we can learn some things through this crisis about online delivery of not only instruction, but an array of opportunities for learning and support. In this way, we can make the most of the crisis to help redesign better systems of education and child development.

GAZETTE: Is that one of the silver linings of this public health crisis?

REVILLE: In politics we say, “Never lose the opportunity of a crisis.” And in this situation, we don’t simply want to frantically struggle to restore the status quo because the status quo wasn’t operating at an effective level and certainly wasn’t serving all of our children fairly. There are things we can learn in the messiness of adapting through this crisis, which has revealed profound disparities in children’s access to support and opportunities. We should be asking: How do we make our school, education, and child-development systems more individually responsive to the needs of our students? Why not construct a system that meets children where they are and gives them what they need inside and outside of school in order to be successful? Let’s take this opportunity to end the “one size fits all” factory model of education.

GAZETTE: How seriously are students going to be set back by not having formal instruction for at least two months, if not more?

“The best that can come of this is a new paradigm shift in terms of the way in which we look at education, because children’s well-being and success depend on more than just schooling,” Paul Reville said of the current situation. “We need to look holistically, at the entirety of children’s lives.”

Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard file photo

REVILLE: The first thing to consider is that it’s going to be a variable effect. We tend to regard our school systems uniformly, but actually schools are widely different in their operations and impact on children, just as our students themselves are very different from one another. Children come from very different backgrounds and have very different resources, opportunities, and support outside of school. Now that their entire learning lives, as well as their actual physical lives, are outside of school, those differences and disparities come into vivid view. Some students will be fine during this crisis because they’ll have high-quality learning opportunities, whether it’s formal schooling or informal homeschooling of some kind coupled with various enrichment opportunities. Conversely, other students won’t have access to anything of quality, and as a result will be at an enormous disadvantage. Generally speaking, the most economically challenged in our society will be the most vulnerable in this crisis, and the most advantaged are most likely to survive it without losing too much ground.

GAZETTE: Schools in Massachusetts are closed until May 4. Some people are saying they should remain closed through the end of the school year. What’s your take on this?

REVILLE: That should be a medically based judgment call that will be best made several weeks from now. If there’s evidence to suggest that students and teachers can safely return to school, then I’d say by all means. However, that seems unlikely.

GAZETTE: The digital divide between students has become apparent as schools have increasingly turned to online instruction. What can school systems do to address that gap?

REVILLE: Arguably, this is something that schools should have been doing a long time ago, opening up the whole frontier of out-of-school learning by virtue of making sure that all students have access to the technology and the internet they need in order to be connected in out-of-school hours. Students in certain school districts don’t have those affordances right now because often the school districts don’t have the budget to do this, but federal, state, and local taxpayers are starting to see the imperative for coming together to meet this need.

Twenty-first century learning absolutely requires technology and internet. We can’t leave this to chance or the accident of birth. All of our children should have the technology they need to learn outside of school. Some communities can take it for granted that their children will have such tools. Others who have been unable to afford to level the playing field are now finding ways to step up. Boston, for example, has bought 20,000 Chromebooks and is creating hotspots around the city where children and families can go to get internet access. That’s a great start but, in the long run, I think we can do better than that. At the same time, many communities still need help just to do what Boston has done for its students.

Communities and school districts are going to have to adapt to get students on a level playing field. Otherwise, many students will continue to be at a huge disadvantage. We can see this playing out now as our lower-income and more heterogeneous school districts struggle over whether to proceed with online instruction when not everyone can access it. Shutting down should not be an option. We have to find some middle ground, and that means the state and local school districts are going to have to act urgently and nimbly to fill in the gaps in technology and internet access.

GAZETTE : What can parents can do to help with the homeschooling of their children in the current crisis?

“In this situation, we don’t simply want to frantically struggle to restore the status quo because the status quo wasn’t operating at an effective level and certainly wasn’t serving all of our children fairly.”

More like this

The collective effort

Notes from the new normal

‘If you remain mostly upright, you are doing it well enough’

REVILLE: School districts can be helpful by giving parents guidance about how to constructively use this time. The default in our education system is now homeschooling. Virtually all parents are doing some form of homeschooling, whether they want to or not. And the question is: What resources, support, or capacity do they have to do homeschooling effectively? A lot of parents are struggling with that.

And again, we have widely variable capacity in our families and school systems. Some families have parents home all day, while other parents have to go to work. Some school systems are doing online classes all day long, and the students are fully engaged and have lots of homework, and the parents don’t need to do much. In other cases, there is virtually nothing going on at the school level, and everything falls to the parents. In the meantime, lots of organizations are springing up, offering different kinds of resources such as handbooks and curriculum outlines, while many school systems are coming up with guidance documents to help parents create a positive learning environment in their homes by engaging children in challenging activities so they keep learning.

There are lots of creative things that can be done at home. But the challenge, of course, for parents is that they are contending with working from home, and in other cases, having to leave home to do their jobs. We have to be aware that families are facing myriad challenges right now. If we’re not careful, we risk overloading families. We have to strike a balance between what children need and what families can do, and how you maintain some kind of work-life balance in the home environment. Finally, we must recognize the equity issues in the forced overreliance on homeschooling so that we avoid further disadvantaging the already disadvantaged.

GAZETTE: What has been the biggest surprise for you thus far?

REVILLE: One that’s most striking to me is that because schools are closed, parents and the general public have become more aware than at any time in my memory of the inequities in children’s lives outside of school. Suddenly we see front-page coverage about food deficits, inadequate access to health and mental health, problems with housing stability, and access to educational technology and internet. Those of us in education know these problems have existed forever. What has happened is like a giant tidal wave that came and sucked the water off the ocean floor, revealing all these uncomfortable realities that had been beneath the water from time immemorial. This newfound public awareness of pervasive inequities, I hope, will create a sense of urgency in the public domain. We need to correct for these inequities in order for education to realize its ambitious goals. We need to redesign our systems of child development and education. The most obvious place to start for schools is working on equitable access to educational technology as a way to close the digital-learning gap.

GAZETTE: You’ve talked about some concrete changes that should be considered to level the playing field. But should we be thinking broadly about education in some new way?

REVILLE: The best that can come of this is a new paradigm shift in terms of the way in which we look at education, because children’s well-being and success depend on more than just schooling. We need to look holistically, at the entirety of children’s lives. In order for children to come to school ready to learn, they need a wide array of essential supports and opportunities outside of school. And we haven’t done a very good job of providing these. These education prerequisites go far beyond the purview of school systems, but rather are the responsibility of communities and society at large. In order to learn, children need equal access to health care, food, clean water, stable housing, and out-of-school enrichment opportunities, to name just a few preconditions. We have to reconceptualize the whole job of child development and education, and construct systems that meet children where they are and give them what they need, both inside and outside of school, in order for all of them to have a genuine opportunity to be successful.

Within this coronavirus crisis there is an opportunity to reshape American education. The only precedent in our field was when the Sputnik went up in 1957, and suddenly, Americans became very worried that their educational system wasn’t competitive with that of the Soviet Union. We felt vulnerable, like our defenses were down, like a nation at risk. And we decided to dramatically boost the involvement of the federal government in schooling and to increase and improve our scientific curriculum. We decided to look at education as an important factor in human capital development in this country. Again, in 1983, the report “Nation at Risk” warned of a similar risk: Our education system wasn’t up to the demands of a high-skills/high-knowledge economy.

We tried with our education reforms to build a 21st-century education system, but the results of that movement have been modest. We are still a nation at risk. We need another paradigm shift, where we look at our goals and aspirations for education, which are summed up in phrases like “No Child Left Behind,” “Every Student Succeeds,” and “All Means All,” and figure out how to build a system that has the capacity to deliver on that promise of equity and excellence in education for all of our students, and all means all. We’ve got that opportunity now. I hope we don’t fail to take advantage of it in a misguided rush to restore the status quo.

This interview has been condensed and edited for length and clarity.

Share this article

You might like.

Study exposes how banks sway policy from shadows, by targeting bureaucrats instead of politicians

New IOP poll shows they still plan to show up to vote but are subject to ‘seismic mood swings’ over specific issues

Tanner Lectures explore models of engaged citizenry from ancient agoras to modern megachurches

Exercise cuts heart disease risk in part by lowering stress, study finds

Benefits nearly double for people with depression

So what exactly makes Taylor Swift so great?

Experts weigh in on pop superstar's cultural and financial impact as her tours and albums continue to break records.

Finding right mix on campus speech policies

Legal, political scholars discuss balancing personal safety, constitutional rights, academic freedom amid roiling protests, cultural shifts

Here's how COVID-19 affected education – and how we can get children’s learning back on track

Nearly 147 million children missed more than half of their in-person schooling between 2020 and 2022. Image:  Unsplash/Taylor Flowe

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Douglas Broom

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Global Health is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, global health.

Listen to the article

• As well as its health impacts, COVID-19 had a huge effect on the education of children – but the full scale is only just starting to emerge.
• As pandemic lockdowns continue to shut schools, it’s clear the most vulnerable have suffered the most.
• Recovering the months of lost education must be a priority for all nations.

When the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 to be a pandemic on 11 March 2020, few could have foreseen the catastrophic effects the virus would have on the education of the world’s children.

During the first 12 months of the pandemic, lockdowns led to 1.5 billion students in 188 countries being unable to attend school in person, causing lasting effects on the education of an entire generation .

As an OECD report into the effects of school closures in 2021 put it: “Few groups are less vulnerable to the coronavirus than school children, but few groups have been more affected by the policy responses to contain the virus.”

Although many school closures were announced as temporary measures, these shutdowns persisted throughout 2020 – and even beyond in some cases.

As late as March 2022, UNICEF reported that 23 countries, home to around 405 million schoolchildren, had not yet fully reopened their schools . As China battled to contain new COVID-19 outbreaks, schools were closed in Shanghai and Xian in October 2022.

COVID has ended education for some

Nearly 147 million children missed more than half of their in-person schooling between 2020 and 2022, UNICEF says. And it warns that many, especially the most vulnerable, are at risk of dropping out of education altogether.

The danger is highlighted by UNICEF data showing that 43% of students did not return when schools in Liberia reopened in December 2020. The number of out-of-school children in South Africa tripled from 250,000 to 750,000 between March 2020 and July 2021, UNICEF adds.

When schools in Uganda reopened after being closed for two years, almost one in ten children were missing from classrooms. And in Malawi, the dropout rate among girls in secondary education increased by 48% between 2020 and 2021.

Out-of-school children are among the most vulnerable and marginalized children in society, says UNICEF. They are the least likely to be able to read, write or do basic maths, and when not in school they are at risk of exploitation and a lifetime of poverty and deprivation, it says.

Lost learning time

Even when children are in school, the amount of learning time they have lost to the pandemic is compounding what UNICEF describes as “a desperately poor level of learning” in 32 low-income countries it has studied.

“In the countries analyzed, the current pace of learning is so slow that it would take seven years for most schoolchildren to learn foundational reading skills that should have been grasped in two years, and 11 years to learn foundational numeracy skills,” the charity says.

Analysis of the crisis by UNESCO, published in November 2022, found that the most vulnerable learners have been hardest hit by the lack of schooling. It added that progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal for Education had been set back.

In Latin America and the Caribbean – a region that suffered one of the longest periods of school closures – average primary education scores in reading and maths could have slipped back to a level last seen 10 years ago , the World Bank says.

Four out of five sixth graders may not be able to adequately understand and interpret a text of moderate length, the bank says. As a result, these students are likely to earn 12% less over their lifetime than if their education had not been curtailed by the pandemic, it estimates.

Widening the achievement gap

In India, the pandemic has widened the gaps in learning outcomes among schoolchildren with those from disenfranchised and vulnerable families falling furthest behind, according to a 2022 report by the World Economic Forum.

Even where schools tried to keep teaching using remote learning, the socio-economic divide was perpetuated. In the United States, a study found children’s achievement in maths fell by 50% more in less well-off areas , compared to those in more affluent neighbourhoods.

One year on: we look back at how the Forum’s networks have navigated the global response to COVID-19.

Using a multistakeholder approach, the Forum and its partners through its COVID Action Platform have provided countless solutions to navigate the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, protecting lives and livelihoods.

Throughout 2020, along with launching its COVID Action Platform , the Forum and its Partners launched more than 40 initiatives in response to the pandemic.

The work continues. As one example, the COVID Response Alliance for Social Entrepreneurs is supporting 90,000 social entrepreneurs, with an impact on 1.4 billion people, working to serve the needs of excluded, marginalized and vulnerable groups in more than 190 countries.

Read more about the COVID-19 Tools Accelerator, our support of GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, the Coalition for Epidemics Preparedness and Innovations (CEPI), and the COVAX initiative and innovative approaches to solve the pandemic, like our Common Trust Network – aiming to help roll out a “digital passport” in our Impact Story .

Consultancy firm McKinsey says that US students were on average five months behind in mathematics and four months behind in reading by the end of the 2020-21 school year. Disadvantaged students were hit hardest, with Black students losing six months of learning on average.

Researchers in Japan found a similar pattern, with disadvantaged children and the youngest suffering most from school closures. They said the adverse effects of being forced to study at home lasted longest for those with poorest living conditions .

However, in Sweden, where schools stayed open during the pandemic, there was no decline in reading comprehension scores among children from all socio-economic groups, leading researchers to conclude that the shock of the pandemic alone did not affect students’ performance.

Getting learning back on track

So what can be done to help the pandemic generation to recover their lost learning ?

The World Bank outlines 10 actions countries can take, including getting schools to assess students’ learning loss and monitor their progress once they are back at school.

Catch-up education and measures to ensure that children don’t drop out of school will be essential, it says. These could include changing the school calendar, and amending the curriculum to focus on foundational skills.

There’s also a need to enhance learning opportunities at home, such as by distributing books and digital devices if possible. Supporting parents in this role is also critical, the bank says.

Teachers will also need extra help to avoid burnout, the bank notes. It highlights a “need to invest aggressively in teachers’ professional development and use technology to enhance their work”.

Have you read?

Covid-19 has hit children hard. here's how schools can help, how the education sector should respond to covid-19, according to these leading experts, covid created an education crisis that has pushed millions of children into ‘learning poverty’ -report, don't miss any update on this topic.

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Health and Healthcare Systems .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

This Earth Day we consider the impact of climate change on human health

Shyam Bishen and Annika Green

April 22, 2024

Scientists have invented a method to break down 'forever chemicals' in our drinking water. Here’s how

Johnny Wood

April 17, 2024

Young people are becoming unhappier, a new report finds

Promoting healthy habit formation is key to improving public health. Here's why

Adrian Gore

April 15, 2024

What's 'biophilic design' and how can it benefit neurodivergent people?

Fatemeh Aminpour, Ilan Katz and Jennifer Skattebol

Why stemming the rise of antibiotic resistance will be an historic achievement

Carel du Marchie Sarvaas

April 11, 2024

COVID-19 and education: The lingering effects of unfinished learning

As this most disrupted of school years draws to a close, it is time to take stock of the impact of the pandemic on student learning and well-being. Although the 2020–21 academic year ended on a high note—with rising vaccination rates, outdoor in-person graduations, and access to at least some in-person learning for 98 percent of students—it was as a whole perhaps one of the most challenging for educators and students in our nation’s history. 1 “Burbio’s K-12 school opening tracker,” Burbio, accessed May 31, 2021, cai.burbio.com. By the end of the school year, only 2 percent of students were in virtual-only districts. Many students, however, chose to keep learning virtually in districts that were offering hybrid or fully in-person learning.

Our analysis shows that the impact of the pandemic on K–12 student learning was significant, leaving students on average five months behind in mathematics and four months behind in reading by the end of the school year. The pandemic widened preexisting opportunity and achievement gaps, hitting historically disadvantaged students hardest. In math, students in majority Black schools ended the year with six months of unfinished learning, students in low-income schools with seven. High schoolers have become more likely to drop out of school, and high school seniors, especially those from low-income families, are less likely to go on to postsecondary education. And the crisis had an impact on not just academics but also the broader health and well-being of students, with more than 35 percent of parents very or extremely concerned about their children’s mental health.

The fallout from the pandemic threatens to depress this generation’s prospects and constrict their opportunities far into adulthood. The ripple effects may undermine their chances of attending college and ultimately finding a fulfilling job that enables them to support a family. Our analysis suggests that, unless steps are taken to address unfinished learning, today’s students may earn $49,000 to $61,000 less over their lifetime owing to the impact of the pandemic on their schooling. The impact on the US economy could amount to $128 billion to $188 billion every year as this cohort enters the workforce.

Federal funds are in place to help states and districts respond, though funding is only part of the answer. The deep-rooted challenges in our school systems predate the pandemic and have resisted many reform efforts. States and districts have a critical role to play in marshaling that funding into sustainable programs that improve student outcomes. They can ensure rigorous implementation of evidence-based initiatives, while also piloting and tracking the impact of innovative new approaches. Although it is too early to fully assess the effectiveness of postpandemic solutions to unfinished learning, the scope of action is already clear. The immediate imperative is to not only reopen schools and recover unfinished learning but also reimagine education systems for the long term. Across all of these priorities it will be critical to take a holistic approach, listening to students and parents and designing programs that meet academic and nonacademic needs alike.

What have we learned about unfinished learning?

As the 2020–21 school year began, just 40 percent of K–12 students were in districts that offered any in-person instruction. By the end of the year, more than 98 percent of students had access to some form of in-person learning, from the traditional five days a week to hybrid models. In the interim, districts oscillated among virtual, hybrid, and in-person learning as they balanced the need to keep students and staff safe with the need to provide an effective learning environment. Students faced multiple schedule changes, were assigned new teachers midyear, and struggled with glitchy internet connections and Zoom fatigue. This was a uniquely challenging year for teachers and students, and it is no surprise that it has left its mark—on student learning, and on student well-being.

As we analyze the cost of the pandemic, we use the term “unfinished learning” to capture the reality that students were not given the opportunity this year to complete all the learning they would have completed in a typical year. Some students who have disengaged from school altogether may have slipped backward, losing knowledge or skills they once had. The majority simply learned less than they would have in a typical year, but this is nonetheless important. Students who move on to the next grade unprepared are missing key building blocks of knowledge that are necessary for success, while students who repeat a year are much less likely to complete high school and move on to college. And it’s not just academic knowledge these students may miss out on. They are at risk of finishing school without the skills, behaviors, and mindsets to succeed in college or in the workforce. An accurate assessment of the depth and extent of unfinished learning will best enable districts and states to support students in catching up on the learning they missed and moving past the pandemic and into a successful future.

Students testing in 2021 were about ten points behind in math and nine points behind in reading, compared with matched students in previous years.

Unfinished learning is real—and inequitable

To assess student learning through the pandemic, we analyzed Curriculum Associates’ i-Ready in-school assessment results of more than 1.6 million elementary school students across more than 40 states. 2 The Curriculum Associates in-school sample consisted of 1.6 million K–6 students in mathematics and 1.5 million in reading. The math sample came from all 50 states, but 23 states accounted for 90 percent of the sample. The reading sample came from 46 states, with 21 states accounting for 90 percent of the sample. Florida accounted for 29 percent of the math and 30 percent of the reading sample. In general, states that had reopened schools are overweighted given the in-school nature of the assessment. We compared students’ performance in the spring of 2021 with the performance of similar students prior to the pandemic. 3 Specifically, we compared spring 2021 results to those of historically matched students in the springs of 2019, 2018, and 2017. Students testing in 2021 were about ten points behind in math and nine points behind in reading, compared with matched students in previous years.

To get a sense of the magnitude of these gaps, we translated these differences in scores to a more intuitive measure—months of learning. Although there is no perfect way to make this translation, we can get a sense of how far students are behind by comparing the levels students attained this spring with the growth in learning that usually occurs from one grade level to the next. We found that this cohort of students is five months behind in math and four months behind in reading, compared with where we would expect them to be based on historical data. 4 The conversion into months of learning compares students’ achievement in the spring of one grade level with their performance in the spring of the next grade level, treating this spring-to-spring difference in historical scores as a “year” of learning. It assumes a ten-month school year with a two-month summer vacation. Actual school schedules vary significantly, and i-Ready’s typical growth numbers for a “year” of learning are based on 30 weeks of actual instruction between the fall and the spring rather than on a spring-to-spring calendar-year comparison.

Unfinished learning did not vary significantly across elementary grades. Despite reports that remote learning was more challenging for early elementary students, 5 Marva Hinton, “Why teaching kindergarten online is so very, very hard,” Edutopia, October 21, 2020, edutopia.org. our results suggest the impact was just as meaningful for older elementary students. 6 While our analysis only includes results from students who tested in-school in the spring, many of these students were learning remotely for meaningful portions of the fall and the winter. We can hypothesize that perhaps younger elementary students received more help from parents and older siblings, and that older elementary students were more likely to be struggling alone.

It is also worth remembering that our numbers capture the “average” progress by grade level. Especially in early reading, this average can conceal a wide range of outcomes. Another way of cutting the data looks instead at which students have dropped further behind grade levels. A recent report suggests that more first and second graders have ended this year two or more grade levels below expectations than in any previous year. 7 Academic achievement at the end of the 2020–2021 school year , Curriculum Associates, June 2021, curriculumassociates.com. Given the major strides children at this age typically make in mastering reading, and the critical importance of early reading for later academic success, this is of particular concern.

While all types of students experienced unfinished learning, some groups were disproportionately affected. Students of color and low-income students suffered most. Students in majority-Black schools ended the school year six months behind in both math and reading, while students in majority-white schools ended up just four months behind in math and three months behind in reading. 8 To respect students’ privacy, we cannot isolate the race or income of individual students in our sample, but we can look at school-level demographics. Students in predominantly low-income schools and in urban locations also lost more learning during the pandemic than their peers in high-income rural and suburban schools (Exhibit 1).

In fall 2020, we projected that students could lose as much as five to ten months of learning in mathematics, and about half of that in reading, by the end of the school year. Spring assessment results came in toward the lower end of these projections, suggesting that districts and states were able to improve the quality of remote and hybrid learning through the 2020–21 school year and bring more students back into classrooms.

Indeed, if we look at the data over time, some interesting patterns emerge. 9 The composition of the fall student sample was different from that of the spring sample, because more students returned to in-person assessments in the spring. Some of the increase in unfinished learning from fall to spring could be because the spring assessment included previously virtual students, who may have struggled more during the school year. Even so, the spring data are the best reflection of unfinished learning at the end of the school year. Taking math as an example, as schools closed their buildings in the spring of 2020, students fell behind rapidly, learning almost no new math content over the final few months of the 2019–20 school year. Over the summer, we assume that they experienced the typical “summer slide” in which students lose some of the academic knowledge and skills they had learned the year before. Then they resumed learning through the 2020–21 school year, but at a slower pace than usual, resulting in five months of unfinished learning by the end of the year (Exhibit 2). 10 These lines simplify the pattern of typical learning through the year. In a typical year, students learn more in the fall and less in the spring, and only learn during periods of instruction (the chart includes the well-documented learning loss that happens during the summer, but does not include shorter holidays when students are not in school receiving instruction).

In reading, however, the story is somewhat different. As schools closed their buildings in March 2020, students continued to progress in reading, albeit at a slower pace. During the summer, we assume that students’ reading level stayed roughly flat, as in previous years. The pace of learning increased slightly over the 2020–21 school year, but the difference was not as great as it was in math, resulting in four months of unfinished learning by the end of the school year (Exhibit 3). Put another way, the initial shock in reading was less severe, but the improvements to remote and hybrid learning seem to have had less impact in reading than they did in math.

Before we celebrate the improvements in student trajectories between the initial school shutdowns and the subsequent year of learning, we should remember that these are still sobering numbers. On average, students who took the spring assessments in school are half a year behind in math, and nearly that in reading. For Black and Hispanic students, the losses are not only greater but also piled on top of historical inequities in opportunity and achievement (Exhibit 4).

Furthermore, these results likely represent an optimistic scenario. They reflect outcomes for students who took interim assessments in the spring in a school building 11 Students who took the assessment out of school are not included in our sample because we could not guarantee fidelity and comparability of results, given the change in the testing environment. Out-of-school students represent about a third of the students taking i-Ready assessments in the spring, and we will not have an accurate understanding of the pandemic’s impact on their learning until they return to school buildings, likely in the fall. —and thus exclude students who remained remote throughout the entire school year, and who may have experienced the most disruption to their schooling. 12 Initial results from Texas suggest that districts with mostly virtual instruction experienced more unfinished learning than those with mostly in-person instruction. The percent of students meeting math expectations dropped 32 percent in mostly virtual districts but just 9 percent in mostly in-person ones. See Reese Oxner, “Texas students’ standardized test scores dropped dramatically during the pandemic, especially in math,” Texas Tribune , June 28, 2021, texastribune.org. The Curriculum Associates data cover a broad variety of schools and states across the country, but are not fully representative, being overweighted for rural and southeastern states that were more likely to get students back into the classrooms this year. Finally, these data cover only elementary schools. They are silent on the academic impact of the pandemic for middle and high schoolers. However, data from school districts suggest that, even for older students, the pandemic has had a significant effect on learning. 13 For example, in Salt Lake City, the percentage of middle and high school students failing a class jumped by 60 percent, from 2,500 to 4,000, during the pandemic. To learn about increased failure rates across multiple districts from the Bay Area to New Mexico, Austin, and Hawaii, see Richard Fulton, “Failing Grades,” Inside Higher Ed , March 8, 2021, insidehighered.com.

The harm inflicted by the pandemic goes beyond academics

Students didn’t just lose academic learning during the pandemic. Some lost family members; others had caregivers who lost their jobs and sources of income; and almost all experienced social isolation.

These pressures have taken a toll on students of all ages. In our recent survey of 16,370 parents across every state in America, 35 percent of parents said they were very or extremely concerned about their child’s mental health, with a similar proportion worried about their child’s social and emotional well-being. Roughly 80 percent of parents had some level of concern about their child’s mental health or social and emotional health and development since the pandemic began. Parental concerns about mental health span grade levels but are slightly lower for parents of early elementary school students. 14 While 30.7% percent of all K–2 parents were very or extremely concerned, a peak of 37.6% percent of eighth-grade parents were.

Parents also report increases in clinical mental health conditions among their children, with a five-percentage-point increase in anxiety and a six-percentage-point increase in depression. They also report increases in behaviors such as social withdrawal, self-isolation, lethargy, and irrational fears (Exhibit 5). Despite increased levels of concern among parents, the amount of mental health assessment and testing done for children is 6.1 percent lower than it was in 2019 —the steepest decline in assessment and testing rates of any age group.

Broader student well-being is not independent of academics. Parents whose children have fallen significantly behind academically are one-third more likely to say that they are very or extremely concerned about their children’s mental health. Black and Hispanic parents are seven to nine percentage points more likely than white parents to report higher levels of concern. Unaddressed mental-health challenges will likely have a knock-on effect on academics going forward as well. Research shows that trauma and other mental-health issues can influence children’s attendance, their ability to complete schoolwork in and out of class, and even the way they learn. 15 Satu Larson et al., “Chronic childhood trauma, mental health, academic achievement, and school-based health center mental health services,” Journal of School Health , 2017, 87(9), 675–86, escholarship.org.

In our recent survey of 16,370 parents across every state in America, 35 percent of parents said they were very or extremely concerned about their child’s mental health.

The impact of unfinished learning on diminished student well-being seems to be playing out in the choices that students are making. Some students have already effectively dropped out of formal education entirely. 16 To assess the impact of the pandemic on dropout rates, we have to look beyond official enrollment data, which are only published annually, and which only capture whether a child has enrolled at the beginning of the year, not whether they are engaged and attending school. Chronic absenteeism rates provide clues as to which students are likely to persist in school and which students are at risk of dropping out. Our parent survey suggests that chronic absenteeism for eighth through 12th graders has increased by 12 percentage points, and 42 percent of the students who are new to chronic absenteeism are attending no school at all, according to their parents. Scaled up to the national level, this suggests that 2.3 million to 4.6 million additional eighth- to 12th-grade students were chronically absent from school this year, in addition to the 3.1 million who are chronically absent in nonpandemic years. State and district data on chronic absenteeism are still emerging, but data released so far also suggest a sharp uptick in absenteeism rates nationwide, particularly in higher grades. 17 A review of available state and district data, including data released by 14 states and 11 districts, showed increases in chronic absenteeism of between three and 16 percentage points, with an average of seven percentage points. However, many states changed the definition of absenteeism during the pandemic, so a true like-for-like comparison is difficult to obtain. According to emerging state and district data, increases in chronic absenteeism are highest among populations with historically low rates. This is reflected also in our survey results. Black students, with the highest historical absenteeism rates, saw more modest increases during the pandemic than white or Hispanic students (Exhibit 6).

It remains unclear whether these pandemic-related chronic absentees will drop out at rates similar to those of students who were chronically absent prior to the pandemic. Some students could choose to return to school once in-person options are restored; but some portion of these newly absent students will likely drop out of school altogether. Based on historical links between chronic absenteeism and dropout rates, as well as differentials in absenteeism between fully virtual and fully in-person students, we estimate that an additional 617,000 to 1.2 million eighth–12th graders could drop out of school altogether because of the pandemic if efforts are not made to reengage them in learning next year. 18 The federal definition of chronic absenteeism is missing more than 15 days of school each year. According to the Utah Education Policy Center’s research brief on chronic absenteeism, the overall correlation between one year of chronic absence between eighth and 12th grade and dropping out of school is 0.134. For more, see Utah Education Policy Center, Research brief: Chronic absenteeism , July 2012, uepc.utah.edu. We then apply the differential in chronic absenteeism between fully virtual and fully in-person students to account for virtual students reengaging when in-person education is offered. For students who were not attending school at all, we assumed that 50 to 75 percent would not return to learning. This estimation is partly based on The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation from the UChicago Consortium on School Research, which estimates that up to 75 percent of high school students who are “off track”—either failing or behind in credits—do not graduate in five years. For more, see Elaine Allensworth and John Q. Easton, The on-track indicator as a predictor of high school graduation , UChicago Consortium on School Research, 2005, consortium.uchicago.edu.

Even among students who complete high school, many may not fulfill their dreams of going on to postsecondary education. Our survey suggests that 17 percent of high school seniors who had planned to attend postsecondary education abandoned their plans—most often because they had joined or were planning to join the workforce or because the costs of college were too high. The number is much higher among low-income high school seniors, with 26 percent abandoning their plans. Low-income seniors are more likely to state cost as a reason, with high-income seniors more likely to be planning to reapply the following year or enroll in a gap-year program. This is consistent with National Student Clearinghouse reports that show overall college enrollment declines, with low-income, high-poverty, and high-minority high schools disproportionately affected. 19 Todd Sedmak, “Fall 2020 college enrollment update for the high school graduating class of 2020,” National Student Clearinghouse, March 25, 2021, studentclearinghouse.org; Todd Sedmak, “Spring 2021 college enrollment declines 603,000 to 16.9 million students,” National Student Clearinghouse, June 10, 2021, studentclearinghouse.org.

Unfinished learning has long-term consequences

The cumulative effects of the pandemic could have a long-term impact on an entire generation of students. Education achievement and attainment are linked not only to higher earnings but also to better health, reduced incarceration rates, and greater political participation. 20 See, for example, Michael Grossman, “Education and nonmarket outcomes,” in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Volume 1 , ed. Eric Hanushek and Finis Welch (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006), 577–633; Lance Lochner and Enrico Moretti, “The effect of education on crime: Evidence from prison inmates, arrests, and self-reports,” American Economic Review , 2004, Volume 94, Number 1, pp. 155–89; Kevin Milligan, Enrico Moretti, and Philip Oreopoulos, “Does education improve citizenship? Evidence from the United States and the United Kingdom,” Journal of Public Economics , August 2004, Volume 88, Number 9–10, pp. 1667–95; and Education transforms lives , UNESCO, 2013, unesdoc.unesco.org. We estimate that, without immediate and sustained interventions, pandemic-related unfinished learning could reduce lifetime earnings for K–12 students by an average of $49,000 to $61,000. These costs are significant, especially for students who have lost more learning. While white students may see lifetime earnings reduced by 1.4 percent, the reduction could be as much as 2.4 percent for Black students and 2.1 percent for Hispanic students. 21 Projected earnings across children’s lifetimes using current annual incomes for those with at least a high school diploma, discounting the earnings by a premium established in Murnane et al., 2000, which tied cognitive skills and future earnings. See Richard J. Murnane et al., “How important are the cognitive skills of teenagers in predicting subsequent earnings?,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management , September 2000, Volume 19, Number 4, pp. 547–68.

Lower earnings, lower levels of education attainment, less innovation—all of these lead to decreased economic productivity. By 2040 the majority of this cohort of K–12 students will be in the workforce. We anticipate a potential annual GDP loss of $128 billion to $188 billion from pandemic-related unfinished learning. 22 Using Hanushek and Woessmann 2008 methodology to map national per capita growth associated with decrease in academic achievement, then adding additional impact of pandemic dropouts on GDP. For more, see Eric A. Hanushek and Ludger Woessmann, “The role of cognitive skills in economic development,” Journal of Economic Literature , September 2008, Volume 46, Number 3, pp. 607–68.

This increases by about one-third the existing hits to GDP from achievement gaps that predated COVID-19. Our previous research indicated that the pre-COVID-19 racial achievement gap was equivalent to $426 billion to $705 billion in lost economic potential every year (Exhibit 7). 23 This is the increase in GDP that would result if Black and Hispanic students achieved the same levels of academic performance as white students. For more information on historical opportunity and achievement gaps, please see Emma Dorn, Bryan Hancock, Jimmy Sarakatsannis, and Ellen Viruleg, “ COVID-19 and student learning in the United States: The hurt could last a lifetime ,” June 1, 2020.

What is the path forward for our nation’s students?

There is now significant funding in place to address these critical issues. Through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act); the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA); and the American Rescue Plan (ARP), the federal government has already committed more than $200 billion to K–12 education over the next three years, 24 The CARES Act provided $13 billion to ESSER and $3 billion to the Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Fund; CRRSAA provided $54 billion to ESSER II, $4 billion to Governors (GEER II and EANS); ARP provided $123 billion to ESSER III, $3 billion to Governors (EANS II), and $10 billion to other education programs. For more, see “CCSSO fact sheet: COVID-19 relief funding for K-12 education,” Council of Chief State School Officers, 2021, https://753a0706.flowpaper.com/CCSSOCovidReliefFactSheet/#page=2. a significant increase over the approximately $750 billion spent annually on public schooling. 25 “The condition of education 2021: At a glance,” National Center for Education Statistics, accessed June 30, 2021, nces.ed.gov. The majority of these funds are routed through the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER), of which 90 percent flows to districts and 10 percent to state education agencies. These are vast sums of money, particularly in historical context. As part of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the Obama administration committed more than $80 billion toward K–12 schools—at the time the biggest federal infusion of funds to public schools in the nation’s history. 26 “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: Saving and Creating Jobs and Reforming Education,” US Department of Education, March 7, 2009, ed.gov. Today’s funding more than doubles that previous record and gives districts much more freedom in how they spend the money. 27 Andrew Ujifusa, “What Obama’s stimulus had for education that the coronavirus package doesn’t,” Education Week , March 31, 2020, www.edweek.org.

However, if this funding can mitigate the impact of unfinished learning, it could prevent much larger losses to the US economy. Given that this generation of students will likely spend 35 to 40 years in the workforce, the cumulative impact of COVID-19 unfinished learning over their lifetimes could far exceed the investments that are being made today.

Furthermore, much of today’s federal infusion will likely be spent not only on supporting students in catching up on the unfinished learning of the pandemic but also on tackling deeper historical opportunity and achievement gaps among students of different races and income levels.

As districts consider competing uses of funding, they are juggling multiple priorities over several time horizons. The ARP funding needs to be obligated by September 2023. This restricts how monies can be spent. Districts are balancing the desire to hire new personnel or start new programs with the risk of having to close programs because of lack of sustained funds in the future. Districts are also facing decisions about whether to run programs at the district level or to give more freedom to principals in allocating funds; about the balance between academics and broader student needs; about the extent to which funds should be targeted to students who have struggled most or spread evenly across all students; and about the balance between rolling out existing evidence-based programs and experimenting with innovative approaches.

It is too early to answer all of these questions decisively. However, as districts consider this complex set of decisions, leading practitioners and thinkers have come together to form the Coalition to Advance Future Student Success—and to outline priorities to ensure the effective and equitable use of federal funds. 28 “Framework: The Coalition to Advance Future Student Success,” Council of Chief State School Officers, accessed June 30, 2021, learning.ccsso.org.

These priorities encompass four potential actions for schools:

• Safely reopen schools for in-person learning.
• Reengage students and reenroll them into effective learning environments.
• Support students in recovering unfinished learning and broader needs.
• Recommit and reimagine our education systems for the long term.

Across all of these actions, it is important for districts to understand the changing needs of parents and students as we emerge from the pandemic, and to engage with them to support students to learn and to thrive. The remainder of this article shares insights from our parent survey of more than 16,000 parents on these changing needs and perspectives, and highlights some early actions by states and districts to adapt to meet them.

1. Safely reopen schools for in-person learning

The majority of school districts across the country are planning to offer traditional five-days-a-week in-person instruction in the fall, employing COVID-19-mitigation strategies such as staff and student vaccination drives, ongoing COVID-19 testing, mask mandates, and infrastructure updates. 29 “Map: Where Were Schools Required to Be Open for the 2020-21 School Year?,” Education Week , updated May 2021, edweek.org. The evidence suggests that schools can reopen buildings safely with the right protocols in place, 30 For a summary of the evidence on safely reopening schools, see John Bailey, Is it safe to reopen schools? , CRPE, March 2021, crpe.org. but health preparedness will likely remain critical as buildings reopen. Indeed, by the end of the school year, a significant subset of parents remain concerned about safety in schools, with nearly a third still very or extremely worried about the threat of COVID-19 to their child’s health. Parents also want districts to continue to invest in safety—39 percent say schools should invest in COVID-19 health and safety measures this fall.

2. Reengage and reenroll students in effective learning environments

Opening buildings safely is hard enough, but encouraging students to show up could be even more challenging. Some students will have dropped out of formal schooling entirely, and those who remain in school may be reluctant to return to physical classrooms. Our survey results suggest that 24 percent of parents are still not convinced they will choose in-person instruction for their children this fall. Within Black communities, that rises to 34 percent. But many of these parents are still open to persuasion. Only 4 percent of parents (and 6 percent of Black parents) say their children will definitely not return to fully in-person learning—which is not very different from the percentage of parents who choose to homeschool or pursue other alternative education options in a typical year. For students who choose to remain virtual, schools should make continual efforts to improve virtual learning models, based on lessons from the past year.

For parents who are still on the fence, school districts can work to understand their needs and provide effective learning options. Safety concerns remain the primary reason that parents remain hesitant about returning to the classroom; however, this is not the only driver. Some parents feel that remote learning has been a better learning environment for their child, while others have seen their child’s social-emotional and mental health improve at home.

Still, while remote learning may have worked well for some students, our data suggest that it failed many. In addition to understanding parent needs, districts should reach out to families and build confidence not just in their schools’ safety precautions but also in their learning environment and broader role in the community. Addressing root causes will likely be more effective than punitive measures, and a broad range of tactics may be needed, from outreach and attendance campaigns to student incentives to providing services families need, such as transportation and childcare. 31 Roshon R. Bradley, “A comprehensive approach to improving student attendance,” St. John Fisher College, August 2015, Education Doctoral, Paper 225, fisherpub.sjfc.edu; a 2011 literature review highlights how incentives can effectively be employed to increase attendance rates. Across all of these, a critical component will likely be identifying students who are at risk and ensuring targeted outreach and interventions. 32 Elaine M. Allensworth and John Q. Easton, “What matters for staying on-track and graduating in Chicago Public Schools: A close look at course grades, failures, and attendance in the freshman year,” Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago, July 2007, files.eric.ed.gov.

Chicago Public Schools, in partnership with the University of Chicago, has developed a student prioritization index (SPI) that identifies students at highest risk of unfinished learning and dropping out of school. The index is based on a combination of academic, attendance, socio-emotional, and community vulnerability inputs. The district is reaching out to all students with a back-to-school marketing campaign while targeting more vulnerable students with additional support. Schools are partnering with community-based organizations to carry out home visits, and with parents to staff phone banks. They are offering various paid summer opportunities to reduce the trade-offs students may have to make between summer school and summer jobs, recognizing that many have found paid work during the pandemic. The district will track and monitor the results to learn which tactics work. 33 “Moving Forward Together,” Chicago Public Schools, June 2021, cps.edu.

In Florida’s Miami-Dade schools, each school employee was assigned 30 households to contact personally, starting with a phone call and then showing up for a home visit. Superintendent Alberto Carvalho personally contacted 30 families and persuaded 23 to return to in-person learning. The district is starting the transition to in-person learning by hosting engaging in-person summer learning programs. 34 Hannah Natanson, “Schools use home visits, calls to convince parents to choose in-person classes in fall,” Washington Post , July 7, 2021, washingtonpost.com.

3. Support students in recovering unfinished learning and in broader needs

Even if students reenroll in effective learning environments in the fall, many will be several months behind academically and may struggle to reintegrate into a traditional learning environment. School districts are therefore creating strategies to support students  as they work to make up unfinished learning, and as they work through broader mental health issues and social reintegration. Again, getting parents and students to show up for these programs may be harder than districts expect.

Our research suggests that parents underestimate the unfinished learning caused by the pandemic. In addition, their beliefs about their children’s learning do not reflect racial disparities in unfinished learning. In our survey, 40 percent of parents said their child is on track and 16 percent said their child is progressing faster than in a usual year. Black parents are slightly more likely than white parents to think their child is on track or better, Hispanic parents less so. However, across all races, more than half of parents think their child is doing just fine. Only 14 percent of parents said their child has fallen significantly behind.

Even if programs are offered for free, many parents may not take advantage of them, especially if they are too academically oriented. Only about a quarter of parents said they are very likely to enroll their child in tutoring, after-school, or summer-school programs, for example. Nearly 40 percent said they are very likely to enroll their students in enrichment programs such as art or music. Districts therefore should consider not only offering effective evidence-based programs, such as high-dosage tutoring and vacation academies, but also ensuring that these programs are attractive to students.

In Rhode Island, for example, the state is taking a “Broccoli and Ice Cream” approach to summer school to prepare students for the new school year, combining rigorous reading and math instruction with fun activities provided by community-based partners. Enrichment activities such as sailing, Italian cooking lessons, and Olympic sports are persuading students to participate. 35 From webinar with Angélica Infante-Green, Rhode Island Department of Education, https://www.ewa.org/agenda/ewa-74th-national-seminar-agenda. The state-run summer program is open to students across the state, but the Rhode Island Department of Education has also provided guidance to district-run programs, 36 Learning, Equity & Accelerated Pathways Task Force Report , Rhode Island Department of Education, April 2021, ride.ri.gov. encouraging partnerships with community-based organizations, a dual focus on academics and enrichment, small class sizes, and a strong focus on relationships and social-emotional support.

In Louisiana, the state has provided guidance and support 37 Staffing and scheduling best practices guidance , Louisiana Department of Education, June 3, 2021, louisianabelieves.com. to districts in implementing recovery programs to ensure evidence-based approaches are rolled out state-wide. The guidance includes practical tips on ramping up staffing, and on scheduling high-dosage tutoring and other dedicated acceleration blocks. The state didn’t stop at guidance, but also flooded districts with support and two-way dialogue through webinars, conferences, monthly calls, and regional technical coaching. By scheduling acceleration blocks during the school day, rather than an add-on after school, districts are not dependent on parents signing up for programs.

For students who have experienced trauma, schools will likely need to address the broader fallout from the pandemic. In southwest Virginia, the United Way is partnering with five school systems to establish a trauma-informed schools initiative, providing teachers and staff with training and resources on trauma recovery. 38 Mike Still, “SWVA school districts partner to help students in wake of pandemic,” Kingsport Times News, June 26, 2021, timesnews.net. San Antonio is planning to hire more licensed therapists and social workers to help students and their families, leveraging partnerships with community organizations to place a licensed social worker on every campus. 39 Brooke Crum, “SAISD superintendent: ‘There are no shortcuts’ to tackling COVID-related learning gaps,” San Antonio Report, April 12, 2021, sanantonioreport.org.

4. Recommit and reimagine our education systems for the long term

Opportunity gaps have existed in our school systems for a long time. As schools build back from the pandemic, districts are also recommitting to providing an excellent education to every child. A potential starting point could be redoubling efforts to provide engaging, high-quality grade-level curriculum and instruction delivered by diverse and effective educators in every classroom, supported by effective assessments to inform instruction and support.

Beyond these foundational elements, districts may consider reimagining other aspects of the system. Parents may also be open to nontraditional models. Thirty-three percent of parents said that even when the pandemic is over, the ideal fit for their child would be something other than five days a week in a traditional brick-and-mortar school. Parents are considering hybrid models, remote learning, homeschooling, or learning hubs over the long term. Even if learning resumes mostly in the building, parents are open to the use of new technology to support teaching.

Edgecombe County Public Schools in North Carolina is planning to continue its use of learning hubs this fall to better meet student needs. In the district’s hub-and-spoke model, students will spend half of their time learning core content (the “hub”). For the other half they will engage in enrichment activities aligned to learning standards (the “spokes”). For elementary and middle school students, enrichment activities will involve interest-based projects in science and social studies; for high schoolers, activities could include exploring their passions through targeted English language arts and social studies projects or getting work experience—either paid or volunteer. The district is redeploying staff and leveraging community-based partnerships to enable these smaller-group activities with trusted adults who mirror the demographics of the students. 40 “District- and community-driven learning pods,” Center on Reinventing Public Education, crpe.org.

In Tennessee, the new Advanced Placement (AP) Access for All program will provide students across the state with access to AP courses, virtually. The goal is to eliminate financial barriers and help students take AP courses that aren’t currently offered at their home high school. 41 Amy Cockerham, “TN Department of Education announces ‘AP Access for All program,’” April 28, 2021, WJHL-TV, wjhl.com.

The Dallas Independent School District is rethinking the traditional school year, gathering input from families, teachers, and school staff to ensure that school communities are ready for the plunge. More than 40 schools have opted to add five additional intercession weeks to the year to provide targeted academics and enrichment activities. A smaller group of schools will add 23 days to the school year to increase time for student learning and teacher planning and collaboration. 42 “Time to Learn,” Dallas Independent School District, dallasisd.org.

It is unclear whether all these experiments will succeed, and school districts should monitor them closely to ensure they can scale successful programs and sunset unsuccessful ones. However, we have learned in the pandemic that some of the innovations born of necessity met some families’ needs better. Continued experimentation and fine-tuning could bring the best of traditional and new approaches together.

Thanks to concerted efforts by states and districts, the worst projections for learning outcomes this past year have not materialized for most students. However, students are still far behind where they need to be, especially those from historically marginalized groups. Left unchecked, unfinished learning could have severe consequences for students’ opportunities and prospects. In the long term, it could exact a heavy toll on the economy. It is not too late to mitigate these threats, and funding is now in place. Districts and states now have the opportunity to spend that money effectively to support our nation’s students.

Emma Dorn is a senior expert in McKinsey’s Silicon Valley office; Bryan Hancock and Jimmy Sarakatsannis are partners in the Washington, DC, office; and Ellen Viruleg is a senior adviser based in Providence, Rhode Island.

The authors wish to thank Alice Boucher, Ezra Glenn, Ben Hayes, Cheryl Healey, Chauncey Holder, and Sidney Scott for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Teacher survey: Learning loss is global—and significant

COVID-19 and learning loss—disparities grow and students need help

Reimagining a more equitable and resilient K–12 education system

Report | Coronavirus

COVID-19 and student performance, equity, and U.S. education policy : Lessons from pre-pandemic research to inform relief, recovery, and rebuilding

Report • By Emma García and Elaine Weiss • September 10, 2020

Download PDF

Press release

Share this page:

Pandemic-relevant research offers key lessons as the education system responds to the coronavirus crisis:

• Research regarding online learning and teaching shows that they are effective only if students have consistent access to the internet and computers and if teachers have received targeted training and supports for online instruction. Because these needed requirements for effectiveness have been largely absent for many, remote education during the pandemic has impeded teaching and learning.
• Research on home schooling shows that it works well for students for whom intentional, personalized, and sufficient resources are available. The crisis-induced delivery of home schooling without time for planning around children’s learning styles and circumstances means that many children home schooled during the pandemic are not replicating such model and thus not reaping the associated benefits.
• Reduced learning time has likely impeded student learning and also affected the development of the whole child. Once the pandemic allows it, we will need to make up for this time by increasing both the amount and quality of learning time—through extended schedules, summer enrichment and after-school activities, more personalized instruction, and staffing strategies that reduce class sizes and staff schools with sufficient and highly credentialed educators.
• Research on chronic absenteeism and on remote learning reinforces the urgency of providing appropriate support to children who are least prepared and especially to those at risk of becoming disengaged and eventually dropping out.
• Research on summer learning (loss or gain) points to the importance of personalized instruction. The research shows that learning styles and outcomes vary greatly, and that the outcomes are a function of the educational resources that families and systems provide to children across the year and of a large number of factors and circumstances that shape children’s learning and development.
• Research shows that a lack of contingency planning exacerbates the negative impacts of recessions, natural disasters, and pandemics on learning. Contingency planning thus needs to be institutionalized and include emergency funding to replenish the resources drained during emergencies.

What we know about the pandemic’s consequences for education so far helps us plan next steps:

• Learning and development have been interrupted and disrupted for millions of students. The only effective response is to use diagnostic tests and other tools to meet each child where he or she is and to devise a plan for making up for the interruptions.
• The pandemic has exacerbated well-documented opportunity gaps that put low-income students at a disadvantage relative to their better-off peers. Opportunity gaps are gaps in access to the conditions and resources that enhance learning and development, and include access to food and nutrition, housing, health insurance and care, and financial relief measures.
• One of the most critical opportunity gaps is the uneven access to the devices and internet access critical to learning online. This digital divide has made it virtually impossible for some students to learn during the pandemic.
• The pandemic has exacerbated the limitations of standardized tests, which reward a narrow set of skills and more affluent students who have access to specialized instruction. Such tests could overwhelm or label children when what they need now are diagnostic assessments and needs-based assessments that assess where they are across a range of domains and what they need going forward.

Informed by our learning, here is a three-pronged plan for addressing the adverse impacts of COVID-19 on education and rebuilding stronger:

• Relief: Give schools urgent resources so that they can provide effective remote instruction and supports at scale during the pandemic.
• Recovery: Provide extra investments to help students and schools make up lost ground as they return to in-school operations.
• Rebuilding: Redesign the system to focus on nurturing the whole child, balancing cognitive with socioemotional skills development and ensuring that all children have access to the conditions and resources that enhance learning and development.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic is overwhelming the functioning and outcomes of education systems—some of which were already stressed in many respects. This is true across the world and affects all children, though to differing degrees depending on multiple factors—including the country/region where they live, as well as their ages, family backgrounds, and degree of access to some “substitute” educational opportunities during the pandemic. In early spring as the pandemic was hitting its first peak, the virus consigned nearly all of over 55 million U.S. school children under the age of 18 to staying in their homes, with 1.4 billion out of school or child care across the globe (NCES 2019a; U.S. Census Bureau 2019; Cluver et al. 2020). Not only did these children lack daily access to school and the basic supports schools provide for many students, but they also lost out on group activities, team sports, and recreational options such as pools and playgrounds.

( COVID-19 & Education Webinar : Join us Wednesday for a discussion on this report, including opening remarks from Randi Weingarten, the president of the 1.7 million-member American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, about the state of COVID-19 and education and what needs to be done now to support educators and mitigate the damage to student performance, especially the most vulnerable children. Register here. )

The shutdown of schools, compounded by the associated public health and economic crises, poses major challenges to our students and their teachers. Our public education system was not built, nor prepared, to cope with a situation like this—we lack the structures to sustain effective teaching and learning during the shutdown and to provide the safety net supports that many children receive in school. While we do not know the exact impacts, we do know that children’s academic performance is deteriorating during the pandemic, along with their progress on other developmental skills. We also know that, given the various ways in which the crisis has widened existing socioeconomic disparities and how these disparities affect learning and educational outcomes, educational inequities are growing (Rothstein 2004; Putnam 2015; Reardon 2011; García and Weiss 2017). As a consequence, many of the children who struggle the hardest to learn effectively and thrive in school under normal circumstances are now finding it difficult, even impossible in some cases, to receive effective instruction, and they are experiencing interruptions in their learning that will need to be made up for.

The 2020–2021 school year is now underway, and with many schools remaining physically closed as the 2020–2021 year begins, there is more we need to understand and think through if we are to meet the crisis head-on. If students are to not see their temporary interruptions become sustained and are to regain lost ground, if teachers are to do their jobs effectively during and after the pandemic, and if our education system is to deliver on its excellence and equity goals during the next phases of this pandemic, it will be critical to identify which students are struggling most and how much learning and development they have lost out on, which factors are impeding their learning, what problems are preventing teachers from teaching these children, and, very critically, which investments must be made to address these challenges. For each child, this diagnostic assessment will deliver a unique answer, and the system will have to meet the child where he or she is. A strengthened system based on meeting children where they are and providing them with what they need will be key to lifting up children.

This report briefly reviews the relevant literature on educational settings that have features in common with how education is occurring during the crisis and emerging evidence on opportunity gaps during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to propose a three-pronged plan. The plan covers the three Rs: (immediate) relief for schools, (short-term) recovery, and (long-term) rebuilding for schools and the education system as a whole.

Children are not in their schools: What should we expect the consequences to be?

The current downturn is unique, and in most ways it is much more severe than any we have experienced in recent history. Almost overnight, the pandemic forced the cancellation of the traditional learning that takes place in school settings. It imposed substantial alterations in the “inputs” used to produce education—typically all the individual, family, teacher, school, etc., characteristics or determinants that affect “outcomes” like test scores and graduation rates. The pandemic has affected inputs at home too, as families and communities juggling health and work crises are less able to provide supports for learning at home. 1 Because there are no direct comparisons to past events or trends, we are without fully valid references for assessing the likely impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on children. There are, however, specific aspects of this crisis that have arisen in other contexts and been studied by education researchers, and we can derive from them some guidance on topics such as the loss of learning time and use of alternative learning modes.

Here we thus summarize research findings on aspects of education that appear most pertinent to the current crisis. We selected this set of studied conditions because they represent situations in which children are out of school in large numbers or using the unusual learning tools that have become typical in recent months. As discussed in the sections below, however, the sudden, severe, and universal nature of this crisis means that the current contexts in which students are currently “absent,” engaged in “remote learning,” or “homeschooled” are very different during the pandemic. However, while these findings are only partially applicable to the situations arising during this pandemic, if we dig into why various modes of learning worked or did not work well, it can help guide how to improve learning as education continues under the pandemic—and how to lift children up once schools recover their normal mode of operation. 2

Decreased learning time has likely impeded student learning

The school lockdowns that started in the spring of 2020 reduced instructional and learning time, which are known to impede student performance, with disparate impacts on different groups of students.

Research on time in school anticipates the consequences of having learning interrupted

International and U.S. data provide a benchmark of what can be considered usual educational progress over a given school year. Here we look at data on reading, math, and science test results of 15-year-old students in countries all over the world from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) run by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD 2009) and data on a cohort of U.S. children who entered kindergarten in 2010 for the 2010–2011 school year from Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–2011 (ECLS-K-2010–2011), run by the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 2010–2011). From these studies, it has been estimated how much children learn over a school year (to make the estimates of how far the group’s average score on skills were at the end of the year from their skill levels at the beginning of a year comparable across studies, we use standard deviations). On average, students advance in their academic performance by between about 0.3 standard deviations (SD) and 0.5 SD to 0.7 SD per year, depending on their age and subject/skill (OECD 2009; own analysis based on NCES 2010–2011). 3 The 2019–2020 school year was cut by at least one third relative to its normal length, which, assuming linear increments in growth over the year and no major other obstacles, suggests a loss of at least 0.1 SD across the board, and larger in earlier grades. These benchmarks will be helpful as we look at the various ways that students have seen their learning interrupted and disrupted this year, and they will continue to do so in 2020–2021.

It is useful as well to examine the research on the length of the school day, which has identified a causal relationship between the amount of (high-quality) instructional time and student performance (Figlio, Holden, and Özek 2018; Goodman 2014; Kidronl and Lindsay 2014; Jin Jez and Wassmer 2013; Marcotte and Hansen 2010). Challenges, though, arise in most evaluations because it is difficult to disentangle the effects of the length of the school day from the effects of starting the school day earlier, or switching to a four-day school week, or to year-round instruction. 4

Figlio, Holden, and Özek (2018) find that extending the school day by an hour to provide literacy instruction increases reading scores by 0.05 SD in elementary schools. Thompson (2019) explains that school days lost due to weather-related cancellations negatively impact performance (citing Marcotte 2007; Marcotte and Hemelt 2008), and that the positive impact of a four-day school week on performance is due to the longer school day, the increased flexibility, and the expanded total learning time over the year. He finds a negative effect (0.03–0.05 SD) of four-day school weeks on performance in Oregon, where weekly instructional time was lower in the districts adopting this model.

Research on summer learning losses and gains show that these vary widely

Another body of research that speaks to potential lost learning time arises from studies of so-called summer learning loss. In earlier research, researchers consistently found that test scores for low-income students would decrease over the summer, while test scores for better-off students would stay constant or increase slightly (Kuhfeld 2019 based on Cooper et al. 1996). 5 (This pattern has also been referred to in some studies as “slide” or “setback”). A limitation of this earlier research, however, was that the samples represented students who were in school in the 1970s and 1980s—and thus were exposed to very different circumstances than their current counterparts. 6

The findings from more recent evidence on summer learning are less consistent. One study reveals a substantial learning loss over the summer of about one to two months in reading and from one to three months of school-year learning in math (Kufheld 2019). Others find that, on average, the change in scores over the summer is near zero—which von Hippel, Workman, and Downey (2018) have renamed “summer slowdown” or “summer stagnation.” Researchers tend to agree, though, on the fact that there is a large variation in summer learning among students, and on the fact that gaps between students of differing socioeconomic status (SES)—specifically high- and low-SES students—widen (Atteberry and McEachin 2020; Kuhfeld 2019; von Hippel, Workman, and Downey 2018). 7

Multiple factors are used to explain the variation in these findings. In addition to differences in the educational resources that families provide children across the year, there are a large number of factors that appear to affect learning and are of particular relevance in the current context when trying to gauge the level of learning that has taken place during the pandemic: these findings on summer learning (loss or gain) reflect the great range of learning styles that students exhibit during the summer, or when schools are not in session, i.e., learning styles and outcome levels vary greatly because students have different innate individual characteristics and their learning and development is shaped by multiple factors and circumstances, in and out of school. This fact will be critically important when schools are back in session in the following two ways. First, when educators measure and assess children’s learning, they will need to consider that there are many ways that children learn and many types of knowledge that they acquire beyond math and reading. In other words, teaching and assessing children needs to be done within a framework that understands that each child may have learned differently and may have learned different things. Second, when designing how to best lift children up to make up for the extended out-of-school sessions and disruptions, it will be critical to create more personalized instruction and extend learning (see the policy section at the end of the report).

Research on chronic absenteeism reinforces the urgency of tending children at risk of becoming disengaged

The literature on student absenteeism also sheds light on the relationship between learning and instructional time. The evidence indicates that the negative relationship between absenteeism and student outcomes becomes more intense the more school days that a student misses. Using data from public schools in Chicago, Allensworth and Evans (2016) noted that each week of absence per semester in ninth grade is associated with a more than 20% decline in the probability of graduating from high school. With respect to performance, the disadvantage associated with absenteeism grows as the number of days missed increases: students who missed 1–2 school days, 3–4 days, 5–10 days, or more than 10 days scored, respectively, 0.10, 0.29, 0.39, and 0.64 SD below students who missed no school on mathematics performance for eighth graders (García and Weiss 2018; see Figure A reproduced below).

As this correlation between days absent and declining test scores indicates, there also seems to be a point after which the disadvantage becomes much larger. Indeed, researchers put a strong emphasis on “chronic absenteeism” as the critical indicator, as students who are chronically absent are at serious risk of falling behind in school, having lower grades and test scores, exhibiting behavioral issues, and, ultimately, dropping out (Balfanz 2017; U.S. Department of Education 2016; Gottfried and Ehrlich 2018). 8 Indeed, the risk of dropping out is of particular concern for students for whom the pandemic may act as the revolving door but one that ushers them away from the school period (IES 2020; Dorn et al. 2020; Stancati, Brody, and Fontdeglòria 2020; Torres 2020). The United Nations has recently defined this as a “generational catastrophe” (United Nations 2020).

A final point to highlight from this body of research is the range of reasons for, and thus strategies needed to reduce, student absenteeism. There are multiple reasons why students miss classes, as well as large differences in the absenteeism rate among both individual students and student subgroups. Those seeking to develop effective policies to reduce absenteeism, especially chronic absenteeism, understand the need to examine the root causes—academic disengagement, socioemotional distress, economic challenges, health problems, and others. Initiatives that have been rigorously evaluated show that it is critical both to identify the specific reason(s) why a student is missing school and to respond with targeted, relevant supports. 9 This point is particularly relevant in the current context, in which so many students are frequently absent for a variety of reasons that may be difficult for teachers and schools to know or address.

The more frequently students miss school, the worse their performance : Performance disadvantage experienced by eighth graders who missed school relative to students with perfect attendance in the last month, by number of days missed (standard deviations)

The data below can be saved or copied directly into Excel.

The data underlying the figure.

Notes: Data reflect performance in the 2015 NAEP mathematics assessment. Estimates are obtained after controlling for race/ethnicity, poverty status, gender, IEP status, and ELL status; for the racial/ethnic composition of the student’s school; and for the share of students in the school who are eligible for FRPL (a proxy for school socioeconomic composition). All estimates are statistically significant at p < 0.01.

Source:  EPI analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress microdata, 2015. Chart adapted from Figure A in García and Weiss 2018.

Copy the code below to embed this chart on your website.

Of course, the various approaches examined by the research on learning time assume two groups of students: those who are missing some learning time in school and those who are not. (In general, they compare “treatment” versus “nontreatment” groups to estimate impacts.) This comparison does not hold during the lockdown. Instead, all students are missing out on in-class instruction, and instead have been attending school remotely via various online arrangements that in some ways resemble homeschooling or online education. As discussed below, the evidence about homeschooling and remote education presents serious limitations, given their very different context, but nonetheless uncovers many issues that we will need to address in post-pandemic education.

Lacking the needed requirements for effectiveness, remote and alternative learning and online instruction during the pandemic has likely affected teaching and learning

The two main tools for education available to children during the lockdowns have been remote and alternative learning and, at least technically, a homeschooling environment. Evidence on these two modes make clear the conditions that would be needed in order for children to effectively learn under these conditions and for teachers to effectively teach under these conditions. As the following subsections show, most of these conditions have been lacking in recent months.

Research on effective online learning indicates it is critical that students have the tools and the experience

Online learning means, first and fundamentally, the shift from face-to-face learning to the use of devices of various sorts to deliver that learning. Successful online learning thus requires that students (and teachers) be familiar and proficient in their uses of those devices for learning. Of course, even more fundamentally, it requires that the devices exist. Here we discuss the needs of students.

We have limited knowledge about how much and for which purposes students have used devices and technology at home up to this point. An estimated 1.5 million K–12 students participated in some online learning in 2010 (Bettinger and Loeb 2017, based on Wicks 2010). 10 Figure B uses PISA data from 2018 for the United States to show that, while students spent extensive time online prior to the pandemic, that time was heavily spent on social activities, browsing or seeking information, playing games, or accessing email. Students spent less time on educational activities, such as school work or communicating with other students or teachers. These findings suggest that over the past few months as children transitioned suddenly to online learning, they did so without necessarily having the practice or experience to learn well online, and that the transition required them to shift their device-use habits from leisure to studying. What we also know is that remote learning demands that children ignore the distractions that are now in front of their faces all the time and to which they, like all of us, are naturally drawn. 11

What activities do 15-year-olds use digital devices for out of school and how often do they use them? : Frequency with which 15-year-olds use digital devices out of school for different activities, 2018

Note: Shares are based on the average use of digital devices out of school for selected activities under each type of activity.

Note: Shares are based on the average use of digital devices out of school for selected activities under each type of activity. “Social networks” includes the use of digital devices out of school for chatting online and for social networks (for example, Facebook); “Surfing” includes browsing the internet for fun videos (e.g., YouTube) and for downloading music, films, games or software from the Internet; “Emailing” includes using email; “Seeking information” includes reading news on the internet and obtaining practical information from the internet; “Games” includes playing one-player games and playing collaborative online games; “School work” references browsing the internet for school work (e.g., for preparing an essay or presentation, following up on lessons, downloading or uploading or browsing material from a school's website, and doing homework on a computer; and “Group communication” includes the use of digital devices out of school for  communication with other students about school work or for communication with teachers and submission of assignments.

Source : EPI analysis using Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) data for the U.S. (OECD 2018).

In addition to assessing quality and time, the literature on the use of devices assumes that all students have access to appropriate digital devices—i.e., it assumes no digital divide. As has been extensively documented, however, that is not the case. For example, García, Weiss, and Engdahl (2020) show that nearly 16% of eighth graders, or one in six who participated in the National Center for Education Statistics’ National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for 2017, do not have a desktop or laptop computer at home on which to follow their classes. And a small fraction of eighth graders, 4.2%, lack home internet, the other essential instrument for remote study. (It’s important to note that the survey questions do not ask about the quality or coverage of the internet access, or the number of computers in the house, and that the information predates the pandemic’s arrival. Devices once available for homework may now be shared with siblings or be used by parents for work. 12 )

A final caveat is that there is still limited evidence on the effectiveness of online education. A critical aspect highlighted by Bettinger and Loeb (2017) is that online courses are difficult, especially for the students who are least prepared. 13 Research on performance of children attending virtual charter schools confirms the importance of self-engagement and parental supervision for success with this mode of education. Also, selection into these schools (students disengaged with  traditional schools enter these schools); worse inputs (teacher-to-student ratios, one-on-one instruction, etc.) than in traditional schools; and other features of these schools translated into negative effects on performance. 14 Later in the report we discuss the requirements for successful online education from the perspective of teachers.

Research on home schooling makes clear that it works well for students under narrow circumstances

According to the NCES, close to 1.7 million students, or about 3.3% of K–12 students, were home-schooled in 2016 (NCES 2018). 15 Parents who home-schooled their children cited the following as the most important reasons for doing so: concerns about the school environment, such as safety, drugs, or negative peer pressure; dissatisfaction with academic instruction at available schools; and a desire to provide religious instruction (Grady 2017).

In terms of its effectiveness, performance of home-schooled students is generally higher than that of their non-home-schooled peers. A review of 14 studies found consistent positive results in 11, mixed results in another study (some positive and some negative results), zero impact in another study, and neutral and negative effects in a final one. The estimate of the effects (based on eight of the 14 studies for which this information was available) ranged from very small (0.05 SD) to extremely large (1.13 SD) (Ray 2017a). Using percentile metrics, home-schooled students scored, on average, at or above the 84th percentile in all subject areas (Ray 2017b). 16

While these findings may look promising, however, it is important to keep in mind two key considerations when interpreting these results. First, many more resources are devoted to home-schooled children, so they would be expected to perform higher, all else equal. Also, higher performance among home-schooled students may be due more to their selection into the category than the “treatment”/type of education they receive. 17

Belfield (2004), for example, suggests that the improved outcomes among students who are home-schooled could be due to flexible instruction (without age-tracking), small “class sizes,” and dedicated parent-teachers who should make home schooling more effective than other forms of education. He also notes that “educational outcomes may be skewed toward those on which the family has competence, and educational progress may be slow if there is no formative assessment or peer-pressure to learn (although home-school parents may exert more pressure or have higher expectations as a result of their supervision).” More recent studies suggest that parameters such as structured or unstructured instruction may also be important drivers of the results (Neuman and Guterman 2016).

These underlying factors could be particularly relevant in the current crisis. Many of the same stark distinctions between effective and ineffective online education and home schooling would apply to the “ emergency remote learning” done at home under a pandemic: students who entered the pandemic better off and those whose parents have been trained in instruction or have a particular ability teach would likely perform better than students whose parents have not been able to develop (or as successful at developing) those skills. In general, parents who were suddenly thrust into the role of home-schoolers had no such preparation; most are taking on that new task while juggling the full range of other home-care responsibilities as well as, in many cases, full-time remote jobs. That said, students whose parents have more formal education likely also have an advantage in this context—as they do in nonpandemic contexts—further compounding the disparities that low-income students are accruing (see, for example, Dinarski 2020; Rothstein 2020; Belfield 2004; Goldstein 2020a). 18

Evidence on online instruction emphasizes that teachers also need training and supports

As the discussion of successful versus unsuccessful remote and online learning reveals, there are multiple requirements needed for online education to work as intended and deliver positive results. Just as the requirements for effective student learning have largely not been met during the pandemic, the same is true for effective online instruction.

First, there was little time to design and develop instructional tools for wide deployment. 19 As a recent analysis of research on the subject details,

Online education, including online teaching and learning, has been studied for decades. Numerous research studies, theories, models, standards, and evaluation criteria focus on quality online learning, online teaching, and online course design. What we know from research is that effective online learning results from careful instructional design and planning, using a systematic model for design and development. The design process and the careful consideration of different design decisions have an impact on the quality of the instruction. And it is this careful design process that will be absent in most cases in these emergency shifts. 20 (Hodges et al. 2020)

Moreover, it is hard to plan and to design effective instruction for the COVID-19 era when teachers and school districts don’t have a framework (or even the right language) to accommodate what they are doing. As Hodges et al. (2020) emphasized when exploring how colleges and universities were coping with the sudden and rapid shift to remote learning (in March 2020), understanding the current circumstances required distinguishing between online or remote learning generally. For our current context, they suggested the term “emergency remote teaching,” which helps signal the uncertainties and unknowns that could affect teachers’ instruction.

Second, weak systems of support, including lack of professional development on how to integrate computers into instruction, have left teachers less than optimally equipped to teach during the pandemic. 21

Slightly over two in three public school teachers report having participated in professional development activities on the use of computers for instruction in the past 12 months, as shown in Figure C , based on García and Weiss 2019 using data from the 2011–2012 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). 22 But those who participated in these activities were not broadly satisfied with them. Among these teachers, one in four found the activity very useful, with about one in three finding it either not useful or just somewhat useful. And teachers who participate in such activities have to surmount barriers to do so, as access to work time and supports to participate in professional development are very limited. Among all teachers, only half have released time from teaching to participate in professional development (50.9 percent), and less than a third are reimbursed for conferences or workshop fees (28.2 percent). 23

Few teachers are well-trained in using computers for instruction

Shares of teachers who said they had training in the past 12 months on the use of computers for instruction, shares of teachers reporting usefulness of training they received in using computers for instruction.

Notes: Data are for teachers in public noncharter schools. The bottom figure shows shares of teachers who answered “very useful,” “useful,” “somewhat useful,” or “not useful” when asked, for the specific professional development activity, “Overall, how useful were these activities to you?”

Source : 2011–2012 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) microdata from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Adapted from García and Weiss 2019.

The limited training pre-pandemic is compounded by the limited technical support during the pandemic. Most K–12 teachers did not contemplate online instruction until being forced to do so by the pandemic. As a result, teachers have had to come up with a variety of options on the fly, from assigning daily or weekly coursework that students turn in online to full classes conducted via Zoom and a range of approaches in between. We can expect that some of these online strategies launched during the COVID-19 crisis did not lead to optimal outcomes.

Third, inadequate systems for tracking attendance online leave teachers in the dark on a key “input” of education: student learning time. Even the most well-trained teacher when it comes to online instruction won’t be effective if his or her students are not online and following instruction. At the most basic level, schools are trying to assess how broadly and consistently students are interacting with teachers and receiving instruction. One ambitious effort has been in Southern Florida, where districts rigorously track attendance and contact parents when students are absent. Quickly recognizing that relying on student log-ins failed to capture much of the activity taking place, districts in Palm Beach County and the Florida Keys ask teachers to log student participation in online forums and completion of assigned work. In general, schools in this system are seeing attendance that is only modestly lower than normal, with the biggest drop-offs among the youngest and oldest students (who, respectively, need parents’ help to get online and are least motivated to take part). However, while the system helps monitor potential race- and class-based disparities in attendance, concerns remain (Bakeman 2020). Attesting the importance of attendance, some school districts that have chosen online instruction for the beginning of the 2020–2021 school year are making registering attendance compulsory through their platforms. 24

Fourth, the emotional bonds critical to any kind of learning are just as important for remote learning or home schooling but hard to attain in the current crisis. Even more so than college professors, K–12 teachers also need to retain emotional bonds with their students, especially younger ones, that can be extremely difficult to attain remotely. Many of these teachers are also parents and so must juggle their children’s activities, such as helping their children with homework, with their own job responsibilities. And teachers working with particularly vulnerable students face additional challenges as some of these students lack access to computers to work or even enough internet bandwidth (see barriers to access described below).

The “whole-child” development that occurs at school was also interrupted during the pandemic

For children, going to school is not just about learning reading and math: it’s also about developing the social and emotional skills critical to succeeding in life. School closures eliminated some of these critically important aspects of school beyond academic activity, such as the development that occurs through personal relationships among students and between students and teachers, after-school activities that support children’s mental and emotional well-being and skills development, and a sense of routine. In addition to the cessation of their normal activities at school, during the pandemic, children have lost in-person contact with relatives and friends and have witnessed many sobering daily life realities, from parents who may be unsure where the next meal or rent payment will come from or who are working risky jobs in order to make ends meet, to family members fearing that loved ones are in danger of serious illness or even death. Overall, the crisis has helped highlight the importance of other skills that are often overlooked in the school context, but that should be nurtured as part of going to school and that will merit more attention in the aftermath of the pandemic.

A range of skills often referred to as socioemotional or noncognitive skills—including creativity, tolerance, persistence, empathy, resilience, self-control, and time management—have long been neglected in education policy, which has tended to follow the so-called cognitive hypothesis (Tough 2012; Ravitch 2011, 2020; Rothstein, Jacobsen, and Wilder 2008). 25 These noncognitive skills are deemed lower priorities in academic contexts—including skills that children typically lagging behind could have an edge in—and their integration in the usual components of learning and teaching is far from standard. As a result, when decisions about curriculum, standards, and evaluation are made, socioemotional skills tend to be the last on the priority list and the first on the chopping block, while testing highly on math and reading—skills that tend to be correlated with having more educated parents and higher household incomes—is richly rewarded in school, furthering “deficit” narratives (faulty messages about who can and cannot succeed in school, and about what succeeding in school means).

For sure, parents and teachers have long been attuned to the broad range of life skills that their students need to develop, but this crisis has sharpened that focus. The sudden need for children across the board to adapt to uncertain and rapidly changing circumstances and to cope with new levels of trauma make it all the more urgent to address this disparity between what parents and teachers understand about the breadth of skills critical to child development and systems that focus on testing a narrow set of cognitive skills. For example, resilience—the ability to adapt to and thrive in different situations—along with persistence and self-control have gained new recognition as important life skills during these months of the pandemic. Children transitioned to online learning overnight and have had to follow classes without the direct supervision of the teacher or the interactions with other students, which requires a higher than usual degree of self-control and persistence. Creativity is another skill that likely is serving children well during this crisis: Students who find new ways to keep themselves engaged and to make forced isolation productive are benefiting, while their peers who are easily bored are losing ground.

As we slowly move forward during the pandemic and we return to “normal,” it is going to be more important than ever that we do not let this recognition of whole-child development fall away and revert to a narrow focus on academics. Doing so would cause harm on several fronts. First, it would ignore and potentially exacerbate the trauma that many children are experiencing. Second, it would put low-income students even further behind—both by weighing heavily the areas of learning that they have been least able to access and by failing to recognize the natural variation in students’ strengths across a broader range of skills, or “patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behavior” (Borghans et al. 2008). And finally it would miss a unique opportunity to better balance what schools can do. Noncognitive skills are demonstrably as important as other cognitive skills when it comes to ensuring that children will thrive both in school and later in life. Moreover, since academic and socioemotional skills develop in tandem, and in recognition of the added challenges during the pandemic, it will be more critical to approach skills development holistically and make teaching and nurturing the whole child central, rather than marginal (see García 2014 and García and Weiss 2016 for a summary of this literature).

Recessions, natural disasters, and pandemics disrupt learning the most when there is no contingency planning

As noted above, prior research on circumstances somewhat similar to the shutdown during the pandemic is important to review—findings from this research may not be directly applicable due to substantial differences in the circumstances, but understanding the mechanisms through which learning occurs under these circumstances, as well as how to be prepared for the upheaval, is critical to informing our way out of this current crisis and our readiness for future ones. This is particularly the case regarding evidence from the research on “education in emergencies,” which examines the provision of education in emergency and post-emergency situations due to pandemics, other natural disasters, and conflicts and wars, generally in poor countries around the world. 26 The practical recommendations from this field have been largely ignored in the education policy arena until now, because they have not seemed to apply in the rich countries. 27 However, there are some exceptions overall and for the United States in particular, including cases of natural disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Maria.

The following lessons can be extracted from this research: Emergencies lead to undeniably negative impacts on educational processes and outcomes; the most disadvantaged population subgroups experience the largest, and most lasting, negative consequences; and contingency plans—absent during the ongoing pandemic—are of critical importance. Providing education, often made available because of these plans, leads to positive outcomes to children and societies. Moreover, emergencies tend to strain existing resources, adding additional challenges.

We summarize here a few key findings. For example, by the end of the school year following the devastation that Hurricanes Katrina (August 2005) and Rita (September 2005) brought to New Orleans, the performance of students who were displaced dropped by 0.07 to 0.22 standard deviations relative to what their performance would have been without the hurricanes (this range includes an average across subjects and grades calculated by Pane et al. [2008] and estimates by Sacerdote [2012] on math and reading). Principals reported that students who were displaced were judged more likely than students in the control groups to engage in negative behaviors, such as fighting, violating school rules, arguing, bullying, playing in isolation, and eating in isolation, and more likely to need mental health counseling; they were also judged less likely to engage in positive behaviors, such as participating in before- or after-school clubs or activities, school-sponsored social events outside the school day, or sports teams (Pane et al. 2008). Sacerdote (2012) also found longer-run effects, including rates of college attendance that were one to four percentage points lower relative to trends measured in cohorts not affected by the natural disasters. 28 Importantly, Özek (2020) finds that some of the negative effects of disasters on students mostly vanish after the first year when there is an “adequate compensatory allocation of resources.” Among the resources he cites as critical to compensating the negative effects of emergencies on learning are teachers—specifically ensuring that the most effective teachers are working with the most vulnerable students. Although, as noted, Özek (2020) found that first-year effects tend to decline, effects persist in the second year in high-poverty schools and in low-performing schools.

Natural disasters and recessions also create economic shocks. Research exploring the consequences of recessions such as the Great Recession sheds light on ways today’s economic crisis is likely affecting children’s education. For example, Irons (2009) discusses the ways that “unemployment and income losses can reduce educational achievement by threatening early childhood nutrition; reducing families’ abilities to provide a supportive learning environment (including adequate health care, summer activities, and stable housing); and by forcing a delay or abandonment of college plans.” Shafiq (2010) also discusses potential negative effects from economic shocks, such as long hours worked by parents, which “reduces the time that parents can devote to assisting their child with homework, reading, and other educational activities.”

Economic shocks in turn lead to cuts in education budgets. Jackson, Wigger, and Xiong (2018) show that spending cuts enacted during the last recession had detrimental effects on education outcomes: the per-pupil spending cuts that states made during the Great Recession (by roughly 7% overall, by over 10% in seven states, and by more than 20% in two states) reduced college enrollment and test scores, particularly for children in poor neighborhoods, and the impacts of these cuts were greater for Black and white students than for Latino students. Jackson, Wigger, and Xiong (2018) estimated that the impacts of such large-scale and persistent education budget cuts are very significant: a $1,000 reduction in per-pupil spending led to a reduction in test scores of about 0.045 standard deviations and a roughly 3 percentage point decline in the share of high school students who go to college. Often, recovery after a shock never fully happens, as explored in more detail later in our report.

The education-in-emergencies research underscores that “contingency plans” are critical to dealing with emergency and post-emergency situations. Specifically during crises arising from war, conflicts, natural disasters, and pandemics, children are displaced often as homes, neighborhoods, and schools are destroyed—and this may threaten survival or inflict some level of trauma upon children. 29 A certain level of preparedness is critical in order to provide an effective response at the onset of a crisis, and to “prepare, cope, and recover” (UN IASC 2007, 2015; Anderson 2020; Azzi-Hucktigran and Shmis 2020).

Although it is expected that countries and their education agencies have a plan to deal with short-run disruptions (i.e., snow days, flu season, etc.), such expectations are uncommon when it comes to contingency plans for larger, longer emergencies. Most information including guidance on planning for education in emergencies comes from several international organizations involved in major, longer-term emergencies. One exception is a reference in a White House publication reviewing assistance provided after Katrina; these words should be heeded in the aftermath of this pandemic:

Individual local and state plans, as well as relatively new plans created by the federal government since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, failed to adequately account for widespread or simultaneous catastrophes.…The President made clear that we must do better in the future. The objective of this report is to identify and establish a roadmap on how to do that, and lay the groundwork for transforming how this Nation—from every level of government to the private sector to individual citizens and communities—pursues a real and lasting vision of preparedness. To get there will require significant change to the status quo, to include adjustments to policy, structure, and mindset. (The White House 2006)

As has been evident in the past few months, there was no national education plan in place to deal with medium-run or long-run emergencies for the scale of COVID-19. Existing plans (as indicated, outlined by international organizations) offer “contingency planning tools” to ensure appropriate arrangements are made to analyze the impact of potential crises and to respond in a timely and effective way. The strategies suggested are characterized as flexible learning approaches, which reflect the reality that the circumstances and needs vary widely. Continued provision of education is expected to support both learning and the psychosocial well-being of both students and educators (Anderson 2020). Some strategies aim at promoting cognitive, emotional, and social development through structured, meaningful, and creative activities in a school setting or in informal learning spaces that replace the unavailable traditional schools. In other words, these programs are designed to provide support similar to that provided by good school systems on a regular basis. 30

Clearly, there are potentially relevant aspects of research on emergency education that, where emergency education resembles the COVID-19 situation, could help policymakers identify what needs to be done immediately and going forward to help schools and students recover. Before we discuss these, we devote much of the next section to assessing how this crisis is expected to have worsened impacts on vulnerable subgroups, and to exacerbate inequities overall.

How is COVID-19 exacerbating opportunity gaps (and what steps are schools taking in response)?

The COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated the well-documented opportunity and enrichment gaps that put low-income students at a disadvantage relative to their better-off peers. By opportunity and enrichment gaps, we mean gaps in access to the conditions or resources that enhance learning and development between low-income students and their higher-income peers (with low-income students less likely than their better-off peers to access these conditions and resources). Before we delve into the details, it is important to state that this should not come as a surprise. The baseline operating status of the education system in the United States before the pandemic had severe problems with regard to equity. Put simply, as a nation, we have structured the education system to deliver the disparate outcomes that it delivers, i.e., outcomes that differ by social class, minority status, and other student characteristics: “It’s not a coincidence or accident” (ASI 2020). 31 Here we briefly describe a few of the gaps that are most directly relevant to students’ abilities to learn during the pandemic: basic needs, economic relief, and support for families and health. We also discuss how the pandemic has exacerbated the limitations of standardized assessments, especially when used to measure performance gaps in education.

There are two important caveats to this discussion. First, any recent statistics are preliminary (and likely quite conservative). Second, there are, of course, other gaps that we are not able include here—for example, in wealth through homeownership or toxic stress linked to structural racism (Lerner 2020; Morsy and Rothstein 2019)—but that are interacting with and compounding those factors that we are able to examine. As leading education and civil rights organizations summarizing the breadth of the opportunities and enrichment gaps note, “the transition to educating students in their homes or shelters has exposed and exacerbated inequities in education, food security, and housing that have long existed” (AFT, LDF, and Leadership Conference 2020). We add health and mental health to that list, and we emphasize the critical role schools play as part of the social safety net and as the first responders to children’s basic needs (Kirk 2019; Weiss and Reville 2019; ASI 2020).

The pandemic has exacerbated opportunity gaps associated with uneven access to food and nutrition, shelter, health insurance, and financial relief measures

The disruption caused by the pandemic and the interruption of the normal operation of schools continue to pose barriers to meeting the most basic of children’s needs (access to food and nutrition and shelter). Families’ resources also have been largely impacted by the economic downturn that followed the disruption. There is overwhelming evidence that low-income children and their families have much less access to nutrition and shelter, that children of color and children from immigrant families are disproportionately affected, and that this lack of access has palpable consequences for their development. It is no secret that the inequities are built into our economic and policy setups, and that these inequities affect children’s development as well. The school shutdowns and economic crisis caused by the pandemic are exposing and exacerbating these challenges.

Evidence on expanded opportunity gaps due to lack of access to food and nutrition

In 2013, as the United States was still recovering from the recession of 2007–2008, half of all public-school students were eligible for free or reduced-price school meals (SEF 2015; Carnoy and García 2017). In other words, years into the economic recovery, a record share of one in two public-school students lived in a household that was unable, absent government support, to consistently feed them. With millions of adults newly out of work due to the economic shock of the coronavirus pandemic—and federal relief insufficient, slow, and difficult to access—many more children are now in food-insecure homes (i.e., they have limited or uncertain access to adequate food, as measured by responses to survey questions about access to food).

Using data from the new Household Pulse Survey (HHPS) from the U.S. Census Bureau, 29.8% of respondents with children were food insecure (Schanzenbach and Tomeh 2020). Bauer (2020) estimates that there were almost 14 million children living in a household characterized by child food insecurity during the week of June 19–23, 2020, “5.6 times as many as in all of 2018 (2.5 million) and 2.7 times as many as during peak of the Great Recession in 2008 (5.1 million).” 32

The data about food insecurity is backed up by news reports showing record levels of visits to food banks during the early part of the pandemic and the shortage of resources to meet the demand for food. According to Feeding America, one in seven Americans relied on food pantries before the pandemic, with demand doubling or tripling in many places in the first weeks of the crisis. By late April, less than two months into the pandemic, food pantries in Chicago and Houston were almost out of staples, and one third of New York City’s food banks had closed due to lack of supplies, donations, and/or volunteers (Conlin, Baertlein, and Walljasper 2020).

Schools continuously tried to fill the void to the extent they could, with buildings that were closed for instruction reopening as places to collect, prepare, and distribute meals. Some schools were serving breakfast or dinner or are giving out weekend meal “packs” for students, and many provide meals for older and younger siblings as well. For example, schools in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, served an average of 8,000 meals—three per day—for the first 39 days of the pandemic, hitting the one million mark on May 12. District Superintendent George Arlotto said of the importance of supporting his students, “We know if we’re not serving meals they might not be getting fed, at least certainly not three meals a day” (Streicher 2020).

However, difficulty matching meals to parents’ schedules and lack of sufficient transportation to deliver meals limited many districts’ ability to serve the students they normally serve. Across the Denver metro region, district capacity during the first month of school closure starting in March spanned a wide range, serving just 12% of students in the largest and lowest-income district, Denver; 16% in Jeffco; 34% in Aurora; and 57% in the Adams 12 Five Star Schools district (Meltzer, Robles, and LaMarr LeMee 2020).

Across the country overall, the networks set up to provide meals left out a large proportion of children. “Only 61.0% of parents whose families received free or reduced-price meals during the school year reported receiving school meal assistance during closures,” noted Waxman, Gupta, and Karpman (2020), who also found that 17.2% of parents living with children under age 19 reported receiving charitable food in May 2020.

Evidence on expanded opportunity gaps due to lack of access to shelter

In addition to children who are especially vulnerable during the pandemic because they rely on schools for basic food and nutrition are children who are homeless. Data show that before the pandemic began, large numbers of students in districts across the country were homeless. 33 For this numerous group of students, getting an education remotely is unthinkable. With millions of adults newly out of work due the economic shock of the coronavirus pandemic—and eviction bans expired or expiring in localities around the country—unstable housing is putting the challenges of educating homeless students into starker relief. Some school districts are paying attention to the needs of their homeless students. In San Jose, California, for example, some schools are expected to be open for counseling and in-person instruction for homeless and special needs students (Lambert, Burke, and Tadayon 2020). The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH 2020) has issued some general guidelines as to how school districts can work with local public health officials and community partners to identify temporary, safe, and stable shelter options for families or youth experiencing homelessness who must quarantine. The agency also provides guidance on ensuring homeless children’s access to remote education while schools are closed.

Evidence on expanded opportunity gaps due to unstable employment and lack of access to financial relief and health insurance

Loss of work has hit families across the board, as initial unemployment shocks in the travel and entertainment industries expanded to shut down restaurants, retail, and even some of the health care sector shortly after the pandemic started. While some of those jobs have returned, we still have extremely elevated rates of unemployment and loss of health insurance. And low-income parents are in particularly tough situations because of the low-paying and unstable nature of their jobs. Those who lost already-precarious non-standard jobs (like “gig” work and other independent contracting work) don’t qualify for unemployment insurance (and many had trouble accessing emergency unemployment benefits because of outdated state systems). Further, many workers around the country who had job-related health insurance lost it just when they needed it most (Cooper and Worker 2020; Bivens and Zipperer 2020). While Congress passed relief measures earlier in the pandemic, some key components of relief—such as the extended unemployment benefits—have expired, and further measures are at this writing stalled in Congress (Gould 2020a; Shierholz 2020). Not granting the needed economic relief and not granting more support for families is going to add to the challenges of parents who have dual responsibilities of supervising children’s learning and putting food on the table and providing them with health protection.

Evidence on expanded opportunity gaps due to health challenges for families

The pandemic obviously also raises the possibility that children’s families and children themselves are grappling with illness and even death. Research shows that the health risks are higher for workers in low-paying professions than for workers in high-paying professions because the former are much less likely to be able to work remotely (Gould and Shierholz 2020). Moreover, essential workers—such as warehouse stockers, home health aides, and delivery and trash truck drivers—now risk contracting COVID-19 while still struggling to survive on low wages. 34

Thus it is not surprising that this crisis has also resulted in an increase in the number of children who face the serious illness or death of a relative. It seems likely that a large share of low-income students and Black and Hispanic students now resuming schooling have suffered major trauma. With Black students losing family members in disproportionate numbers, the pandemic is exacting a particular toll on these communities (Harper 2020). For example, in Georgia, where African Americans make up just 30% of the state’s population, they represent over 80% of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and more than 50% of deaths (Weiner 2020). When New York City was the epicenter of the pandemic in the United States, the heavily white borough of Manhattan had a hospitalization rate of 3.31% and a death rate of 1.22%—the city’s lowest—despite having the oldest residents of any of the city’s five boroughs, while the heavily low-income, African American borough of the Bronx had the highest rates, 2.24% and 6.34%, roughly double those of Manhattan (Wadhera et al. 2020). 35

Evidence on expanded opportunity gaps due to health challenges for students

These same groups of students—Black and Hispanic students, and low-income students— suffer academically due to physical and mental health problems that are less likely to be addressed in a timely and consistent manner (Ghandour et al. 2018; Menas 2019; Morsy and Rothstein 2019). Many rely on school-based health clinics, a critical resource that is no longer available in schools where teaching is not occurring on site. Earlier in the pandemic when access to doctors’ offices was severely limited (with many serving only urgent cases) and hospitals were overwhelmed (and perceived as unsafe), problems from toothaches and ear infections to emotional breakdowns went untreated and, in many cases, became much worse. When the state of Florida shut down in late March, for example, it banned all nonemergency medical and dental services, leading to questions as to whether even check-ups conducted prior to procedures were permitted (Boca News Now 2020). 36

With both physical and mental health on the line for stressed-out students, school districts are trying to leverage newly available resources to compensate. These include additional Medicaid resources provided in the first federal COVID-19 relief legislation, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act. That act temporarily increases the federal Medicaid match to states that agree to maintain current eligibility standards and cost-sharing requirements and limit disenrollment. Relaxed guidelines enable states to use some of that money for telehealth services without additional authorization, so students can see doctors remotely as needed. The federal CARES Act that was enacted in March provides $13.2 billion for K–12 schools as part of Title I funding, and it includes several aspects of student health in allowable uses. The Los Angeles Unified School District has used some of that funding to launch a mental health hotline for students. Superintendent Austi Beutner notes, “Their world has been turned upside down and we need to make sure students have the support they need [during this crisis]” (Jordan 2020a).

All of the above challenges, of course, mean more stress. And for children who were already living in cramped and less-than-ideal situations, having all family members in the house makes the regular challenges of daily life much greater. Increased incidences of abuse due to confinement, stress, and lack of access to outside support further affirm the urgency of addressing the stressors that are affecting families and, in turn, their children’s development and ability to learn (Stratford 2020; Greeley 2020; Tolerance Trauma 2020).

The pandemic has exacerbated opportunity gaps in teaching and learning

It is in these challenging contexts of economic insecurity and housing instability that students (and teachers) were suddenly transitioning to remote learning, adding another class- and race-based disparity in education opportunity: the “digital divide.” The “digital divide” refers to the fact that some children do not have access to the devices or internet services needed to operate online—and there is a double digital divide that arises from the fact that low-income children and Black and Hispanic children are more likely to lack this access (García, Weiss, and Engdahl 2020; Tinubu Ali and Herrera 2020). Research on the digital divide counters the idea that all children can access online instruction and the education system shifted to online education. Given the resurgence of COVID-19 cases over the summer and the growing number of school districts announcing plans to begin the 2020–2021 school year totally remotely, the divide would only continue in the imminent future. Some low-income families are struggling to obtain a computer or other device for each child, with a share of families lacking an internet connection enabling children to do assigned work online or a quiet space to do solo work (let alone attend the Zoom calls that classrooms are now conducting; see Hodges et al. 2020).

Our analysis of data from the 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress shows that digital devices are not universally available or used at home for school-related purposes. Our findings are presented in Figure D . Specifically, 84.4% of eighth graders overall, and 76.3% of poor eighth graders have a laptop or computer, which means that about 16% of eighth graders and 25% of poor eighth graders have no desktop or laptop at home. In addition, only about half of eighth graders had experience using the internet at home frequently for homework, with a much larger share of non-poor students (56.1%) than poor students (46.4%) accustomed to using the home internet frequently for homework (a gap of 10 percentage points). (We define poor students as students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch programs, and non-poor students as students who are ineligible for those programs.) 37

Not all students are set up for online learning, and students who are poor have less access to key tools : Share of eighth-graders with access to online learning, by income level and tool, 2017

Notes:  Poor students are students eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch programs. Non-poor students are students who are ineligible for those programs. Frequent use of internet at home for homework means every day or almost every day. Students’ teachers were either “already proficient” in, “have not” received training in, or “had received training” in “software applications” and “integrating computers into instruction” in the last two years.

Source:  2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), eighth-grade reading sample microdata from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. Chart adapted from Figure D in García, Weiss, and Engdahl 2020.

Our analysis of 2017 NAEP data also shows that teachers are not universally prepared to teach online, as also shown in Figure D. Just about a third (32.5%) of eighth graders overall have teachers who consider themselves proficient in using software applications, and only a fifth (19.3%) have teachers who consider themselves proficient in integrating computers into instruction. The shares of students overall with teachers who don’t consider themselves proficient but who have received some training in applications and in computer use in instruction are higher (43.4% and 69.2% respectively). Yet that still leaves nearly a quarter (100% minus 43.4% minus 32.5%, or 24.1%) of eighth graders with teachers who are neither proficient in nor trained in software applications, and close to one in eight (100% minus 69.2% minus 19.3%, or 11.5%) with teachers who are neither proficient in nor trained in how to integrate computers into instruction.

A Southern Education Foundation report on class- and race-based disparities during the COVID-19 crisis finds similar disparities in access to the resources needed for online learning. It notes that nearly one in five African American children and a slightly greater share of children in low-income households have no access to the internet at home (Tinubu Ali and Herrera 2020). These disparities mirror those reported by superintendents who responded to a survey by AASA, the School Superintendents Association, in late March as schools across the country were closing down (Rogers and Ellerson Ng 2020). 38 Numerous news outlets reporting on the digital divide have also noted these disparities by race and ethnicity (for example, see Kamenetz 2020b). School shutdowns and associated internet- and device-access challenges have been occurring at a time when many of the public libraries that have been a resource for families without computers or home internet access are closed due to the pandemic.

School districts are trying hard to take these challenges into consideration and to make up for the large disparities they know their students face. Some, like Montgomery County, Maryland, are sending home Chromebooks and tablets, prioritizing students who are eligible for free- and reduced-price lunches or are known not to have devices at home (St. George 2020). Others, like New York City, are lending iPads to students who need them (NYC Department of Education 2020). All of this takes time, however, and many districts lack the resources. (Montgomery County provided paper packets to students for the first few weeks of closures, until it could distribute the Chromebooks.) Some districts are making online work optional, as a way to not further disadvantage students who physically cannot do it, but of course that can weaken schools’ capacity to continue to instruct.

Tinubu Ali and Herrera (2020) also report on dozens of innovative strategies districts have employed to overcome some of these disparities. These strategies include deploying roving school buses that add Wi-Fi coverage in South Carolina, the purchase of thousands of additional hotspots in Texas, and two months of free internet in Caldo Parish in Louisiana thanks to a partnership between Comcast and the local NAACP. (Comcast is also providing free access in Montgomery County, Maryland.) In Tennessee, Staples is printing and distributing printed materials free of charge to students who cannot afford the cost, and public schools in Jackson, Mississippi, are developing a package of learning materials that are paper-based or online and shared via the state’s educational programming television channels. South Carolina’s public television network is providing free virtual professional development sessions on home learning and technology best practices. In Miami-Dade, one of the most diverse school districts in the country, instructions for families are provided in English, Spanish, and Creole.

The pandemic has exacerbated the limitations of standardized tests

Digital divides and disparities in parental resources are fueling the growth of opportunity gaps that likely will make it harder for disadvantaged students to engage with their schoolwork and easier for these students to lose interest in school. If so, the pandemic will also widen performance gaps between disadvantaged students and their better-off peers and increase graduation and school dropout rates among disadvantaged students, particularly if districts don’t adjust practices to reconnect with these students.

Thus, one practice that may need adjusting or revisiting is testing. During the pandemic, traditional assessments—which have limited value even in normal contexts—are much less useful in capturing what students know and have learned. These assessments could feel “overwhelming or condemning to children” at a time when it is necessary to create opportunities for students to show what they know and to demonstrate where they are, and for teachers to adjust instruction to students’ current development in order to advance their development and potential (RESEARCHED 2020, NPE 2020). As set forth above, students have very uneven access to the online resources they need to take tests, let alone complete them effectively. Similarly, students have uneven access to the special instruction and supervised practice that help students pass these tests—with lower income students and Black and Hispanic students less likely to have access than their higher income and white peers. This means that standardized testing during the pandemic will deliver results that are, by design, going to be even more closely correlated with life circumstances than is true during periods of regular classroom instruction. Compounding all of the barriers to meaningful and equitable monitoring and testing during the pandemic, teachers in remote settings lack the tools that they have when they are in their classrooms to interpret test results. In other words, in a classroom, teachers are more able to distinguish between a low score likely due to the student’s lack of understanding of the material versus a low score due to the student’s frequent absences, emotional distress, or other factors. As a result, teachers working remotely are hard-pressed to respond to a test score with an appropriate strategy to support the student.

For all of these reasons, traditional standardized tests have limited value in this context and may do more harm than good. 39 Rather, school districts should be using tests that are designed to assess where students are across a range of areas and to help teachers meet students there. These tests include diagnostic tests, formative tests, SEL assessments, and assessments that can be performed remotely such as project-based assessments and capstone projects. 40 These types of tests will be critical to helping students and teachers alike start to dig out of the academic hole dug by the COVID-19 shovel.

Going forward: Translating what we have learned into a plan for the “three Rs” of relief, recovery, and rebuilding

Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, we have made choices about how to sustain, or provide relief to, the education system. We have also had the opportunity to consider how best to proceed as we start to recover, and how to rebuild the system by taking more decisive action on substantial, long-needed changes. Indeed, how well we rebuild the education system will determine how well we address the impacts the pandemic has had on our human capital and how prepared we are for shocks of this nature in the future.

As noted above, students have seen their normal learning and development interrupted and disrupted. Inevitably, this will lead to lost ground during the pandemic, with disadvantaged students particularly vulnerable given the way that the pandemic has compounded large existing opportunity gaps. We propose a set of targeted education interventions and comprehensive services to lift up disadvantaged children and reduce inequities as we move out from this pandemic. This plan tackles today’s three Rs — relief, recovery, and rebuilding —with a phased three-stage process that must be properly funded at each stage.

Specifically, this three-pronged plan requires making the necessary investments to 1) put school systems on a solid footing to provide effective remote instruction and supports at scale as the crisis continues to play out (the “relief” phase); 2) make new investments to help schools and students compensate for lost time and ground during the period of quarantine (during the “recovery” phase); and 3) lay the foundations for a shift toward an education system that understands the complexity of education production and its multiple components, untaps children’s talents, works equally for all students, and reflects the value we place on education as a society (in the “rebuilding” phase). This plan will require substantial amounts of resources and strong collaboration and effort.

If the Great Recession is any indicator, competition for resources will be fierce. In fact, early indicators are that this public health crisis will pose enormous challenges for states and local governments, those responsible for over 90% of the school systems’ revenue. 41 Moreover, we entered this crisis in a more difficult position than in the Great Recession (based on a comparison with what we learned from the 2009 federal stimulus, and from the fact that about half of the states as of 2016 had yet to return to the level of per-student spending that they had attained prior to the Great Recession). 42

With state budgets at historic crisis levels and the economy continuing to struggle, 43 the prevailing narrative will likely be an even more severe version of “we can’t afford that” than what we experienced in the aftermath of the Great Recession. It will therefore be more important than ever to meet that assertion with the fact that “we can’t afford not to.” All of the evidence we have amassed demonstrates that not spending costs far more, and delivers far less, in the long run, than making the needed investments. 44

Underlying the fiscal barriers to making the needed investments in education is a lack of leadership at the federal level that makes it very difficult for states to do what is needed. So far, there has been insufficient, scattered attention to education from policymakers, but even that has had a marked political tone that fails to acknowledge challenges or provide required resources. 45

Relief: Give schools urgent resources so that they can provide effective remote instruction and supports at scale during the pandemic

During the pandemic, schools have been challenged with not only fulfilling their main roles of educating our children but also serving as a key part of the safety net: Specifically, to some degree, schools have provided not just remote education but also supports like meals, health services, counseling, and, in some cases, housing. Given the fact the schools are not universally going to be resuming standard operating procedures in the foreseeable future, policies must be enacted to enable all schools to provide effective remote instruction and supports consistently, and at scale.

While states and school districts are critical players in the relief stage, most of the calls for action involve the federal government because states and school districts are not only overstrained but also facing imminent budget cuts caused by the pandemic, with an inability to incur deficit spending.

Congress must resume consideration of additional relief measures and pay more attention to schools and associated public supports, including child care, social services, food and nutrition supports, and physical and mental health care—devoting substantially larger shares of, and sufficient, funding to these needs. At a minimum:

• Every school must be equipped and have the necessary resources, in conjunction with both public and private community institutions, to feed children (and, as relevant, their families) for as long as the current crisis demands.
• These needed services include the various wraparound supports specific to physical and mental health services, and to countering the various negative impacts of the crisis on the mental and emotional health of both students and educators.
• During the first months of the pandemic, the lack of preparation to cope with the lockdowns meant that many children lost access to the most basic needs. School districts must coordinate with state and local agencies and partner organizations to assess students’ needs so that districts understand their students’ situations and can respond accordingly.
• Unlike during the first months into the pandemic, access to online education must be universal.
• Schools must be equipped to do needs-based monitoring of students’ status in terms of internet access; their access to computers and other technology tools for online learning; and students’ capacity to make effective use of the tools they have. This type of diagnostic assessment of technology and access is critical to understanding the degree to which students can engage with instruction on a regular basis and is foundational to their ability to learn.
• District and school leaders should provide teachers with the necessary training and preparation to avoid unstructured instruction and the kind of “trial-and-error” instruction many had to employ during the first months of the pandemic.
• District and school leaders should survey teachers as to the specific professional development and other supports they need to teach effectively in these adapted contexts, and Congress should allocate federal aid to ensure that all teachers obtain the needed support. 47
• Given that many teachers, like other “essential workers,” must balance instruction with attending to other household realities, including parenting their own children, Congress should ensure that support for child care is included in key relief measures. 48

In the “relief” phase, schools must also have the resources they need to safely operate with partial on-site instruction if the health protocols allow for doing so.

• These plans at the very least must include communicating, educating, and reinforcing appropriate hygiene and social distancing practices in ways that are developmentally appropriate for students, teachers, and staff; maintaining healthy environments (e.g., cleaning and disinfecting frequently touched surfaces); repurposing unused or underutilized school (or community) spaces to increase classroom space and facilitate social distancing, including outside spaces, where feasible; developing a proactive plan for when a student or staff member tests positive for COVID-19; conducting case tracing in the event of a positive case; etc.
• Every school district must receive the resources to ensure the safety guidelines are disseminated, understood, and followed. Ensuring that guidelines are followed includes providing the financial resources and the equipment so that members of the school community are protected, the facilities are cleaned, and staff members have what they need to be safe. 50

Recovery: Provide extra investments to help students and schools make up lost ground as they return to in-school operations

When schools resume their operations back in the classroom, it will be critical to fully understand which students have been engaged and to what degree, how much they have learned, and where they have fallen behind. But for meaningful teaching and learning to take place, educators must first be able to assess their students’ well-being and readiness to learn. Once they achieve that, educators will need sufficient, appropriate resources and tools to enable students to catch up and continue their development.

• Careful use of well-designed diagnostic tests will be critical to preparing and equipping schools and teachers to do their jobs, which will include adjusting instruction as necessary, and thus to helping students make up for disrupted education.
• Using diagnostic assessments to assess the needs of the pandemic can provide a model for using assessments more appropriately in the future—i.e., as formative and informative tools of teaching and learning, rather than as evaluative tools of judgment. 52
• Educators must receive training not just on diagnostic testing but also on benchmark testing, project-based learning, capstone projects, and performance assessments, with a focus on remote instruction and trauma-based instruction. 53
• COVID-19 is expected to boost early retirements, especially among teachers who are closer to retirement and among those in the highest-risk groups, and voluntary attrition, especially among those teachers who faced major obstacles in their work during the first months of the pandemic. These risks could also affect other staff at schools (e.g., nurses, paraprofessionals, principals) and come at a time when more personnel are needed. Budget constraints could further deplete the teaching and education workforces. 54
• Flexible approaches will be necessary: Children learn differently, and they underwent different challenges during the pandemic. Remote learning is less effective for children who are less prepared (i.e., without full access to computers and other equipment, without experience using devices for school work, with fewer supports, and with less likelihood of being engaged).
• More intensive interventions and strategies will be needed for students identified as at heightened risk of dropping out altogether.
• Providing more flexible and personalized interventions for students will require more, better, and targeted investments in professional development for teachers so that they are equipped to deliver personalized learning.
• The coronavirus crisis created serious challenges to students’ well-being and development that require a response focusing on their social and emotional learning, health, and well-being. 55
• Through their positive relationships with students, and through more specialized knowledge about social and emotional learning (SEL), teachers can contribute to the social and emotional learning of students. Therefore, improving training and support for teachers, teachers’ aides, and other school staff members in SEL will be critical to helping students regain their footing after the coronavirus crisis.
• Supporting students’ social and emotional development will also require increasing the number of school nurses (clinics), counselors, social workers, paraprofessionals, etc., with a focus on both students’ social and emotional learning and their mental and physical health. Other practices at school (curriculums, etc.) can be enhanced to support social and emotional learning.
• Schools should consider increasing both the amount and quality of learning time through a number of options, including extended schedules (in particular for those students lagging behind), summer enrichment programs that support the whole child, and staffing strategies that reduce class sizes and staff schools with sufficient and highly credentialed educators, 56 including teachers’ aides and tutors, whether in person or online.
• Schools should also consider ensuring access to and quality of online instruction, if online education is going to be used on its own or in conjunction with traditional instruction. In keeping with the recommendations in the “relief” section above, online instruction needs to be better tailored (especially for those who are least prepared), of high-quality, and accessible to all students. Similarly, schools need to provide supports for teachers who had not been prepared on how to use technology for instruction. Teachers should be enlisted in helping to create online instructional tools and policies. 57 Finally, districts and teachers must apply “an equity lens,” to target tools and resources to students who experience the biggest opportunity gaps (i.e., students who lack digital access or who suffer more from nutrition challenges or housing instability).

Rebuilding: Redesign the system to focus on nurturing the whole child and on equal provision of opportunities

Major crises provide unique opportunities to rethink the status quo. In the aftermath of the coronavirus crisis, policymakers must seize the opportunity to address structural problems in the educational system and invest new and different approaches. This should be a pathway toward establishing a system that ensures we meet the student, teacher, and school needs that we have been neglecting and make delivering excellence and equity in education the norm. Delivering equity in education requires addressing the major disparities in student outcomes by race and social class that arise in a system designed to deliver disparities in educational opportunities. The bottom line is, we must seize this moment to redesign the system to deliver the excellence and equity needed for every child to be able to thrive. 58

• Going forward, the education system must better balance what we teach, how we teach it, and how we reward the full range of skills that matter for and define a child’s development and education. The institutions that create education policy and practice must make many changes to ensure that schools teach and reward the development of cognitive and socioemotional skills. The shift begins with recognizing that skills of both types are mutually supportive, not mutually exclusive. 59
• For example, a whole-child approach that embraces and employs a broader range of assessments, and uses these assessments for “formative and informative” purposes, rather than for judging and sorting students, would also go a long way to closing the gaps. This shift recognizes that traditional tests are designed to capture only a narrow slice of what children know and can do, and that these tests are biased toward the types of skills that are closely correlated with parents’ socioeconomic status, not necessarily, and not exclusively, children’s potential.
• School districts must conduct a detailed needs assessment of the district overall and of each school in the district, identifying where poverty and all other stressors that are intertwined with poverty impact the ability of children to learn, and mapping out community resources that can be leveraged to meet those needs. And it means working through a variety of channels (and with a variety of partners) to close the opportunity and enrichment gaps that have long impeded progress for low-income students, students of color, and students from immigrant families and communities. 60
• Education systems must tackle head-on the school- and district-based disparities that mirror and compound the disparities that children experience at home. In high-poverty schools, and in schools serving larger shares of minority students, there is generally less access to the education “inputs” that lead to good outcomes, whether it is highly credentialed teachers, access to after-school programs, access to AP classes, positive ways of dealing with discipline issues, etc. A broad range of tools and resources must be deployed to close gaps by types of school on all fronts, making education funding more adequate and more equitable.
• School systems and their community partners must also establish a flexible set of strategies to offer wraparound supports—such as health clinics, community gardens, and parenting classes—tailored to the specific features of the community and the diversity of the communities serving our 55 million students across the country.
• All the institutions in the education system and society at large must value education and educators and treat teachers as professionals. Teachers’ judgement is critical to identifying what children and educators need. School districts and education institutions must improve the types and usefulness of the professional development and supports offered to teachers, to allow them to keep up with advances in research on effective teaching and face the challenges of the job. Teachers must also be given more of a say in the decisions affecting their jobs and careers, from the materials they use in their classrooms to the types of training they receive. Valuing educators also includes paying them at a level commensurate with what similar college-educated workers earn in other professions. Research shows that taking these steps can help attract professionals to teaching as a career and help prevent them from retiring or quitting their schools and the profession. 61
• Policymakers must recognize that education policy alone cannot ensure that all children have the foundation they need to get a good education. We need an economic agenda to accompany the rebuilding that lifts all children up and closes the opportunity gaps that are educational and not educational in nature. Children in low-income families—often children of color—lack many of the resources that their higher income and white peers have, which puts them at a disadvantage before they even enter their classrooms. Some opportunity gaps can be addressed by strengthened education policies. But the ones of a different nature would call for better public policies and a stronger economic agenda. 62
• Finally, policymakers at all levels must establish and fund contingency plans for the next time we experience a crisis as disruptive and overwhelming as the coronavirus pandemic, whether that occurs in the next handful of years or further into the future.

Despite the fact that we do not know exactly how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting children’s needs and academic performance, we know enough from existing research on learning during somewhat comparable educational experiences, and from news and observations of how education is being produced during the crisis, to assess the likely consequences on educational outcomes both overall and for relatively disadvantaged subgroups.

We reviewed the research on what to expect when children experience a substantial loss of learning time, when schools make a sudden shift to remote learning and home schooling without meeting the conditions for their effectiveness, and when circumstances lead to a massive increase in stress and disruption for children and their families. We also reviewed evidence that has emerged during the crisis on the multiple challenges that children, their teachers, schools, families, and communities face, all of which exacerbate opportunity gaps. Indeed, the evidence points to disparities in opportunities that exacerbate existing inequities and place major stress on low-income students and their teachers, in particular. Due to the digital divide and many other factors, these children are most likely to lose more substantial learning time. And their families are also most likely to experience compounded stresses—such as job loss, the loss of health care, the lack of paid sick leave, the lack of child care, and the need to work on site in “essential” jobs that put them at health risks: all these factors make it much harder for these families to attend to children who are suddenly home schooling and struggling with ad-hoc efforts at remote learning.

Together, the lessons learned point to the need to enact an agenda that lifts up children and reduces educational inequities after the interruption to schooling due to the coronavirus is over. The agenda must also rebuild the system so that lifting up children and reducing inequities in education become the new norm. To accomplish this, we outline a three-stage response. The first stage is immediate relief for students and educators so they can function better in the early 2020–2021 school year as remote learning continues in some form for many children. The second stage is significant short-term investments during the recovery that will enable students whose education was interrupted by the coronavirus crisis to catch up and continue their development. The third stage is longer-term reforms to rebuild the education system so that the challenges documented here are corrected and the system finally delivers an excellent, equitable education to all children.

In the rebuilding phase, it is essential to establish an education system that embraces a whole-child approach, addresses the impacts of poverty and inequality on students’ capacity to learn and on teachers’ abilities to do their jobs, offers a flexible set of wraparound supports to mitigate the impacts of the inequities that are built into the system, values education and educators, and creates viable contingency plans for future crises.

In closing, the ultimate consequences of the pandemic for K–12 education in the United States will indeed be a function of the quality, intensity, and comprehensiveness of our response to counter the pandemic’s negative lasting effects. Indeed, our call for relief, recovery, and reform has a historical precedent. As Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation, recently noted:

During the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt affirmed the need for relief, recovery, and reform—in that order. Today, we must follow these same steps—beyond reform to a broader, deeper reimagination of our society. (Darren Walker 2020).

This societal reimagination certainly encompasses a reimagination of our education system. With the right vision, we can actually ensure that public education plays a critical role in restoring the human and social capital in our country and in readying us for the next challenges, big or small, that we may confront in the future. Our children and our future depend on it.

About the authors

Emma García  is an education economist at the Economic Policy Institute, where she specializes in the economics of education and education policy. Her research focuses on the production of education (cognitive and noncognitive skills), evaluation of educational interventions (early childhood, K–12, and higher education), equity, returns to education, teacher labor markets, and cost analysis in education. She has held research positions at the Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, the Campaign for Educational Equity, the National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, and the Community College Research Center; consulted for MDRC, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the National Institute for Early Education Research; and served as an adjunct faculty member at the McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University. She received her Ph.D. in economics and education from Columbia University’s Teachers College.

Elaine Weiss  is the lead policy analyst for income security at the National Academy of Social Insurance, where she spearheads projects on Social Security, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation. Prior to her work at the academy, Weiss was the national coordinator for the Broader Bolder Approach (BBA) to Education, a campaign launched by the Economic Policy Institute, from 2011 to 2017. BBA promoted a comprehensive, evidence-based set of policies to allow all children to thrive in school and life. Weiss has co-authored and authored EPI and BBA reports on early achievement gaps and the flaws in market-oriented education reforms. She is co-author of  Broader, Bolder, Better , a book with former Massachusetts Secretary of Education Paul Reville published by Harvard Education Press . Weiss came to BBA from the Pew Charitable Trusts, where she served as project manager for Pew’s Partnership for America’s Economic Success campaign. She has a Ph.D. in public policy from the George Washington University Trachtenberg School and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to EPI Publications Director Lora Engdahl for having edited this report, as well as for co-authoring one of the pieces this report builds on, and for her suggestions on news reports that provide useful context. To the last point, we also acknowledge the extensive work on the repercussions of COVID-19 for education conducted by many of our colleagues, of which we are only able to cite a fraction. We appreciate EPI Vice President John Schmitt’s supervision and support of this project, EPI Research Assistant Melat Kassa for her assistance with the tables and figures, and EPI’s communications staff for their assistance with the production and dissemination of this study.

1. For references on production of education, see Coleman et al. 1966; Hanushek 1979; Todd and Wolpin 2003.

2. Note, too, that we do not offer an in-depth review of these very extensive bodies of work, but rather use them to better understand what it is at play and to frame what we should anticipate the next-phase and post-pandemic outcomes to look like.

3. Students in grades kindergarten and first, for example, experienced larger gains as measured by the ECLS-K assessments in math and reading between the fall and the spring of those years. For example, our descriptive analysis of the ECLS-K 2010–2011 data suggests that students gain an average of 0.7 SD in kindergarten. For a discussion on spring to spring gains by grades (average of 0.45 SD across grades), see Bloom et al. 2008.

4. These kinds of challenges and trade-offs may also be relevant to the decisions schools will need to make for 2020–2021. For example, von Hippel (2020), when discussing school instruction that spans 12 months, explains that although year-round calendars increase summer learning, in most cases they reduce learning at other times of year, so that the total amount learned over a 12-month period is no greater under a year-round calendar than under a nine-month calendar.

5. Assessing a seminal study by Alexander, Entwisle, and Olson (2007), based on a sample of Baltimore students who were tracked from first grade in 1982 to age 22, Kuhfel explains that most of the test-score gap by socioeconomic status (SES) in ninth grade was explained by “differing summer experiences in the early elementary years.”

6. The more recent research also discusses several technical challenges that would require some concern about the findings. For example, there were characteristics of the tests used to assess skills before and after the summer that made them not comparable, or that made the tests more difficult in the fall than in the spring; very small samples in particular contexts; and other caveats. See von Hippel and Hamrock (2019) and von Hippel, Workman, and Downey (2018).

7. Atteberry and McEachin (2020) find that slightly over half of the students lose nearly all their school-year progress but the rest of the students actually maintain their school-year learning. Kuhfeld (2019) similarly finds that the summer loss is not generalized, but points to a larger loss overall, with around 60–80% of students losing ground in the elementary school grades (and an even larger share with respect to math). Kuhfeld (2019) also finds that the slide is larger in higher grades than in lower grades, and that performance gaps between minority and nonminority students did not increase, but gaps between students in high-poverty versus low-poverty schools increased significantly but by a small amount (at most, students in high-poverty schools lost one week of learning). The two studies (Atteberry and McEachin 2020 and Kuhfeld 2019) use the NWEA’s MAP Growth reading and math assessments. von Hippel, Workman, and Downey (2018) estimate that during the summer, performance gaps by socioeconomic status slightly increase for children in their first years in school. Our own exploratory analysis of the ECLS-K 2010–2011 data coincides with finding most students experience gains during the summers (both in math and reading), and that the performance gaps widen between low- and high-income children (using household income as a proxy for socioeconomic status). See also Quinn et al. 2016.

8. Definitions of chronic absenteeism vary by study, school district, etc. They typically are based on the number of days or a share of days missed over an entire school year, and they are only available on a yearly basis. For example, the U.S. Department of Education (2016) defines chronically absent students as those who “miss at least 15 days of school in a year.” Elsewhere, chronic absenteeism is frequently defined as missing 10% or more of the total number of days the student is enrolled in school or missing a month or more of school in the previous year (Ehrlich et al. 2013; Balfanz and Byrnes 2012).

9. Some examples are J-PAL 2017, Jordan 2019, and Balu 2019.

10. This 1.5 million figure is of course not completely illustrative today because overall enrollment numbers are expected to have grown since 2010. As a related reference, the National Center for Education Statistics estimates that there were 656 virtual schools in the U.S. in 2017–2018, enrolling about 279,000 students (0.55 percent of total enrollment) (NCES 2019b).

11. The literature on use of devices for education covers a lot of ground: findings tend to be a function of the type of technology/device used, the intensity, the developmental period/age, etc. (Crone and Konijn 2018; Walsh et al. 2018, see a summary in García 2018). To illustrate a few of these associations, researchers have found that time spent using a mobile phone and watching TV and sending text messages is correlated with lower achievement, slower reading times, and more intuitive but less analytic thinking, and it is also correlated with a faster but less accurate performance in a test of selective attention capacity and skills, as well as in processing-speed ability (Evans-Schmidt and Vandewater 2008; Lepp, Barkley, and Karpinski 2014; Fox, Rosen, and Crawford 2009; Barr et al. 2015; Abramson et al. 2009). Video-gaming can positively influence visual attention and spatial skills (attention capacity, quicker attention deployment, and faster processing,  according to Evans-Schmidt and Vandewater 2008). More frequent use of social media is negatively correlated with grade point averages (GPA), academic performance, and hours per week spent studying (Junco 2012; Karpinski et al. 2012; Kirschner and Karpinski 2010). Texting, using Facebook (and accessing Facebook while studying), and conducting internet searches unrelated to academic activity concurrent with homework completion all negatively correlate with GPA (Junco and Cotten 2012; Rosen, Carrier, and Cheever 2013; Wilmer, Sherman and Chein 2017). Media use (including social media) positively correlates with social and emotional learning (SEL) development, relationships with peers, and engagement, but also with addiction, bullying, mood and self-esteem problems, and time not sleeping/exercising/studying, some due to the trade-offs between time spent on some of these activities (Crone and Konijn 2018; Lemola et al. 2015; American Academy of Pediatrics 2011). The evidence also points out that if the content watched is high-quality educational programming, and does not displace other cognitively enriching experiences, screen time is positively correlated with achievement, engagement, and attitudes toward learning (Evans-Schmidt and Vandewater 2008). Concerns with excessive screen time have been well covered in the media during the months of the pandemic. See for example Kamenetz 2020a; Cheng and Wilkinson 2020.

12. Some information for households with children during the pandemic has been released by the U.S. Census Bureau through the Household Pulse Survey Tables for a target population of adults 18 years and older. See U.S. Census Bureau 2020a.

13. They say: “These students’ learning and persistence outcomes are worse when they take online courses than they would have been had these same students taken in-person courses.” See Zhao 2020 for some discussion of the challenges around online learning. NCES has used this period to build a repository of this research, which is discussed in Soldner 2020.

14. One in three online charter schools reported that all of their courses were self-paced. On average, online charter schools provide less simultaneous learning and teaching in a week than conventional schools would have in a day and less one-on-one instruction, with larger student-to-teacher ratios. Principals in these schools reported that the greatest challenge was student engagement (a challenge cited almost three times as often as any other issue) (Gill et al. 2015). Based on national data, across all tested students in online charters, the typical annual academic losses are -0.25 SD for math and -0.10 SD for reading (Woodworth et al. 2015). See Bueno 2020 for a more updated study of full-time virtual school attendance in Georgia, which shows negative effects ranging from -0.1 to -0.4 SD on performance.

15. This share has been relatively stable since 2007.

16. Subjects tested include reading, language l, mathematics (with computation), science, social studies, core (with computation), and composite (with computation).

17. As researchers note, the evidence is limited by the inability to use experimental or even quasi-experimental methods, precluding them from drawing conclusions as to causality (Belfield 2004; Cheng and Donnelly 2019; Lubienski, Pukett, and Brewer 2013). Belfield (2004) explains the three empirical issues that arise when comparing outcomes from home schooling against public schooling: 1) the common concern over the endogeneity of school choice, that is different types of families choose the type of school that their children attend, and little can be inferred about the impacts of schools for students who do not attend them; 2) the need to distinguish the absolute performance of home-schoolers from the treatment effect of home schooling—“Given the above-median resources of many home-schooling families, academic performance should be high even if home schooling itself is not differentially effective. Full controls for family background are needed, however, to identify a treatment effect”; 3) “home-schoolers can often choose which tests to take and when to take them (and have parents administer them), introducing other biases.”

18. Bacher-Hicks, Goodman, and Mulhern (2020) examine the search for online learning platforms used by schools and supplemental resources on Google. They find that the search intensity had roughly doubled relative to baseline. (They also find that the intensity rose twice as much in areas with above-median SES as in areas with below-median SES, where SES is measures by household income, parental education, and computer and internet access.

19. This lack of time for planning has in a way continued during the summer. As the news reports have broadly shown, many schools were going to reopen but they had to cancel at the last minute, which probably meant that the plans in place were no longer aligned with students’ and teachers’ needs. In other cases, the uncertainty about resources available (as discussed later in the report) led to a squandered opportunity to plan accordingly.

20. The authors point to the nine factors that determine the quality of online teaching and learning, including modality, pacing, student-instructor ratio, pedagogy (type), role of online assessments, students’ online roles, instructors’ online roles, online communication synchrony, and source of feedback. While all may not apply as strongly in K–12 education, the range of considerations highlights the challenges public school teachers will face in attempting to make remote instruction effective.

21. More broadly, these aspects about online instruction also touch upon the relevance of teacher professional development, the importance of establishing learning communities for teachers, and teachers’ access to a sound system of supports (Darling-Hammond et al. 2017; Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan 2018; García and Weiss 2019). Among other advantages, learning communities allow teachers to acquire new skills, update their knowledge, and strengthen their practice and effectiveness in the classroom, all critically important factors for education quality and also for the stability of the teaching workforce (García and Weiss 2019).

22. As we explained in our study, the professional development module that delivered data for the 2011–2012 SASS is rotating and was not included in the most recent data set available when we were conducting our study (2015–2016), but it will be in the next cycle, 2017–2018.

23. Teachers also reported having very little input on which activities to undertake for their professional development. Only 11.1 percent of teachers have a great deal of influence determining the content of in-service professional development programs. As we noted in García and Weiss 2019, this disregard for teachers’ input is quite troubling, given national and international surveys and testimonies showing that teachers want to play a more direct role in selecting the types and content of professional development opportunities offered to them (see Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 2014; Loewus 2019; OECD 2019; Kirk 2019; Schwartz 2019).

24. For example, in Washington, D.C., the school district has indicated attendance is compulsory for students ages 5–17. Schools will use daily attendance as an indicator of student engagement in learning together with information on completing assignments and participation in live classes (District of Columbia Office of the Mayor 2020).

25. This sharply academic focus narrowed with the 2001 passage of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which replaced the earlier version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The 2015 passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act attempted to dial back that pressure (see CASEL 2020; Kostyo, Cardichon, and Darling-Hammond 2018). Useful references on these issues and some others discussed below are Bloom 1964; Borghans et al. 2008; Duckworth and Yeager 2015; Levin 2012; Jones et al. 2016; Jones et al. 2019; Shonkoff and Phillips 2000; Lippman et al. 2015; Petway, Brenneman, and Kyllonen 2016; UNESCO’s Incheon Declaration for Education 2030 (UNESCO et al. 2016); and our own work on these issues: García 2014; García and Weiss 2016.

26. For those interested in this approach, Tirivayi et al. (2020) offer a comprehensive examination of past public policy responses to emergency crises.

27. Technically, this is known as lack of external validity. This research documents that approximately 50 million primary- and lower-secondary-age children are out of school in conflict-affected countries around the world (Save the Children 2013). Natural disasters, which also displace large numbers of students, are four times as prevalent today as they were in the 1980s, likely due to the growing impacts of climate change, and that number is predicted to increase exponentially in the next 20 years (Oxfam International 2007; Save the Children 2008; USAID 2014).

28. Further, research has explored the effects on the communities to which children and their families migrate (known as spillover effects from emergency migrants on the host communities), as well as some of the factors that explain them. Hurricane Maria in September 2017 caused a large influx of students from Puerto Rico to Florida’s public schools—about 12,000 students between October 2017 and May 2018. Studies found immediate negative effects on the performance outcomes of host students (students in the schools accepting new students from the disaster area) following hurricane Maria. Studies also found immediate negative effects on the performance outcomes of host students following Hurricane Katrina in September 2005, though they found zero effects on Florida’s public schools following the Haitian migrant influx after the earthquake in January 2010 and two years after it (Özek 2020; Imberman, Kugler, and Sacerdote 2012; Figlio and Özek 2019). Özek (2020) found significant adverse effects of hurricane migrants on the educational outcomes of existing students in the first year. Specifically, he found that a 5-percentage-point increase in the share of hurricane migrants reduced test scores in math and in English language arts (ELA) by an amount equivalent to one to two months of instruction, increased the likelihood of being involved in a disciplinary incident by 15–20% (of the dependent variable mean) in middle and high school, and increased the likelihood of existing students leaving their schools before the start of the 2018–2019 school year by roughly 7% (with larger increases among white and African American students). Effects were mainly concentrated among higher-performing students, especially in disadvantaged school settings.

29. Historically, there is strong agreement that in these circumstances, having access to education (versus not having access) leads “to a range of positive outcomes including child protection and well-being, economic development, peace building, and reconstruction” (Burde et al. 2017).

30. Other contingency planning strategies involve providing psychosocial programs or supplemental educational activities that protect children from harm. The strategies avoid unstructured days where traumatizing memories linger, fears thrive, and violence is always possible (Sommers 1999). Some education content, for example in refugee contexts, may be designed to mitigate conflict, and peace education programs show promise in changing attitudes and behaviors toward members of those perceived as the “other” (Burde et al. 2017). As Anderson (2020) indicates, “it is not only the mechanism and approach that is used but also the quality and methods of teaching that are critical to understand.” Different mechanisms for delivering education include radio, podcast, or television broadcasts; online programs or virtual peer learning circles; and even the provision of kits with basic materials (pencils, exercise books, erasers, etc.). Another critical element is to ensure that children have access to the instructional mechanisms used.

31. A recent publication by The Century Foundation notes “the significant variation in both per-pupil spending and student outcomes across the country” and estimates that the U.S. needs to spend an additional $150 billion to ensure that all students “achieve national average outcomes” (TCF 2020). For research about the important role that opportunity gaps and family income play in education performance, see Coleman et al. 1966; Reardon 2011; García and Weiss 2017; Putnam 2015; Rothstein 2004; and Weiss and Reville 2019.

32. Food insecurity is a different measure than poverty. The former, in the Bauer article, refers to the share of households reporting to the U.S. Census Bureau that it was sometimes or often the case that the children in the household “were not eating enough because we just couldn’t afford enough food.” But poverty rates are also an instructive measure during this crisis. Using an unlikely scenario of an unemployment rate of 30% this year due to COVD-19, Parolin and Wimer (2020) estimate that poverty rates in the United States could reach their highest levels in 50 years. Specifically, they estimate that if unemployment rates stay at 30% throughout the year, the supplemental poverty measure (SPM) rate for children would rise by more than 7 percentage points, from 13.6% to 20.9% (the SPM created by the U.S. Census Bureau is a measure of poverty that some researchers consider more accurate than the official poverty measure because it takes into account income from such benefits as food stamps and housing assistance).

33. A total of 1.5 million students surveyed in the 2017–2018 school year had experienced homelessness at some point during the last three school years (USICH 2020).

34. Even if they don’t lose their jobs, some workers and virtually all essential workers don’t have access to work remotely (following the traditional racial/SES inequities). The inability to work remotely means that keeping their jobs and thus their access to health insurance disproportionately exposes them to the virus (Gould and Shierholz 2020; Bivens and Zipperer 2020) and makes it nearly impossible for them to supervise their children and assist them in their education needs.

35. For updated information, nationally and for various subgroups, see the CDC COVID Data Tracker (CDC 2020c).

36. This is a problem both for students in dense urban areas, where normally strong hospital systems have been overwhelmed at times during the pandemic, and in rural areas, where already gutted systems have lacked the capacity to deal with the onslaught of cases. See, for example, the description of New York City’s hospitals when that city was hit hard early in the pandemic in Arnold 2020 as well as Sandoval 2020’s more recent account of a small rural hospital on the Texas–Mexico border.

37. Specifically, in our studies, poor students are students eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch programs under federal guidelines that deliver such meals based on family income falling below a certain threshold. Non-poor students are students who are ineligible for those programs. For a recent discussion, see Cookson 2020.

38. While 25% of superintendents reported that almost all of their students (91–100%) had internet access at home and 26% reported that almost all of their students had devices to connect to the internet at home, substantial shares of superintendents reported gaps in that access: 23% estimated that just 81–90% had access to internet and devices; 16–17% estimated that 71–80% had access to internet and devices; 11% estimated that just 61–70% had access to internet and devices; 10% said the share with access to internet and devices was 50% or less; and 14% said the share with access to internet and devices was 50% or less (Rogers and Ellerson Ng 2020).

39. As early as March, Texas waived requirements that students take its standardized state STAAR test due to the closure of schools (Swaby 2020), and Massachusetts did the same in April (Lisinski 2020). See also Brookings Institution 2020; Darling-Hammond and Kini 2020; NEPC 2020; Ravitch 2020.

40. AFT 2020d. Capstone projects are end-of-year term projects that students can complete to bring the school year to a close in lieu of statewide standardized assessments (see Weingarten 2020). For some examples of these projects, see Dickinson 2020.

41. U.S. Census Bureau (2020b). McNichol and Leachman (2020) estimate “$555 billion in shortfalls over state fiscal years 2020–2022.” Bivens (2020) reviews estimates of a revenue shortfall for state and local governments of nearly $1 trillion.

42. See Baker and DiCarlo 2020; Leachman and Figueroa 2019; Partelow, Yin, and Sargrad 2020.

43. Since March 2020, the House of Representatives and the Senate have passed four coronavirus relief packages totaling over $3 trillion. The most current proposed measures are the HEROES and HEALS Acts (Lee 2020a, b; Progressive Caucus Action Fund 2020). For a discussion on the relatively small amounts that public schools and education have received, see Jordan 2020b; Reber and Gordon 2020. See also Snell 2020.

44. An obvious lesson learned from the COVID-19 crisis is that schools and related sectors like early childhood education and child care are undervalued relative to their key contributions to the societal good. Schools are “essential to the operation of the country… It is impossible to restart the economy without the schools, they go together” and are “a critical part of the social safety net for children” (ASI 2020). Education and also health and social services are “forms of investment, not consumption; necessities, not luxuries” (Folbre 2016). Just as we have learned that many formerly invisible workers are “essential” to the daily functioning of our economy, we must treat education as the essential service it is and support it as such.

45. Blad 2020; Broadwater 2020; Calargo 2020; Ferris 2020; Ferguson 2020; Strauss 2020; Valant 2020.

46. See Tinubu Ali and Herrera 2020; Cohodes 2020.

47. One potential silver lining of the coronavirus pandemic is that it brings attention to a longstanding issue in education: the inadequate systems of professional development for teachers (see García and Weiss 2019). As practitioners, researchers, and policymakers collaborate more closely on professional development offerings that will help teachers teach during the pandemic, that model can inform a broader look at the systems of professional supports available to teachers and prompt more research on what constitutes optimal professional development—i.e., what professional development offerings need to cover, how the offerings should be delivered and where and for how long, and how teachers are connected to the opportunities. As we showed in García and Weiss 2019, teachers want these supports but too often are offered one-size-fits-all programs when there is no single optimal combination valid for all teachers at all times and in all settings. Also shown in García and Weiss 2019, enhanced professional development would play a role in keeping teachers in the classroom and attracting new professionals into teaching.

48. See for example U.S. Senate 2020 for an overview of the proposed Coronavirus Child Care and Education Relief Act.

49. See CDC 2020a, 2020b; AASA 2020; UNESCO et al. 2020; NEA 2020; AFT 2020a; National Superintendents Roundtable 2020. There are still many things that scientists and public health experts do not know about the prevalence, transmission, and long-term consequences of contracting COVID-19 among children and adolescents. Likewise, there is no universally agreed on threshold of incidence of the disease under which activities can safely resume. While these questions are beyond the scope of this report and our areas of expertise, they are critical factors weighing on the reopening of our schools. Several studies point to lower prevalence of infection among children than on average but also to the need to assess whether the incidence of the disease among children can be influenced by selective testing, how prevalence of the virus among children compares with prevalence among their parents (i.e., whether the rate of infection of parents is different from their children’s), how these have changed over time (i.e., whether the immunity lasts longer for children or for parents, etc.), etc. (Idele et al. 2020; Pollán et al. 2020; Heald-Sargent et al. 2020). The American Academy of Pediatrics (2020) is requesting that schools reopen. See Goldstein 2020b.

50. While there is no precise estimate of how much following these guidelines would cost, the School Superintendents Association estimates that the average school district will need an additional $1.78 million to meet the COVID-19-related expenses of reopening schools (AASA 2020). The National Academy of Sciences estimates the cost of health-related supplies at $1.8 million for a school district serving 3,200 students (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2020). The Council of Chief State School Officers explains that the costs associated with opening schools safely under appropriate health and safety protocols would add up to about $30 billion across all schools (CCSSO 2020). The American Federation of Teachers culls from a number of sources to estimate that a total of $116.5 billion is needed for all measures, $35 billion of which would be needed for additional instructional staff to support adequate social distancing (AFT 2020b, 2020c). See also DiNapoli Jr. 2020 and Berman 2020. The cost of reopening schools is an unsettled issue.

51. See ASI 2020; CPCC, The Education Trust, NEA 2020; Duflo 2020; Brookings Institution 2020.

52. See Gordon 2013; RESEARCHED 2020.

53. AFT 2020d; Weingarten 2020; Dickinson 2020.

54. See García and Weiss 2020; Will 2020; Page 2020; Hamilton, Kaufman, and Diliberti 2020; NIRS 2020. For early retirements of teachers and principals, see Will 2020 and Page 2020. For challenges imposed by remote instruction, see Greif Green and Bettini 2020; Prothero 2020. In terms of recessions, public education job losses following the Great Recession exceeded 316,000 between September 2008 and September 2011 (BLS 2020). The job losses in April 2020 alone were already greater than in all of the Great Recession: 468,800 jobs were lost just a month after the pandemic started (Gould 2020b; see BLS 2020 for a still deeper decrease in May and a slight recovery in June and July). An estimate of the consequences of a 15% reduction in state education funding says that it could lead to the loss of more than 300,000 teaching positions (or 8.4%; see Griffith 2020).

55. See Darling-Hammond et al. 2020; Shonkoff and Phillips 2000; García and Weiss 2016; Walker, Tim 2020; Weiss and Reville 2019; Zhao 2020; Clark et al. 2020; Goldstein 2020a.

56. See Mishel and Rothstein 2003 and Schanzenbach 2020 for a recent review of the influence of class size on achievement. Note that this literature was not reviewed in the literature review section of this report because class size has generally not been a feature of the pandemic. However, in the literature, smaller classes are an implicit recommendation from various subfields. For evidence on summer programs, see McCombs et al. 2019. For evidence on tutoring effectiveness, see Nickow, Oreopoulos, and Quan 2020. On personalized learning, see Kim 2019.

57. Ferguson et al. 2020; García 2020; Hamilton, Kaufman, and Diliberti 2020.

58. Oakes, Maier, and Daniel 2017; Gonzalez 2018; Weiss and Reville 2019; Darling-Hammond et al. 2020; Starr 2020.

59. Darling-Hammond et al. (2020) discuss this framework as informed by evidence from the science of learning and development. See the different principles of practice in their Figure 1.

60. Weiss and Reville 2019; Shonkoff and Williams 2020.

61. EPI’s series of reports on the teacher shortage documents the factors that lead teachers to quit (and likely discourage people from entering the profession). See Economic Policy Institute 2020. See Allegretto and Mishel 2019 for estimates of the teacher pay penalty (how much less teachers earn in wages and benefits than comparable college-educated workers in other professions).

62. See García 2015 and García and Weiss 2017, among others.

AASA. 2020. Guidelines for Reopening Schools from the AASA COVID-19 Recovery Task Force .

Abramson, M.J., G.P. Benke, C. Dimitriadis, I.O. Inyang, M.R. Sim, R.S. Wolfe et al. 2009. “Mobile Telephone Use Is Associated with Changes in Cognitive Function in Young Adolescents.” Bioelectromagnetics 30: 678–686. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.20534.

Albert Shanker Institute (ASI). 2020.  Panel on Coronavirus Pandemic and K-12 Education Funding ( Expert Presenters: Pedro Noguera, Sylvia Allegretto, Bruce Baker; Randi Weingarten) (webinar). April 24, 2020.

Alexander, Karl L., Doris R. Entwisle, and Linda Steffel Olson. 2007. “Lasting Consequences of the Summer Learning Gap.”  American Sociological Review   72,  no. 2: 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200202 .

Allegretto, Sylvia, and Lawrence Mishel. 2019.  The Teacher Weekly Wage Penalty Hit 21.4 Percent in 2018, a Record High: Trends in the Teacher Wage and Compensation Penalties Through 2018 . Economic Policy Institute and the Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics at the University of California, Berkeley, April 2019.

Allensworth, Elaine, and Shayne Evans. 2016. “Tackling Absenteeism in Chicago.”   Phi Delta Kappan 98, no. 2: 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721716671900.

American Academy of Pediatrics. 2011. Children, Adolescents, Obesity, and the Media Pediatrics. Policy Statement, 128, no. 1, American Academy of Pediatrics, July 2011. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-1066.

American Academy of Pediatrics. 2020. COVID-19 Planning Considerations: Guidance for School Re-entry Critical Updates on COVID-19, Clinical Guidance . June 25, 2020.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). 2020a. A Plan to Safely Reopen America’s Schools and Communities: Guidance for Imagining a New Normal for Public Education, Public Health and Our Economy in the Age of COVID-19 .

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). 2020b. A Time to Act: The Importance of Investment in Public Education and Other State and Local Services in the Time of COVID-19 .

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). 2020c. Reopening Schools During a Time of Triple Crisis: Financial Implications.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). 2020d. Student Assessment and the Use of Data (guidance sheet).

American Federation of Teachers, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (AFT, LDF, and Leadership Conference). 2020. “ Joint Statement of Education and Civil Rights Organizations Concerning Equitable Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic School Closures and Beyond .” April 29, 2020; updated with additional signers as of May 15, 2020.

Anderson, Allison. 2020. COVID-19 Outbreak Highlights Critical Gaps in School Emergency Preparedness , The Brookings Institution March 11, 2020.

Arnold, Carrie. 2020. “ New York City’s Coronavirus Outbreak Is Already Overwhelming Hospitals .” New Scientist, March 31, 2020.

Atteberry, Allison, and Andrew McEachin. 2020. “School’s Out: The Role of Summers in Understanding Achievement Disparities.” American Educational Research Journal . https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220937285 .

Azzi-Hucktigran Kaliope, and Tigran Shmis. 2020. Managing the Impact of COVID-19 on Education Systems Around the World: How Countries Are Preparing, Coping, and Planning for Recovery , The World Bank, March 18, 2020.

Bacher-Hicks, Andrew Joshua Goodman, and Christine Mulhern. 2020. “ Inequality in Household Adaptation to Schooling Shocks: Covid-Induced Online Learning Engagement in Real Time .” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 27555.

Bakeman, Jessica. 2020. “ Taking Attendance During COVID-19 School Closures; It’s Complicated .” April 8. WLRN .

Baker, Bruce, and Matthew DiCarlo. 2020. The Coronavirus Pandemic and K-12 Education Funding , Albert Shanker Institute, April 2020.

Balfanz, Robert. 2017. “Absenteeism Matters to Schools and Students.” Phi, Delta, Kappan . https://kappanonline.org/absenteeism-school-matters/ .

Balfanz, Robert, and Vaughan Byrnes. 2012. The Importance of Being in School: A Report on Absenteeism in the Nation’s Public Schools . Center for the Social Organization of Schools (Johns Hopkins University), May 2012.

Balu, Rekha. 2019. “Intervention Design Choices and Evaluation Lessons from Multisite Field Trials on Reducing Absenteeism.” In Absent from School: Understanding and Addressing Student Absenteeism , edited by Michael A. Gottfried and Ethan L. Hutt, 199–212, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Publishing Group.

Barr, N., G. Pennycook, J.A. Stolz, and J.A. Fugelsang. 2015. “The Brain in your Pocket: Evidence that Smartphones Are Used to Supplant Thinking.” Computers in Human Behavior 48: 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.029.

Bauer, Lauren. 2020. “ About 14 Million Children in the US Are Not Getting Enough to Eat .” The Brookings Institution, July 9, 2020.

Belfield, C. 2004.  Home-Schooling in the US (Occasional Paper No. 88).  New York: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Berman, Jillian. 2020. Here’s How Much School Closures Will Cost Parents in Lost Wages, Reduce GDP—and Negatively Impact the Nation’s Education System . Market Watch , July 24, 2020.

Bettinger, Eric, and Susanna Loeb. 2017. Promises and Pitfalls of Online Education . The Brookings Institution, June 9, 2017.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. 2014.  Teachers Know Best: Teachers’ Views on Professional Development . December 2014.

Bivens, Josh. 2020 . As Economic Forecasts Worsen, Up to $1 Trillion in Federal Aid to State and Local Governments Could Be Needed by the End of 2021 , Economic Policy Institute, May 11, 2020.

Bivens, Josh, and Ben Zipperer. 2020. Health Insurance and the COVID-19 Shock: What We Know So Far About Health Insurance Losses and What It Means for Policy . Economic Policy Institute, August 2020.

Blad, Evie. 2020. “ Trump, Fauci, and Reopening Schools: What You Need to Know ” (blog post). Education Week , May 14, 2020.

Bloom, Benjamin S. 1964.  Stability and Change in Human Characteristics : New York: Wiley.

Bloom, Howard S., Carolyn J. Hill, Alison Rebeck Black, and Mark W. Lipsey. 2008. “Performance Trajectories and Performance Gaps as Achievement Effect-Size Benchmarks for Educational Interventions.”  Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness  1, no. 4: 289–328. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19345740802400072 .

Boca News Now . 2020. “ Coronavirus: All FL Doctors Offices Must Close for Non-Emergency Care; Definition of “Procedure” Is Unclear, But Intent Is to Reduce COVID-19 Spread In Medical Offices .” Boca News Now , March 20.

Borghans, Lex, Angela L. Duckworth, James J. Heckman, and Bas ter Weel. 2008. “The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits.”  Journal of Human Resources  43, no. 4: 972–1059. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2008.0017 .

Broadwater, Luke. 2020. “ Congress’s Ideological Divide Has Stymied Aid for Pandemic-Stricken Schools .” New York Times , August 6, 2020.

Brookings Institution. 2020. “Reopening Schools in the Fall Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic” (webinar). Expert panelists: John Allen, Michael Hansen, Daniel A. Domenech, Heather J. Hough, Emiliana Vegas . May 21, 2020.

Bueno, Carycruz. 2020. “Bricks and Mortar vs. Computers and Modems: The Impacts of Enrollment in K-12 Virtual Schools.” EdWorkingPapers no. 20–250. Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/kahb-5v62 .

Burde, Dana, Amy Kapit, Rachel L. Wahl, Ozen Guven, and Margot Igland Skarpeteig. 2017. “Education in Emergencies: A Review of Theory and Research.” Review of Educational Research 87, no. 3: 619–658. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316671594 .

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2020. “ All Employees, Thousands, Local Government Education, Seasonally Adjusted ” (online data table), Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics Survey (National), accessed August 19, 2020.

Calargo, Jessica. 2020. “ What Is Betsy DeVos Thinking? ” New York Times , July 15, 2020.

Carnoy, Martin, and Emma García. 2017.  Five Key Trends in U.S. Student Performance: Progress by Blacks and Hispanics, the Takeoff of Asians, the Stall of Non-English Speakers, the Persistence of Socioeconomic Gaps, and the Damaging Effect of Highly Segregated Schools . Economic Policy Institute, January 2017.

Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 2020a. “ Preparing K–12 School Administrators for a Safe Return to School in Fall 2020 ” (web page), last updated August 26, 2020.

Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 2020b. “ Operating Schools During COVID-19: CDC’s Considerations ” (web page), last updated September 1, 2020.

Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 2020c. CDC COVID Data Tracker , last updated August 25, 2020.

Century Foundation (TCF). 2020. Closing America’s Education Funding Gaps . July 2020.

Cheng, Albert, and Michael Donnelly. 2019. “New Frontiers in Research and Practice on Homeschooling.”  Peabody Journal of Education  94, no. 3: 259–262. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0161956X.2019.1617576 .

Cheng, Erika R., and Tracey A. Wilkinson. 2020. “ Agonizing Over Screen Time? Follow the Three C’s .” New York Times , April 13, 2020.

Clark, Helen, et al. 2020. “A Future for the World’s Children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission.” The Lancet 395: 605–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32540-1 .

Cluver, Lucie, Jamie M. Lachman, Lorraine Sherr, Inge Wessels et al. 2020. “Parenting in a Time of COVID-19,” The Lancet , March 25, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30736-4 .

Cohodes, Sarah. 2020. A Better Fall Is Possible , The Atlantic , July 7, 2020.

Coleman, J.S., E. Campbell, C. Hobson, J. McPartland, A. Mood, F. Weinfeld, and R. York. 1966. Equality of Educational Opportunity . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). 2020. “ Federal Legislation to Promote Social and Emotional Learning .”

Congressional Progressive Caucus Center, The Education Trust, National Education Association (CPCC, The Education Trust, NEA). 2020. “ Dispatch from the Frontlines—Standing Together to Demand Safe Schools” (webinar). Participants: Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici, John King, Lily Eskelsen Garcia, Beatriz Beckford. August 5, 2020.

Conlin, Michelle, Lisa Baertlein, and Christopher Walljasper. 2020. “ U.S. Food Banks Run Short on Staples as Hunger Soars .” Reuters Business News , April 24.

Cookson Jr., P.W. 2020.  Measuring Student Socioeconomic Status: Toward a Comprehensive Approach . Learning Policy Institute, June 25, 2020.

Cooper, David, and Jaimie Worker. 2020. The Coronavirus Pandemic Requires State and Local Policymakers to Act, in Addition to Demanding a Strong Federal Response . Economic Policy Institute, March 17, 2020.

Cooper, Harris, Barbara Nye, Kelly Charlton, James Lindsay, Scott Greathouse. 1996. “The Effects of Summer Vacation on Achievement Test Scores: A Narrative and Meta-analytic Review.”  Review of Educational Research   66, no.  3: 227–268. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066003227 .

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). 2020. Letter to Honorable Lamar Alexander Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions United States Senate . June 24, 2020.

Crone, Eveline A. and Elly A. Konijn. 2018. “Media Use and Brain Development during Adolescence.” Nature Communications 9, no. 588: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03126-x.

Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Tara Kini. 2020. A New “New Deal” for Education: Top 10 Policy Moves for States in the COVID 2.0 Era . Learning Policy Institute, May 19, 2020.

Darling-Hammond, Linda, Dion Burns, Carol Campbell, A. Lin Goodwin, Karen Hammerness, Ee-Ling Low, Ann McIntyre, Mistilina Sato, and Ken Zeichner. 2017.  Empowered Educators: How High-Performing Systems Shape Teaching Quality Around the World, 1st Edition . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, Linda, Lisa Flook, Channa Cook-Harvey, Brigid Barron, and David Osher. 2020. “Implications for Educational Practice of the Science of Learning and Development.”  Applied Developmental Science  24, no. 2: 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.

Dickinson, Lisa. 2020. “ Culminating Capstone Projects: Another Option for Engaging Students Remotely .” Share My Lesson Blog , May 12, 2020.

DiNapoli Jr., Michael A. 2020. Making School Budgets Whole and Equitable During and After COVID-19 . Learning Policy Institute, July 17, 2020.

Dinarski, Susan. 2020. “The School Year Really Ended in March.” New York Times, May 7, 2020.

District of Columbia Office of the Mayor. 2020. DC’s COVID-19 Situational Update: August 26 .

Dorn, Emma, Bryan Hancock, Jimmy Sarakatsannis, and Ellen Viruleg. 2020. COVID-19 and Student Learning in the United States: The Hurt Could Last a Lifetime . McKinsey & Company. June 1, 2020.

Duckworth, Angela L., and David S. Yeager. 2015. “Measurement Matters: Assessing Personal Qualities Other Than Cognitive Ability for Educational Purposes.” Educational Researcher 44, no. 4: 237–251. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15584327 .

Duflo, Esther. 2020. “ Research and Policy Seminar with Esther Duflo: Good Economics for Covid-19 Times ” (webinar). Inter-American Development Bank, June 26, 2020.

Economic Policy Institute. 2020. “ Teacher Shortages ” (Featured work web page). Accessed September 4, 2020.

Ehrlich, Stacy B., Julia A. Gwynne, Amber Stitziel Pareja, and Elaine M. Allensworth with Paul Moore, Sanja Jagesic, and Elizabeth Sorice. 2013.  Preschool Attendance in Chicago Public Schools: Relationships with Learning Outcomes and Reasons for Absences . The University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research, September 2013.

Evans-Schmidt, Marie, and Elizabeth Vandewater. 2008. “Media and Attention, Cognition, and School Achievement.” The Future of Children 18, no. 1: 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.0.0004 .

Ferguson, Katie, Amy Hysick, Rachel Murat, and Alhassan Susso. 2020. “ The Reinvention Schools Really Need: Four New York Teachers of the Year Push Back at Gov. Cuomo .” New York Daily News , May 17, 2020.

Ferguson, Maria. 2020. “ A Bad Time to Pick a Fight on Public Education .” KappanOnline , July 13, 2020.

Ferris, Sarah. 2020. “ War Over Reopening Schools Hits Congress .” Politico , July 10, 2020.

Figlio, David, and Umut Özek. 2019. “Unwelcome Guests? The Effects of Refugees on the Educational Outcomes of Incumbent Students.” Journal of Labor Economics 37, no. 4: 1061–1096.

Figlio, David, Kristian L. Holden, and Umut Özek. 2018. “Do Students Benefit from Longer School Days? Regression Discontinuity Evidence from Florida’s Additional Hour of Literacy Instruction.” Economics of Education Review 67: 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.06.003 .

Folbre, Nancy. 2016. “ The Economics of Care “ (webinar), Institute for New Economic Thinking, February 24, 2016.

Fox, A.B., J. Rosen, M. Crawford. 2009. “Distractions, Distractions: Does Instant Messaging Affect College Students’ Performance on a Concurrent Reading Comprehension Task?” Cyberpsychol. Behav . 12: 51–53. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0107.

García, Emma. 2014.  The Need to Address Noncognitive Skills in the Education Policy Agenda . Economic Policy Institute, December 2014.

García, Emma. 2015. Inequalities at the Starting Gate. Cognitive and Noncognitive Skills Gaps Between 2010–2011 Kindergarten Classmates . Economic Policy Institute, June 2015.

García, Emma. 2018. “Internet, Social Media, Games, Physical Activity and Educational Outcomes.” Unpublished manuscript.

García, Emma. 2020. “ The Pandemic Sparked More Appreciation for Teachers, but Will It Give Them a Voice in Education and Their Working Conditions? ” Working Economics Blog (Economic Policy Institute), May 7, 2020.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2016. Making Whole-Child Education the Norm: How Research and Policy Initiatives Can Make Social and Emotional Skills a Focal Point of Children’s Education . Economic Policy Institute, August 2016.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2017. Education Inequalities at the School Starting Gate: Gaps, Trends, and Strategies to Address Them . Economic Policy Institute, September 2017.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2018.  Student Absenteeism: Who Misses School and How Missing School Matters for Performance . Economic Policy Institute, September 2018.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2019. The Role of Early Career Supports, Continuous Professional Development, and Learning Communities in the Teacher Shortage. The Fifth Report in ‘The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market’ Series . Economic Policy Institute, July 2019.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2020. A Policy Agenda to Address the Teacher Shortage in U.S. Public Schools. The Sixth Report in ‘The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market’ Series . Economic Policy Institute, forthcoming 2020.

García, Emma, Elaine Weiss, and Lora Engdahl. 2020. “ Access to Online Learning Amid Coronavirus Is Far from Universal, and Children Who Are Poor Suffer from a Digital Divide .” Working Economics Blog (Economic Policy Institute), April 17, 2020.

Ghandour, Reem M., Laura J. Sherman, Catherine J. Vladutiu, Mir M. Ali, Sean E. Lynch, Rebecca H. Bitsko, and Stephen J. Blumberg. 2018. “Prevalence and Treatment of Depression, Anxiety, and Conduct Problems in US Children.” Journal of Pediatrics 206: 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.09.021.

Gill, Brian, Lucas Walsh, Claire Smither Wulsin, Holly Matulewicz, Veronica Severn, Eric Grau, Amanda Lee, and Tess Kerwin. 2015. Inside Online Charter Schools . Mathematica Policy Research, October 2015.

Goldstein, Dana. 2020a. “ Research Shows Students Falling Months Behind During Virus Disruptions .” New York Times , June 10, 2020.

Goldstein, Dana. 2020b. “ Why a Pediatric Group Is Pushing to Reopen Schools This Fall .” New York Times , June 30, 2020.

Gonzalez, Jennifer. 2018. “ 10 Ways Educators Can Take Action in Pursuit of Equity : My interview with Pedro Noguera.” Cultofpedagogy.com , December 2, 2018.

Goodman, Joshua. 2014. “ Flaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time ,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 20221.

Gordon, Edmund W. 2013. “Community View: Standardized Testing Is Ineffective, Immoral Policy.”  Journal News,  April 15, 2013.

Gottfried, Michael A., and Stacy B. Ehrlich. 2018. “Introduction to the Special Issue: Combating Chronic Absence.”  Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk  23, nos. 1–2: 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2018.1439753 .

Gould, Elise. 2020a. “ Six Months Into the Recession and an 11.5 Million Jobs Deficit Remains .” Economic Policy Institute Economic Indicators, September 4, 2020.

Gould, Elise. 2020b. “ Public Education Job Losses in April Are Already Greater Than in All of the Great Recession .” Working Economics Blog (Economic Policy Institute), June 3, 2020.

Gould, Elise, and Heidi Shierholz. 2020. Not Everybody Can Work From Home: Black and Hispanic Workers Are Much Less Likely to Be Able to Telework . Economic Policy Institute, March 19, 2020.

Grady, Sarah. 2017. “ A Fresh Look at Homeschooling in the U.S. ” NCES Blog (National Center for Education Statistics), September 26, 2017.

Greeley, Christopher S. 2020. “Child Maltreatment Prevention in the Era of Coronavirus Disease 2019.” JAMA Pediatrics . Published online August 03, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.2776.

Greif Green, Jennifer, and Elizabeth Bettini. 2020. “ Addressing Teacher Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic .” Teachers College Record , July 31, 2020 .

Griffith, Michael. 2020. “ The Impact of the COVID-19 Recession on Teaching Positions .” Learning Policy Institute Blog , April 30, 2020.

Hamilton, Laura S., Julia H. Kaufman, and Melissa Diliberti. 2020. Teaching and Leading Through a Pandemic: Key Findings from the American Educator Panels Spring 2020 COVID-19 Surveys , RAND Corporation.

Hanushek, Eric A. 1979. “Conceptual and Empirical Issues in the Estimation of Educational Production Functions.” Journal of Human Resources 14, no. 3: 351–388. https://doi.org/10.2307/145575.

Harper, Averi. 2020. “ COVID-19 Exposes Mistrust, Health Care Inequality Going Back Generations for African Americans .” ABC News , April 28, 2020.

Heald-Sargent, T., W.J. Muller, X. Zheng, J. Rippe, A.B. Patel, and L.K. Kociolek. 2020. “Age-Related Differences in Nasopharyngeal Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Levels in Patients With Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).” JAMA Pediatrics . Published online July 30, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3651.

Hodges, Charles, Stephanie Moore, Barb Lockee, Torrey Trust, and Aaron Bond. 2020. “ The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning .” Educause Review , March 27, 2020.

Idele, Priscilla; David Anthony,. Lynne M. Mofenson, Jennifer Requejo, Danzhen You, Chewe Luo, and Stefan Peterson. 2020. “ The Evolving Epidemiologic and Clinical Picture of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Disease in Children and Young People .” Innocenti Working Paper no. WP-2020-07, UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti.

Imberman, Scott A., Adriana D. Kugler, and Bruno I. Sacerdote. 2012. “Katrina’s Children: Evidence on the Structure of Peer Effects from Hurricane Evacuees.” American Economic Review 102, no. 5: 2048–2082. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.5.2048.

Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education. 2020. Dropout Prevention in the Time of COVID-19 , Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia.

Irons, John. 2009. Economic Scarring: The Long-Term Impacts of the Recession , Economic Policy Institute, September 30, 2009.

Jackson, Kirabo C., Cora Wigger, and Heyu Xiong. 2018 . “Do School Spending Cuts Matter? Evidence from The Great Recession .” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 24203.

Jin Jez, Su, and Robert W. Wassmer. 2013. “The Impact of Learning Time on Academic Achievement.” Education and Urban Society 47, no. 3: 284–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124513495275 .

Jones, Stephanie, et al. 2016. What Is the Same and What Is Different? Making Sense of the “Non-Cognitive” Domain: Helping Educators Translate Research into Practice. Harvard University EASEL Lab.

Jones, Stephanie, et al. 2019. “ Explore SEL ” (web page). Harvard University EASEL Lab.

Jordan, Phyllis W. 2019. Attendance Playbook: Smart Solutions for Reducing Chronic Absenteeism , Future Ed (McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University) and Attendance Works.

Jordan, Phyllis W. 2020a. “ Kids Lose Access to Critical Health Care Source When Schools Shutter Due to COVID-19 .” Georgetown University Health Policy Institute Center for Children and Families. April 6, 2020.

Jordan, Phyllis W. 2020b. “ What Congressional Covid Funding Means for K-12 Schools .” Future Ed (McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University), August 9, 2020.

J-PAL. 2017. “ Roll Call: Getting Children into School .” J-PAL Policy Bulletin , August 2017.

Junco, R. 2012. “Too Much Face and Not Enough Books: The Relationship Between Multiple Indices of Facebook Use and Academic Performance.” Computers in Human Behavior 28: 187–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026.

Junco, R., and S.R. Cotten. 2012. “No A 4 U: The Relationship Between Multitasking and Academic Performance.” Comput. Educ. 59: 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023.

Kamenetz, Anya. 2020a. “ I Was a Screen–Time Expert: Then the Coronavirus Happened .” New York Times , July 30, 2020.

Kamenetz, Anya. 2020b. “ 4 In 10 U.S. Teens Say They Haven’t Done Online Learning Since Schools Closed .” NPR, April 8, 2020.

Karpinski A.C., P.A. Kirschner, I. Ozer, J.A. Mellott, and P. Ochwo. 2012. “An Exploration of Social Networking Site Use, Multitasking, and Academic Performance Among United States and European University Students.” Computers in Human Behavior 29: 1182–1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.011.

Kidronl, Yael, and Jim Lindsay. 2014.  The Effects of Increased Learning Time on Student Academic and Nonacademic Outcomes: Findings from a Meta-Analytic Review . U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences’ National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance and Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia.

Kim, E. Tammy. 2019. “ The Messy Reality of Personalized Learning: Untangling the Mixed Record of the Latest Big-Fix Educational Trend Promoted by Silicon Valley .” The New Yorker , July 10, 2019.

Kirk, Joy. 2019. “ Teachers Are Always There to Help, But Now We’re the Ones Who Need a Boost .”  Working Economics Blog  (Economic Policy Institute), June 14, 2019.

Kirschner, Paul A., and Aryn C. Karpinski. 2010. “Facebook® and Academic Performance.” Computers in Human Behavior 26: 1237–1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024.

Kostyo, Stephen, Jessica Cardichon, and Linda Darling-Hammond. 2018.  Making ESSA’s Equity Promise Real: State Strategies to Close the Opportunity Gap . Learning Policy Institute, September 2018.

Kraft, Matthew A., David Blazar, and Dylan Hogan. 2018. “The Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence.” Review of Educational Research 88, no. 4: 547–558. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318759268.

Kuhfeld, Megan. 2019. “ Rethinking Summer Slide: The More You Gain, the More You Lose .” KappanOnline, June 6.

Lambert, Diana, Michael Burke, and Ali Tadayon. “ Spike in Coronavirus Cases Means Some Schools Won’t Open at All This Fall ,” EdSource , July 10, 2020.

Leachman, Michael, and Eric Figueroa. 2019. K-12 School Funding Up in Most 2018 Teacher-Protest States, But Still Well Below Decade Ago . Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, March 2019.

Lee, Thea. 2020a. “ HEROES Act Provides Critical Relief and Recovery Measures to U.S. Workers ” (Statement), Economic Policy Institute, May 12, 2020.

Lee, Thea. 2020b. “ The GOP HEALS Act Fails to Heal People Harmed by the Coronavirus, Will Cost Millions of Jobs, and Protects Bad Employers ” (statement), Economic Policy Institute, July 28, 2020.

Lemola, S., N. Perkinson-Gloor, S. Brand, J.F. Dewald-Kaufmann, A. Grob. 2015. “Adolescents’ Electronic Media Use at Night, Sleep Disturbance, and Depressive Symptoms in the Smartphone Age.” Journal of Youth Adolescence 44, no. 2: 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0176-x.

Lepp A., J.E. Barkley, A.C. Karpinski. 2014. “The Relationship Between Cell Phone Use, Academic Performance, Anxiety, and Satisfaction With Life in College Students.” Computers in Human Behavior 31: 343–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.049.

Lerner, Michele. 2020. “ One Home, a Lifetime of Impact .” Washington Post , July 23, 2020.

Levin, Henry M. 2012. “More Than Just Test Scores.” Prospects 42: 269–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-012-9240-z .

Lippman, L.H., R. Ryberg, R. Carney, and K.A. Moore. 2015. Key “Soft Skills” That Foster Youth Workforce Success: Toward a Consensus Across Fields , Child Trends, FHI360, and USAID, 2015.

Lisinski, Chris. 2020 . “ Massachusetts Scraps School Testing, Modifies Graduation Requirements .” WGBH . April 11, 2020.

Loewus, Liana. 2019. “ A Clearer Vision for Teacher Professional Learning .”  Education Week , May 14, 2019.

Lubienski, Christopher, Tiffany Puckett, and T. Jameson Brewer. 2013. “Does Homeschooling ‘Work’? A Critique of the Empirical Claims and Agenda of Advocacy Organizations.” Peabody Journal of Education 88, no. 3, 378–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2013.798516.

Marcotte, Dave E. 2007. “Schooling and Test Scores: A Mother-Natural Experiment.” Economics of Education Review 26, no. 5: 629–640.

Marcotte, Dave E., and Benjamin Hansen. 2010. “Time for School? When the Snow Falls, Test Scores also Drop.” Education Next, Winter 2010: 52–59.

Marcotte, Dave E., and Steven W. Hemelt. 2008. “Unscheduled School Closings and Student Performance.” Education Finance and Policy 3, no. 3: 316–338. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp.2008.3.3.316.

McCombs, Jennifer Sloan, Catherine H. Augustine, Fatih Unlu, Kathleen M. Ziol-Guest, Scott Naftel, Celia J. Gomez, Terry Marsh, Goke Akinniranye, and Ivy Todd. 2019. Investing in Successful Summer Programs: A Review of Evidence Under the Every Student Succeeds Act . Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2019.

McNichol, Elizabeth, and Michael Leachman. 2020. States Continue to Face Large Shortfalls Due to COVID-19 Effects , Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, July 2019.

Meltzer, Erica, Yesenia Robles, and Gabrielle LaMarr LeMee. 2020. “ Why Colorado School Districts Are Serving Fewer Meals During Coronavirus Closures .” Denver Post , May 12.

Menas, Amanda. 2019. “ The Widening Mental Health Treatment Gap in Schools .” NEA Today , May 2, 2019.

Mishel, Lawrence, and Richard Rothstein. 2003.  The Class Size Debate . Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.

Morsy, Leila, and Richard Rothstein. 2019. Toxic Stress and Children’s Outcomes: African American Children Growing Up Poor Are at Greater Risk of Disrupted Physiological Functioning and Depressed Academic Achievement , Economic Policy Institute, May 1, 2019.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Reopening K-12 Schools During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prioritizing Health, Equity, and Communities . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25858 .

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. 2018. “T. 206.10. Number and Percentage of Homeschooled Students Ages 5 Through 17 with a Grade Equivalent of Kindergarten Through 12th Grade, by Selected Child, Parent, and Household Characteristics: Selected Years, 1999 Through 2016.” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_206.10.asp .

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. 2019a. “Table 216.20. Number and Enrollment of Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, by School Level, Type, and Charter, Magnet, and Virtual Status: Selected Years, 1990–91 Through 2017–18” Digest of Education Statistics: 2019, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, December 2019. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_208.20.asp .

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. 2019b. “Table 208.20. Public and Private Elementary and Secondary Teachers, Enrollment, Pupil/Teacher Ratios, and New Teacher Hires: Selected Years, Fall 1955 Through Fall 2028.” Digest of Education Statistics: 2019, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, November 2019. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_216.20.asp .

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K 2010–2011).

National Education Association (NEA). 2020. All Hands On Deck: Guidance Regarding Reopening School Buildings , July 2020.

National Education Policy Center (NEPC). 2020. “ The Misguided Push to Reintroduce Standardized Testing During the Pandemic .” NEPC Newsletter , August 6, 2020.

National Institute on Retirement Security (NIRS). 2020. “Will COVID-19 Trigger Teacher Retirements?” (webinar). Expert speakers: Dan Doonan, David Lamoureux, Paul Angelo, Rocky Joyner. August 14, 2020.

National Superintendents Roundtable. 2020. “ 10 Takeaways to Safely Reopen Schools. Infectious Disease Specialists Speak .” Roundtable News , July 19, 2020.

Network for Public Education (NPE). 2020. “ Diane Ravitch in Conversation with Michael Hynes ” (webinar), May 13, 2020.

Neuman, Ari, and Oz Guterman. 2016. “Academic Achievements and Homeschooling—It All Depends on the Goals .” Studies in Educational Evaluation 51: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.005 .

New York City (NYC) Department of Education. 2020. “ Getting Started With Your iPad ” (web page), accessed September 3, 2020.

Nickow, Andre, Philip Oreopoulos, and Vincent Quan. 2020. “ The Impressive Effects of Tutoring on PreK-12 Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence .” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper no. 27476.

Oakes, Jeannie, Anna Maier, and Julia Daniel. 2017. Community Schools: An Evidence-Based Strategy for Equitable School Improvement , National Education Policy Center and Learning Policy Institute, June 2017.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2009. “ The Usefulness of PISA Data for Policy Makers, Researchers and Experts on Methodology .” In PISA Data Analysis Manual: SPSS, Second Edition . Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264056275-2-en.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2018. Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) data for 2018.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2019.  TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners . Paris: TALIS, OECD Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en .

Oxfam International. 2007. Climate Alarm: Disasters Increase as Climate Change Bites .

Özek, Umut. 2020. “ Examining the Educational Spillover Effects of Severe Natural Disasters: The Case of Hurricane Maria .” American Institutes for Research/Calder Working Paper no. 233-0320, March 2020.

Page, Susan, 2020. “ Back to School? 1 in 5 Teachers Are Unlikely to Return to Reopened Classrooms This Fall, Poll Says .” USA Today , May 26, 2020.

Pane, John F., Daniel F. McCaffrey, Nidhi Kalra, Annie J. Zhou. 2008. “ Supplemental Materials For: Effects of Student Displacement in Louisiana During the First Academic Year After the Hurricanes of 2005 .” RAND Corporation Working Paper no. WR-570-RC.

Parolin, Zachary, and Christopher Wimer. 2020. “ Forecasting Estimates of Poverty During the COVID-19 Crisis .” Poverty & Social Policy Brief 4, no. 6: April 16, 2020. Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University.

Partelow, Lisette, Jessica Yin, and Scott Sargrad. 2020. Why K-12 Education Needs More Federal Stimulus Funding . Center for American Progress , July 2020.

Petway II, Kevin T., Meghan W. Brenneman, and Patrick C. Kyllonen Kyllonen. 2016. “Connecting Noncognitive Development to the Educational Pipeline.” In Non-cognitive Factors and Educational Attainment , edited by Myint Swe Khine and Shaljan Areepattamannil. Boston: Sense Publishers

Pollán, Marina, et al. 2020. “Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Spain (ENE-COVID): A Nationwide, Population-Based Seroepidemiological Study.” The Lancet , July 6, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31483-5,

Progressive Caucus Action Fund. 2020. “ Coronavirus Explainer: Comparison of the Heroes Act and HEALS Act .” Last updated August 4, 2020.

Prothero, Arianna. 2020. “Social Emotional Learning and School Reopenings: A Guide for Schools.” EdWeek , July 14, 2020.

Putnam, Robert. 2015. Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis . New York: Simon and Schuster.

Quinn, D.M., N. Cooc,, J. McIntyre, and C.J. Gomez. 2016. “Seasonal Dynamics of Academic Achievement Inequality by Socioeconomic Status and Race/Ethnicity: Updating and Extending Past Research With New National Data.”  Educational Researcher  45, no. 8: 443–453.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16677965 .

Ravitch, Diane. 2011.  The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education . New York: Basic Books.

Ravitch, Diane. 2020.  Slaying Goliath: The Passionate Resistance to Privatization and the Fight to Save America’s Public Schools . New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Ray, Brian D. 2017a. “A Systematic Review of the Empirical Research on Selected Aspects of Homeschooling as a School Choice.”  Journal of School Choice  11, no. 4: 604–621. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15582159.2017.1395638 .

Ray, Brian. 2017b. “A Review of Research on Homeschooling and What Might Educators Learn?.” Dossiê: Homeschooling e o Direito à Educação. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1980-6248-2016-0009 .

Reardon, Sean F. 2011. “The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich and the Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations.” In  Whither Opportunity?: Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances , edited by Greg J. Duncan and Richard Murnane. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Reber, Sarah, and Nora Gordon. 2020. “ Schools Need Flexible Federal Aid Now: What Should Congress Do Next? ” Brown Center Chalkboard (The Brookings Institution), July 27, 2020.

RESEARCHED. 2020. “ Formative Assessment in the Age of Covid: How Can Practitioners Apply Evidence-based Assessment Practices to Today’s Challenges? ” (panel discussion video: moderator: Joshua Starr; panelists: Paul Zinni, Melissa Spadin, Kristin Huff, Lauren Merkley, Utah Teacher of the Year 2020). August 10, 2020.

Rogers, Chris, and Noelle Ellerson Ng. 2020. Memorandum: Report of Initial Findings: COVID-19 Impact on Public School s . AASA: The School Superintendents Association. March 27, 2020.

Rosen, L.D., L. Mark Carrier, and N.A. Cheever. 2013. “Facebook and Texting Made Me Do It: Media-Induced Task-Switching While Studying.” Computers in Human Behavior 29: 948–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001.

Rothstein, Richard. 2004.  Class and Schools: Using Social, Economic, and Educational Reform to Close the Achievement Gap . Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.

Rothstein, Richard. 2020. “ The Coronavirus Will Explode Achievement Gaps in Education .” Shelterforce , April 13, 2020.

Rothstein, Richard, Rebecca Jacobsen, and Tamara Wilder. 2008.  Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right . New York: Teachers College Press and Economic Policy Institute.

Sacerdote, Bruce. 2012. “When the Saints Go Marching Out: Long-Term Outcomes for Student Evacuees from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 4, no. 1: 109-135. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.4.1.109.

Sandoval, Edgar. 2020. “ Like a Horror Movie: A Small Border Hospital Battles the Coronavirus. ” New York Times , August 4, 2020.

Save the Children. 2008. In the Face of Disaster: Children and Climate Change .

Save the Children. 2013. Attacks on Education: The Impact of Conflict and Grave Violations on Children’s Futures .

Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore. 2020. “The Economics of Class Size.” In The Economics of Education (Second Edition), A Comprehensive Overview , edited by Steve Bradley and Colin Green, 321–331. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815391-8.00023-9 .

Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore, and Natalie Tomeh. 2020. “ Visualizing Food Insecurity: App Offers Snapshot of Weekly National and State-by-State Averages .” Institute For Policy Research, Northwestern University, July 14, 2020.

Schwartz, Sarah. 2019. “ What Do Teachers Really Want from Professional Development? Respect .”  Education Week , May 15, 2019.

Shafiq, M. Najeeb. 2010. “ The Effect of an Economic Crisis on Educational Outcomes: An Economic Framework and Review of the Evidence .” Current Issues in Comparative Education 12, no. 2: 1523–1615.

Shierholz, Heidi. 2020. “ Total Initial UI Claims Have Risen in Each of the Last Four Weeks: Congress Must Act .” Working Economics Blog (Economic Policy Institute), September 3, 2020.

Shonkoff, J.P., and D.A. Phillips. 2000.  From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development . Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Shonkoff, Jack P., and David R. Williams. 2020. Thinking About Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Impacts Through a Science-Informed, Early Childhood Lens . The Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, April 2020.

Snell, Kelsey. 2020. “ Here’s How Much Congress Has Approved For Coronavirus Relief So Far And What It’s For .” NPR, May 15, 2020.

Soldner, Matthew. 2020. “ Seeking Your Help in Learning More About What Works in Distance Education: A Rapid Evidence Synthesis .” NCEE Blog , March 26, 2020.

Sommers, Marc. 1999. Emergency Education for Children .

Southern Education Foundation. 2015.  A New Majority Research Bulletin: Low-Income Students Now a Majority in the Nation’s Public Schools . January 2015.

Stancati, Margherita, Leslie Brody, and Xavier Fontdeglòria. 2020. “ The Pandemic Sent 1.5 Billion Children Home From School: Many Might Not Return .” Wall Street Journal , June 3, 2020.

Starr, Joshua. 2020. Responding to COVID-19: Short- and Long-Term Challenges , KappanOnline, March 23, 2020.

St. George, Donna. 2020. “ Montgomery County Schools Launch Remote Learning: ‘It Will be Chaotic.’ ” Washington Post , March 30, 2020.

Stratford, Brandon. 2020. As Schools Reopen, Addressing COVID-19–Related Trauma and Mental Health Issues Will Take More Than Mental Health Services . Child Trends, July 2020.

Strauss, Valerie. 2020. “ How to Stop Magical Thinking in School Reopening Plans .” Washington Post , July 30, 2020.

Streicher, Stan. 2020. “ Anne Arundel County Public Schools Has Handed Out 1M Meals During Coronavirus Pandemic .” CBS Baltimore , May 12, 2020.

Swaby, Aliyya. 2020. “ Texas STAAR Test Requirements Waived Due To Coronavirus Outbreak .” Texas Public Radio . March 17, 2020.

Thompson, Paul N. 2019. Effects of Four-Day School Weeks on Student Achievement: Evidence from Oregon , IZA DP No. 12204, March 2019.

Tinubu Ali, Titlayo, and Mirel Herrera. 2020. Distance Learning During COVID-19: 7 Equity Considerations for Schools and Districts . Southern Education Foundation, April 2020.

Tirivayi, Nyasha, Dominic Richardson, Maja Gavrilovic, Valeria Groppo, Lusajo Kajula, Elsa Valli, and Francesca Viola. 2020. “ A Rapid Review of Economic Policy and Social Protection Responses to Health and Economic Crises and Their Effects on Children: Lessons for the COVID-19 Pandemic Response .” Innocenti Working Paper no. 2020-02, UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti, Florence.

Todd, Petra E., and Kenneth I. Wolpin. 2003. “On the Specification and Estimation of the Production Function for Cognitive Achievement.” Economic Journal 113, 485: F3–F33. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00097 .

Tolerance Trauma. 2020. A Trauma-Informed Approach to Teaching Through Coronavirus . March 23, 2020.

Torres, Stacy. 2020. “ After Coronavirus, Expect High School Dropout Wave: 9/11 Was the Trigger for My Sisters .” USA Today , April 30, 2020.

Tough, Paul. 2012.  How Children Succeed: Grit,   Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character . New York: Mariner Books.

UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank, World Food Programme, and UNHCR. 2020. Framework for Reopening Schools , April 2020.

UNESCO, the World Bank, UNFPA, UNDP, UN Women, and UNHCR. 2016. Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4 .

United Nations. 2020. Education During COVID-19 and Beyond . Policy Brief. August 2020.

United Nations Inter-Agency Standing Committee (UN IASC). 2007. Guideline: Inter-Agency Contingency Planning for Humanitarian Assistance IASC Sub-Working Group on Preparedness , November 2007.

United Nations Inter-Agency Standing Committee (UN IASC). 2015. Guideline: Emergency Response Preparedness July 2015 IASC Task Team on Preparedness and Resilience , July 2015.

United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 2014. Guide to Education in Natural Disasters: How USAID Supports Education in Crises . January 2014.

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH). 2020 . “Supporting Children and Youth Experiencing Homelessness During the COVID-19 Outbreak: Questions to Consider ” (web page) March 16, 2020.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. “ CPS Historical Time Series Tables on School Enrollment Table A-1. School Enrollment of the Population 3 Years Old and Over, by Level and Control of School, Race, and Hispanic Origin: October 1955 to 2018 ,” December 2019.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2020a. Household Pulse Survey Data Tables , accessed July 2020.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2020b. 2018 Public Elementary-Secondary Education Finance Data , last revised April 14, 2020

U.S. Department of Education. 2016. “ Chronic Absenteeism in the Nation’s Schools: An Unprecedented Look at a Hidden Educational Crisis ”  (online fact sheet), accessed August 2018.

U.S. Senate. 2020. “Coronavirus Child Care and Education Relief Act” (fact sheet), accessed September 4, 2020.

Valant, Jon. 2020. “ School Reopening Plans Linked to Politics Rather than Public Health .” Brown Center Chalkboard (Brookings Institution blog), July 29, 2020.

von Hippel, Paul T. 2020. “ Year-Round School Calendars: Effects on Summer Learning, Achievement, Parents, Teachers, and Property Values ,” EdWorkingPaper no. 20-209. Annenberg Institute at Brown University.

von Hippel, Paul T., and Caitlin Hamrock. 2019. “Do Test Score Gaps Grow Before, During, or Between the School Years? Measurement Artifacts and What We Can Know in Spite of Them.” Sociological Science . http://dx.doi.org/10.15195/v6.a3 .

von Hippel, Paul T., J. Workman, and D.B.  Downey. 2018. “Inequality in Reading and Math Skills Forms Mainly Before Kindergarten: A Replication, and Partial Correction, of ‘Are Schools the Great Equalizer?’” Sociology of Education 91, no. 4: 323–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718801760 .

Wadhera, Rishi K., Priya Wadhera, and Prakriti Gaba et al. 2020. “Variation in COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Deaths Across New York City Boroughs.” JAMA Network Research Letter , April 29, 2020. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2765524 .

Walker, Darren. 2020. “ Extraordinary Times, Extraordinary Measures .” Equal Change Blog (Ford Foundation), June 11, 2020.

Walker, Tim. 2020. “ Social-Emotional Learning Should Be Priority During COVID-19 Crisis .” NEA Today , April 15, 2020.

Walsh, Jeremy J., Joel D. Barnes, Jameason D. Cameron, Gary S. Goldfield, Jean-Philippe Chaput, Katie E. Gunnell, Andrée-Anne Ledoux, Roger L. Zemek, and Mark S. Tremblay. 2018. “Associations Between 24 Hour Movement Behaviours and Global Cognition in US Children: A Cross-sectional Observational Study.” The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health ,  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(18)30278-5.

Waxman, Elaine, Poonam Gupta, and Michael Karpman. 2020. More Than One in Six Adults Were Food Insecure Two Months Into the COVID-19 Recession: Findings from the May 14–27 Coronavirus Tracking Survey . Urban Institute, July 2020.

Weiner, Rachel. 2020. “ More Than 80 Percent of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Georgia Were African American, Study Finds .” Washington Post , April 29.

Weingarten, Randi. 2020. “ How to Cap This Unprecedented School Year .” AFT Voices , March 20, 2020.

Weiss, Elaine, and Paul Reville. 2019.  Broader, Bolder, Better: How Schools and Communities Help Students Overcome the Disadvantages of Poverty . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Publishing Group.

The White House. 2006. The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned .

Wicks, Matthew. 2010. A National Primer on K-12 Online Learning. Version 2 . International Association for K-12 Online Learning, October 2010.

Will, Madeline. 2020. “ Teachers Say They’re More Likely to Leave the Classroom Because of Coronavirus .” Education Week , June 3, 2020.

Wilmer, Henry H., Lauren E. Sherman, and Jason M. Chein. 2017. “Smartphones and Cognition: A Review of Research Exploring the Links Between Mobile Technology Habits and Cognitive Functioning.” Frontiers in Psychology 8: 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00605.

Woodworth, J.L., M.E. Raymond, K. Chirbas, M. Gonzalez, Y. Negassi, W. Snow, and C. Van Donge. 2015. Online Charter School Study 2015 . Center for Research on Education Outcomes, Stanford University, 2015.

Zhao, Yong. 2020. “ Does It Work? The Most Meaningless Question to Ask about Online Education .” Zhaolearning.com (blog), March 28, 2020.

See related work on Student achievement | Education | Educational inequity | Coronavirus | COVID and education

See more work by Emma García and Elaine Weiss

Sign up to stay informed

New research, insightful graphics, and event invites in your inbox every week.

See related work on Student achievement , Education , Educational inequity , Coronavirus , and COVID and education

Track EPI on Twitter

Mission: Recovering Education in 2021

THE CONTEXT

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused abrupt and profound changes around the world.  This is the worst shock to education systems in decades, with the longest school closures combined with looming recession.  It will set back progress made on global development goals, particularly those focused on education. The economic crises within countries and globally will likely lead to fiscal austerity, increases in poverty, and fewer resources available for investments in public services from both domestic expenditure and development aid. All of this will lead to a crisis in human development that continues long after disease transmission has ended.

Disruptions to education systems over the past year have already driven substantial losses and inequalities in learning. All the efforts to provide remote instruction are laudable, but this has been a very poor substitute for in-person learning.  Even more concerning, many children, particularly girls, may not return to school even when schools reopen. School closures and the resulting disruptions to school participation and learning are projected to amount to losses valued at $10 trillion in terms of affected children’s future earnings.  Schools also play a critical role around the world in ensuring the delivery of essential health services and nutritious meals, protection, and psycho-social support. Thus, school closures have also imperilled children’s overall wellbeing and development, not just their learning.   

It’s not enough for schools to simply reopen their doors after COVID-19. Students will need tailored and sustained support to help them readjust and catch-up after the pandemic. We must help schools prepare to provide that support and meet the enormous challenges of the months ahead. The time to act is now; the future of an entire generation is at stake.

THE MISSION

Mission objective:  To enable all children to return to school and to a supportive learning environment, which also addresses their health and psychosocial well-being and other needs.

Timeframe : By end 2021.

Scope : All countries should reopen schools for complete or partial in-person instruction and keep them open. The Partners - UNESCO , UNICEF , and the World Bank - will join forces to support countries to take all actions possible to plan, prioritize, and ensure that all learners are back in school; that schools take all measures to reopen safely; that students receive effective remedial learning and comprehensive services to help recover learning losses and improve overall welfare; and their teachers are prepared and supported to meet their learning needs. 

Three priorities:

1.    All children and youth are back in school and receive the tailored services needed to meet their learning, health, psychosocial wellbeing, and other needs. 

Challenges : School closures have put children’s learning, nutrition, mental health, and overall development at risk. Closed schools also make screening and delivery for child protection services more difficult. Some students, particularly girls, are at risk of never returning to school. 

Areas of action : The Partners will support the design and implementation of school reopening strategies that include comprehensive services to support children’s education, health, psycho-social wellbeing, and other needs. 

Targets and indicators

2.    All children receive support to catch up on lost learning.

Challenges : Most children have lost substantial instructional time and may not be ready for curricula that were age- and grade- appropriate prior to the pandemic. They will require remedial instruction to get back on track. The pandemic also revealed a stark digital divide that schools can play a role in addressing by ensuring children have digital skills and access.

Areas of action : The Partners will (i) support the design and implementation of large-scale remedial learning at different levels of education, (ii) launch an open-access, adaptable learning assessment tool that measures learning losses and identifies learners’ needs, and (iii) support the design and implementation of digital transformation plans that include components on both infrastructure and ways to use digital technology to accelerate the development of foundational literacy and numeracy skills. Incorporating digital technologies to teach foundational skills could complement teachers’ efforts in the classroom and better prepare children for future digital instruction.   

While incorporating remedial education, social-emotional learning, and digital technology into curricula by the end of 2021 will be a challenge for most countries, the Partners agree that these are aspirational targets that they should be supporting countries to achieve this year and beyond as education systems start to recover from the current crisis.

3.   All teachers are prepared and supported to address learning losses among their students and to incorporate  digital technology into their teaching.

Challenges : Teachers are in an unprecedented situation in which they must make up for substantial loss of instructional time from the previous school year and teach the current year’s curriculum. They must also protect their own health in school. Teachers will need training, coaching, and other means of support to get this done. They will also need to be prioritized for the COVID-19 vaccination, after frontline personnel and high-risk populations.  School closures also demonstrated that in addition to digital skills, teachers may also need support to adapt their pedagogy to deliver instruction remotely. 

Areas of action : The Partners will advocate for teachers to be prioritized in COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, after frontline personnel and high-risk populations, and provide capacity-development on pedagogies for remedial learning and digital and blended teaching approaches. 

Country level actions and global support

UNESCO, UNICEF, and World Bank are joining forces to support countries to achieve the Mission, leveraging their expertise and actions on the ground to support national efforts and domestic funding.

Country Level Action

1.  Mobilize team to support countries in achieving the three priorities

The Partners will collaborate and act at the country level to support governments in accelerating actions to advance the three priorities.

2.  Advocacy to mobilize domestic resources for the three priorities

The Partners will engage with governments and decision-makers to prioritize education financing and mobilize additional domestic resources.

Global level action

1.  Leverage data to inform decision-making

The Partners will join forces to   conduct surveys; collect data; and set-up a global, regional, and national real-time data-warehouse.  The Partners will collect timely data and analytics that provide access to information on school re-openings, learning losses, drop-outs, and transition from school to work, and will make data available to support decision-making and peer-learning.

2.  Promote knowledge sharing and peer-learning in strengthening education recovery

The Partners will join forces in sharing the breadth of international experience and scaling innovations through structured policy dialogue, knowledge sharing, and peer learning actions.

The time to act on these priorities is now. UNESCO, UNICEF, and the World Bank are partnering to help drive that action.

Last Updated: Mar 30, 2021

• (BROCHURE, in English) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (BROCHURE, in French) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (BROCHURE, in Spanish) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (BLOG) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (VIDEO, Arabic) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (VIDEO, French) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• (VIDEO, Spanish) Mission: Recovering Education 2021
• World Bank Education and COVID-19
• World Bank Blogs on Education

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

New UNESCO global survey reveals impact of COVID-19 on higher education

In the wake of the unprecedented COVID-19 education disruptions which affected more than 220 million tertiary-level students around the world, UNESCO conducted a global survey aimed at providing an evidence-based overview of the current situation of the higher education system at national and global levels.

The results provide insights on how some countries were able to transform challenges, brought by the rapid digitalization of education, into opportunities through strong government support and international cooperation.

The survey attempts to assess the varying impact the pandemic had on higher education systems in terms of access, equity and quality of teaching and learning, university operation, national challenges, emerging issues, and strategic responses.

 The key findings for the various assessment dimensions are:

 Mode of teaching and learning: The major impact of COVID-19 on teaching and learning is the increase in online education. The hybrid mode of teaching has become the most popular form. 

• Access : The impact of COVID-19 on enrollment varies by regional and income levels. High income and Europe and North American countries are better able to cope with the disruption due to government funding support and increase in domestic enrollment.
• International mobility : Mobility took a major hit, affecting international students significantly, but virtual mobility could compensate or even replace physical mobility. 
• University staff : Despite the closure of many universities, the impact of COVID-19 on university staff compared to the previous academic year is limited.  
• Disruption of research and extension activities : COVID-19 caused suspension and cancellation of teaching and research activities globally. 
• Widening inequality : The mixed impact of the pandemic on university finance shed a light on the exacerbation of inequality in higher education. Financial support from the government and external sources are crucial to the survival of HEIs. 
• University operations : The strong impact of the pandemic on HEIs operations caused reduced maintenance and services on campus and campuses closures worldwide.
• National challenges : Health and adaptation to new modes and models of teaching are the top concerns for students and institutions. 
• Transition from higher education to work : The significant reduction of job opportunities makes the transition from higher education to the labor market more difficult. Employers are also seeking applicants with higher technology skills. 
• National priority : Strategic options for country-specific response are to improve infrastructure and availability of digital devices for online or distance learning as well as support for teachers and more international collaboration in research and policy dialogues.

The global survey was addressed to the 193 UNESCO Member States and 11 Associate Members. Sixty-five countries submitted responses, fifty-seven of which were used for the analysis that informed the report.

• Access the full report
• More on UNESCO’s work in higher education

Related items

• Higher education

More on this subject

Other recent news

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

10 COVID-19’s Affect on Education, Specifically in High Schools

Melissa Kostecki

Introduction

Our country, The United States of America, has been heavily impacted by the global pandemic, COVID-19, in numerous ways. One major aspect of our country that has had to heavily adjust to these new safety protocols is our education system, specifically high schools. A typical day of high school no longer looks like a day from 8 am to 3 pm, with extracurricular activities following school to socialize. Now, high schools all around the United States have had to switch to virtual learning, to protect students’ and teachers’ health. This dramatic change in high schools has been challenging, but it has shown how strong our education system is. COVID-19 has challenged and modified the way high schools are now functioning by forcing online learning technology to advance rapidly, having to introduce and create new ways of learning, and adjusting the education system to the new norms of our society. This topic relates to STS because without the technology we have today, virtual learning would not be possible. Advancements in learning technology have allowed high schools around the world to function during this time.

Impact on Learning Technology in Secondary Education

To begin, a major part that high school systems have had to change is the learning technology being used to hold virtual classes. High schools and technology companies have had to figure out quickly what is needed to make virtual learning easy and available to all students. Holding virtual classes requires high schools to have various online learning resources to help students succeed and stay on track during this time. The main application used by most high school students is called Zoom . Zoom is an online communication application that is used to hold virtual classes. Teachers have many tools avail able on this application to help make virtual classes more interactive. Certain features that teachers enjoy include, “Many teachers take advantage of the Zoom feature that allows for recording conversations and saving chat transcripts so students can refer to them later” ( Lieberman 2). Zoom is an easy-to-use application that allows high school teachers to interact with students by sharing their screens with the class and viewing their students through web came ras. But, with most high schoo ls around the country using this tool, it has forced Zoom to advance its technology very rapidly so that it’s able to cater to the number of users that need it.

The rapid increase in Zoom users has challenged the application. Lieberman (2020) noted, “The surge of new users, including 90,000 schools and the rapid increase in users has also led to increased scrutiny of the security limitations” (1). Clearly, there has been a rapid increase in the number of high schools that are relying on this application, which has caused slight defects as Zoom continues to improve its system. But, without this technology, it would make learning online much more difficult and could cause some students to fall behind in school. Luckily, with learning technology advancements like Zoom, virtual learning is manageable and more interactive.

Creating New Technology to Make High School Learning Interactive

It is evident that high school students are concerned about their futures and they feel that what their school may be doing is not enough for them to stay on track. So, from this information, it’s evident that students’ futures may have to be put slightly on pause for them to get back on track. High schools around the United States should begin to implement online resources to help high school students stay on track with their goal of college. Resources can include how to study for standardized tests and faculty helping students with their college applications. As our education system continues to endeavor during this time, each day more and more new learning techniques continue to be implemented to help students. But, it’s evident that more needs to be done to make students feel prepared for the future during this time. As high schools continue to advance their online systems, more resources will likely be available to help students thinking about life after high school during this time.

Impact on High School Student’s Social Interaction & Mental Health

“This dramatic change in high schools has been challenging, but it has shown how strong our education system is.”

As our society begins to adjust to the new norms of our society of maintaining six feet apart from others, wearing a mask in public, and staying home if you’re sick, our interaction with each other has changed. A main part of the high school experience is interacting with classmates inside and outside of the classroom ( Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1). High school students are missing out on memories like prom, graduation, and sporting events. All of this uncertainty for when high school will return to normal has created a lot of anxiety and stress for students ( Kreitz 1). But, being in a global pandemic gives students the only option of dealing with this situation and creating solutions. High schools around the country have begun making solutions like, making their extracurricular clubs meet virtually. One high school in Texas has shifted their club fair to be virtual, so students still have the opportunity to stay in contact with peers and make new friends. A teacher Vivian Hernandez (2020) describes the importance of social interaction during this time, “When educators sponsor a student club, they’re building community, they bring students together, student clubs do not have to stop because of COVID-19, they may be more important now than ever” (1). Interaction with others will help make high school students feel less lonely during this time. High schools around the country are creating new ways to hold regular student sessions like this, which shows how high schools can come together to support one another. 

Luckily, thanks to the technology we have, high school students can easily learn from home. Without computers, e-textbooks, and online applications, it would be impossible to continue to go through the school year. And although students are missing the structure of the normal school day, this will only make high school institutions stronger for the future.  Dr. Michael Krüger, Coordinator of the International Education Management noted in an interview that despite the complexity of the new teaching and learning arrangements, he is surprised how focused everyone is and how much has been achieved. Krüger believes the lessons learned from these experiences will have a lasting impact on their teaching and help strengthen the educational system ( Wawa , 1). As an education system, all members of high schools have worked to strengthen their learning techniques and to adapt to the new norms of our society during this time. 

Connection to STS Theory

The topic of how education has changed in high schools across the country due to COVID-19 relates to the STS theory of social constructivism. Social constructivism describes that science & technology are importantly social, that they are always active, and that they do not provide a direct route from nature to ideas. The main aspects of this theory is seen throughout this chapter. The technology that has been created to make virtual learning easier and more engaging was shaped by teachers, students, and parents’ biases based on what they believed to be the best way of learning virtually. Also, science and technology are very active during this time and are constantly changing since as we begin to test new ways of learning, our high schools are learning what methods are efficient and what is not, changing them accordingly. Lastly, the technology being used is not an actual description of nature and is not displaying the normal techniques that would be used to teach high school students.

To conclude, COVID-19 has impacted the high schools around our country significantly. But, through the technology available to students, the education system has been able to reach new limits and introduce new ways of learning using virtual-technology that have never been used before. Now, new ways of learning will be implemented into school days when things go back to normal. Although there are rising concerns about students not performing as well or being prepared, high schools around the country have been able to adapt to a one of a kind situation and have been able to continue to teach through the learning technology that is available to our society. Students’ social interaction and mental health has also shifted during this time, but communities are coming together to support one another and create new ways to interact so that each student feels happy. COVID-19 has challenged and modified the way high schools are now functioning, by forcing learning technology to advance rapidly, having to introduce and create new ways of learning, and adjusting the education system to the new norms of our society. Through this global pandemic, we’ve seen how strong our education system in high schools really is.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Operating schools during COVID-19: CDC’s Considerations. ” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/schools.html .

Chick, Robert C., et al. “Using Technology to Maintain the Education of Residents during the COVID-19 Pandemic.”  Journal of Surgical Education , vol. 77, no. 4, 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1931720420300842.

Fox, Michelle. “Go to college or skip it? High school students face a new reality due to coronavirus.” CNBC, 24 Apr. 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/high-school-students-face-a-new-reality-due-to-coronavirus.html.

Hernandez, Vivian. “Creating Online Clubs for Students During Remote Learning.” Edutopia,  28 Sep. 2020, https://www.edutopia.org/article/creating-online-clubs-students-during-remote-learning .

Kreitz, Mary. “The Impact of COVID-19 on high school students.” Child & Adolescent Behavioral Health, 2020,   https://www.childandadolescent.org/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-high-school-students/.

Lieberman, Mark. “Zoom Use Skyrockets During Coronavirus Pandemic, Prompting Wave of Problems for Schoo ls .” E ducationWeek , 3 Apr. 2020, https://www.edweek.org/technology/zoom-use-skyrockets-during-coronavirus-pandemic-prompting-wave-of-problems-for-schools/2020/04  Accessed 4 Dec. 2020.

Wawa, Brenda. “COVID-19 and Higher Education: Interview with Dr. Michael Krüger .” Academic Impact, 2020,   https://academicimpact.un.org/content/covid-19-and-higher-education-interview-dr-michael-kr%C3%BCger .

“Woman in Pink Shirt Sitting by the Table While Smiling” by Julia M Cameron is in the Public Domain

“Photo of Child Sitting by the Table While Looking at the Imac” by Julia M Cameron is in the P ublic Domain

COVID-19: Success Within Devastation Copyright © 2020 by Melissa Kostecki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Appleton Area Schools see drop in student absences, but work is still needed

Editor's note: The original version of this story misstated the percentage for chronic absenteeism. That percentage has been updated.

More kids in Appleton are staying in school thanks to efforts from the district and other organizations, but, as in many districts across the state, the pandemic is still having an effect on school attendance and chronic absenteeism.

When we looked at the latest data last month , the rate of chronic absenteeism in the Appleton Area School District had dropped to 17% for the 2022-23 school year, down from 21% for 2021-22. "Chronic absenteeism" is defined as students missing more than 10% of days in a given school year.

The district has "allocated a significant number of resources into supporting our students that are struggling with consistent attendance," said AASD superintendent Greg Hartjes, so they're "pleased to see improvement."

But there's still work to be done, Hartjes added, because absenteeism is still twice what it was pre-pandemic. In the 2018-19 school year, AASD's chronic absenteeism rate was 7%, according to data from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

We talked with AASD last year about efforts they were making to help kids stay in school. Here's how those efforts have fared.

What's been working: incentives, community education and building one-on-one relationships

Efforts to help kids stay in school began right away during the school year, said AASD attendance coordinator Stephanie Marta. It started with an "attendance campaign" to educate the community about the importance of attending and staying in school, including yard signs, posters and postcards.

During the school year, the district continued to work with attendance teams to connect with families and students, Marta said. Usually, one of the first steps is to offer an incentive to keep coming to school. Some incentives are for individual students setting goals for themselves, while other incentives include schoolwide celebrations to recognize those students who are doing well.

Other students that need more support will work with mentors, Marta said. The district has trained staff in Check & Connect , an evidence-based program from the University of Minnesota to help students stay in school.

"They'll meet once a week or more with students," Marta said. "They'll talk about grades and keep the lines of communication open between home and school."

The Boys and Girls Club of Appleton helps with student mentorship through its Truancy Reduction & Assessment Center. In TRAC, three case managers receive referrals from the school and use a version of Check & Connect to help build positive relationships between the student and their school.

This year, said senior director Kayla McNamara, TRAC continued to work on cases from the previous year. That meant they "were able to pick back up and not really miss a beat" in September with students who needed extra help last year.

"We're sitting down with a young person, asking them questions, and trying to get to know them and what their life is like, what they want to do some day," McNamara said. "We want to understand what that student needs to get back on track."

She said TRAC served 284 students last school year and 235 this year, though she expects to see about 40 more students needing help before the end of this school year.

Mental health issues from the pandemic continue to affect student attendance; work still needed

While community partnerships and relationship-building play a critical role in helping students, both McNamara and Marta said they're still seeing long-term effects of the pandemic play a role in attendance issues.

A number of students are suffering from anxiety and other mental health issues as a result of the pandemic, McNamara said. "There's been an increase in mental health concerns across the nation and locally, it's no different," she said.

As a result, Marta said, some kids have trouble with wanting to come to school at all. To help them, the district is "trying to come up with different strategies and alternatives for those students who have school anxiety." Often, she added, it starts with getting them in school for a little bit of time "and building on that."

Other kids struggle with economic circumstances, Marta said, in the case of families who don't have reliable housing or transportation. And, in some cases, McNamara said, "(Older students) may need to provide care for a younger sibling or have to work late into the night."

Still, AASD has a concrete goal for its attendance rates: "We really would like to get rates back to what they were prior to the pandemic," Marta said.

At the end of the day, however, the goal is to help students attend school regularly, and partnerships between students, schools, families and community organizations are key to that, she said.

"Whether you're missing school through excused (absences) or not, we want students there to receive instruction," Marta said.

"We receive a lot of support and communication from principals in Appleton because they care," McNamara said. "They are setting it up so that a young person can know there's another person that cares for you."

Rebecca Loroff is a K-12 education reporter for the USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin. She welcomes story tips and feedback. Contact her at 920-907-7801 or [email protected]. Follow her on X (formerly Twitter) at @RebeccaLoroff.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

COVID-19 and its impact on education, social life and mental health of students: A survey

The outbreak of COVID-19 affected the lives of all sections of society as people were asked to self-quarantine in their homes to prevent the spread of the virus. The lockdown had serious implications on mental health, resulting in psychological problems including frustration, stress, and depression. In order to explore the impacts of this pandemic on the lives of students, we conducted a survey of a total of 1182 individuals of different age groups from various educational institutes in Delhi - National Capital Region (NCR), India. The article identified the following as the impact of COVID-19 on the students of different age groups: time spent on online classes and self-study, medium used for learning, sleeping habits, daily fitness routine, and the subsequent effects on weight, social life, and mental health. Moreover, our research found that in order to deal with stress and anxiety, participants adopted different coping mechanisms and also sought help from their near ones. Further, the research examined the student’s engagement on social media platforms among different age categories. This study suggests that public authorities should take all the necessary measures to enhance the learning experience by mitigating the negative impacts caused due to the COVID-19 outbreak.

1. Introduction

The emergence of Corona Virus disease (COVID-19) has led the world to an unprecedented public health crisis. Emergency protocols were implemented in India to control the spread of the virus which resulted in restrictions on all non-essential public movements ( Saha et al. 2020 ). With the closure of educational institutions, the need for a rapid transition from physical learning to the digital sphere of learning emerged ( Kapasia et al. 2020 ). Online learning has been observed as a possible alternative to conventional learning ( Adnan and Anwar 2020 ). However, according to a meta-analysis on e-learning ( Cook 2009 ), it is reported that online learning is better than nothing and similar to conventional learning. To improve the e-learning experience, the education institutions are required to comply with the guidelines and recommendations by government agencies, while keeping students encouraged to continue learning remotely in this tough environment ( Aucejo et al. 2020 ). Bao (2020 ) addresses five high-impact guidelines for the efficient conduct of online education.

This rapid evolution at such a large scale has influenced the students of all age groups ( Hasan and Bao 2020 ). It is expected that the continued spread of the disease, travel restrictions and the closure of educational institutions across the country would have a significant effect on the education, social life, and mental health of students ( Odriozola-gonzález et al. 2020 ). The students from the less privileged backgrounds have experienced larger negative impacts due to the Covid-19 outbreak ( Aucejo et al. 2020 ). Reduction in family income, limited access to digital resources, and the high cost of internet connectivity have disrupted the academic life of the students. Moreover, 1.5 billion students across the world are now deprived of basic education ( Lee 2020 ) leading to a serious psychological impact on their health. Moreover, changes in daily routine including lack of outdoor activity, disturbed sleeping patterns, social distancing have affected the mental well-being of the students. ( Cao et al. 2020 ) uses 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) as a diagnostic tool for the assessment of anxiety disorders, panic disorders, and social phobia. Further, ( Ye et al. 2020 ) analyses mediating roles of resilience, coping, and social support to deal with psychological symptoms.

In this paper, we investigated and analyzed the potential consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the life of students. Our research shows that there is a wide gap between the government's policy aspirations and the implementation of these online education policies at the grassroots level. Moreover, our study attempts to assess the mental situation of students of different age groups using different parameters including sleeping habits, daily fitness routine, and social support. Further, we analyse different coping mechanisms used by students to deal with the current situation.

2. Objective and methods

A 19-set questionnaire was developed, which included a variety of multiple-choice questions, Likert scale and for a few questions, the respondents were allowed to enter free texts. The survey was administered using the Google Forms platform, which requires subjects to be logged in to an e-mail account to participate in the survey, it restricted multiple entries from an individual account. The distribution of the questionnaire was conducted through the outreach of social media platforms, e-mail, and standard messaging services. Clear instructions with the google form were provided to ensure the respondent must be a student.

2.1. Study design

A web-based survey was conducted to students through the medium of Google online platforms from July 13 to July 17, 2020. The online survey questionnaire contained four subgroups:

• (a) Participants were asked to describe their general demographics, such as age, the region of residence.
• (b) Information about the daily online learning routine following the transition from offline learning in educational institutions in India: average time spent for online study (hours) /day; medium for online study; average time spent for self-study (hours)/day.
• (c) Assessment of the experience of online learning to evaluate the levels of satisfaction among students.
• (d) Assessment of health due to the change in lifestyle: average time spent on sleep (hours)/day; change in weight; average time spent on fitness (hours)/day; the number of meals/days; also, we considered further questions about the medium of stress busters during the pandemic, cohesion with family members, etc.

The aim of this survey study is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education, health, and lifestyle of students from different age-groups.

2.2. Statistical analysis

In this study, we conducted a cross-sectional survey with a sample size of 1182 students from different educational institutions. A summary of demographic details in the form of numbers and percentages is provided. Mean at 95% Confidence Interval limit was calculated for learning hours for online classes and self-study, duration of sleep, time spent on fitness and sleep. Kruskal Wallis test, a non-parametric test was used to assess the significant difference in the time spent on the aforementioned activities among different age distributions. Fisher’s exact test was performed to assess the differences between respondent’s health with the variables of interest. In order to analyse the association between age categories and different variables such as change in weight, health issues faced, stress busters, etc, the Pearson Chi Square test was used. JMP Version 15.2.1 from SAS was used for analysis. A statistically significant value of P < 0.05 was considered.

2.3. Ethical consideration

The following survey was done in a properly informed set up and consent from the individuals was taken for the participation. No individual was forced against their will and no identifying information was collected.

3.1. Participants characteristics

A total of 1182 subjects from different educational institutions including schools, colleges, and universities in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) participated in the online questionnaire. The demographic detail of the participants is shown in Table 1 . The mean age is 20.16 years (95% confidence interval (CI), 19.8–20.4) (range, 7–59). The age of the participants was normally distributed (‘7–17’ year old, 303; ‘18–22’ year old, 694; ‘23–59’ year old, 185). 728 (61.62%) of the respondents lived in Delhi-NCR and the rest were living outside of Delhi-NCR during the period of the pandemic.

Demographic data of the respondents to the online survey questionnaire.

3.2. Assessment of online learning

According to Table 2 , the Kruskal Wallis test was used to assess the difference in the time spent by different age categories for daily routine activities. The average time spent on online classes for students was 3.20 h/day (95% confidence interval (CI), 3.08–3.32). However, the average time spent on online classes was significantly higher for students with age group ‘7–17’ years (3.69 h/day), and lower for students with age groups, ‘18–22’ years (2.98 h/day) and ‘23–59’ years (2.66 h/day) (P < 0.0001*). Further, respondents were asked about the time they allot per day for self-study, however, there was no significant difference among different age group categories (P = 0.106). Overall, 2.91 h/day (95% CI, 2.78–3.03) was the average time spent on self-study. According to the assessment of satisfaction level among students (see Fig. 1 .a), 38.3% of students had negative response towards online classes (2.6% poor and 35.7% very poor), 33.4% considered it average while 28.4% (19.9% good and 8.5% excellent) gave a positive review. Surprisingly, the in-depth analysis showed the satisfaction levels varied significantly with different age groups. There were 51.6% (48.6% very poor and 3% poor) negative online class reviews from subjects in the ‘18–22’ age group, compared to 31.5% (29.1% very poor and 2.4% poor) negative reviews from subjects in the ‘7–17’ age group who spent more time on online classes.

Table showing how different variables (time spent on online class, self-study, fitness, sleep, and social media) changes with different age distributions.

Kruskal Wallis test was used to produce a P-value that analyzes significant difference between different age distributions. *Statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Visualizations demonstrate a) Likert analysis of Online classes for the sample and for different age categories b) Medium for the online classes b) Learning medium used by different age categories.

The respondents were further asked about the medium of their online learning (see Fig. 1 .b), 57.3% in the age group ‘7–17’ used smartphones while the majority of students from age group ‘18–22’ (56.4%) and age group ‘23–59’ (57.8%) used laptop/desktop for study. However, only a small portion of the total students (3.1%, n = 37) used tablet. With regard to the time spent in online classes, there was a statistically significant difference between the various mediums used (P = 0.0002). As shown in Table 3 , 4.29 h/day (95% CI, 3.63–4.96) was the average time spent on online classes using tablets, 3.43 h/day (95% CI, 3.25–3.61) when using laptop/desktop, and 3.06 h/day (95% CI, 2.90–3.23) when using smartphones.

Time spent on online classes using different learning medium.

3.3. Assessment of health in educational institutions

Among the respondents from different age groups (see Fig. 2 ), 13.6% (n = 160) faced health-related issues during the period of nationwide travel restrictions. Further respondents were asked about the change in body weight within this period, 37.1% reported an increase in weight, 17.7% reported a decrease in weight, and 45.3% reported no change in weight. When asked whether they are satisfied with their utilization of time, the majority of respondents (51.4%, n = 608) answered in ‘NO’, and the rest (n = 575) answered with ‘YES’. Also, 70.3% of the respondents stated that they were socially connected with their family members.

Visualizations demonstrate a) Pie Chart for Likert questions: whether the respondent faced health issues; whether the respondent utilized the time efficiently; whether the respondent is socially well connected. b) Stacked bar chart to analyze the change in weight during the period of lockdown.

According to Table 4 , fisher’s exact test indicated that the respondents who were not socially well connected and believed that they did not utilize their time in lockdown, had a significant impact on their state of health. Also, in Table 5 , the Pearson Chi Square test for Likert analysis on ‘time utilized’ (P < 0.0001*), ‘health issue faced’ (P < 0.0001*), and ‘socially well connected’ (P = 0.0002*) rejected the null hypothesis that there is no association between these variables with the different distribution of age groups. To maintain a state of health and well-being, it is necessary to perform a certain amount of exercise daily. The findings of Table 2 showed that the time spent on fitness was statistically different for different age groups (P = 0.039*, Kruskal Wallis test). And, the average time spent on sleep was 7.87 h/day (95% Confidence Interval, 7.77–7.96). The differences between the age groups in terms of duration of sleep were statistically significant.

Fisher’s exact test to analyse the effect of multiple factors on health.

*Statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Pearson Chi Square test for the association between different variables and age distribution.

Further, respondents were questioned about the measures adopted to cope with the rising stress levels during the pandemic. According to the Pearson Chi Square test in Table 4 , there was a significant difference in the measures used by the different age categories. Fig. 3 shows the detailed distribution of different stress reliever activities used among different age categories.

Visualization demonstrate the distribution of stress relieving activities among different age categories.

3.4. Social media

According to Fig. 3 , a significant number of individuals from different age categories used social media as a medium for stress reliever. Further in Fig. 4 . a, the findings provide the distribution of the sample for the use of different platforms. While the majority of respondents used social media, 1.44% did not have an account on any platform. Fig. 4 . b gives the detailed distribution of platforms for age-wise groups. YouTube (39%) was the preferred platform for the age group '7–17,' followed by Whatsapp (35%) and Instagram (17%). Most of the social networking sites in India restricts individuals below 13 years of age to have an account on their platforms. However, some individuals under 13 years of age used Instagram (n = 2), Whatsapp (n = 16), and Snapchat (n = 1). For the age group ‘18-22’, Instagram (39%) was the most preferred networking site, and the respondents in the age-group ‘23-59’ preferred WhatsApp (38%).

Visualization demonstrate the distribution of preferred social media platform for a) the sample and b) among different age categories.

As shown in Table 2 , the average time spent on social media for the age group ‘7-17’ was 1.68 h/day (95% Confidence Interval, 1.52–1.85), 2.64 h/day (95% Confidence Interval, 2.50–2.78) for the age group ‘18-22’, and for the age group ‘23-59’, it was 2.37 h/day (95% Confidence Interval, 2.14–2.61). The difference between the groups was statistically different (P < 0.0001*).

4. Discussion

The outbreak of Covid-19 has upended the lives of all parts of the society. One of the most immediate changes introduced was the closure of educational institutions to slow the transmission of the virus. In order to prevent further interruption of studies, new teaching methods for the online delivery of education were introduced ( Johnson et al., 2020 , Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). However, these measures can have long-term consequences on the lives of students ( Cohen et al. 2020 ). Therefore, there is a strong need to record and study the effects of the changes being made. In this study, our aim is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education, health, social life of the students, and demonstrate results about its subsequent effect on their daily routine amid travel restrictions. The findings indicate that the time spent by students on online classes did not comply with the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) ( Department of School Education & Literacy Ministry of Human Resource Development 2020 ). Limited class interaction and inefficient time table significantly affected the satisfaction levels among students. The peer-to-peer impact in the school environment motivates individuals to work hard and learn social skills, which may not be possible in an online setting. Moreover, the biggest challenge for online learning is the requirement of efficient digital infrastructure and digital skillset for both students and teachers.

Further, this study analyses the impact of different factors to measure stress levels among students. Alarmingly, 51.4% of respondents reported that they did not utilize their time during the period of lockdown. Furthermore, sleeping habits, daily fitness routines, and social interaction significantly affected their health conditions. The government agencies imposed measures such as social distancing and restrictions on travel but they did not take into account the health implications. Although, these measures are necessary to regulate safe conditions, there is no strategy to safeguard the psychological impact due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Our research also explores the different coping mechanisms used by students of different age groups. Moreover, we analyzed various digital social media tools used by students as a self-management strategy for mental health. Our statistical analysis addresses key concerns related to online education and health due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

5. Opinions and recommendations

Once the COVID-19 pandemic ends and educational institutions re-open, the concerned authorities should continue to invest in online education to enhance learning experience. They should carefully analyze the issues experienced during sudden transition to online learning and prepare for any future situations. Proper training of educators for the digital skills and improved student-teacher interaction must be conducted. For disadvantaged students, availability of digital infrastructure with proper internet availability and access to gadgets must be ensured to avoid any disruption to their study.

Due to the situation in Covid-19, many students are likely to suffer from stress, anxiety, and depression, so it is necessary to provide emotional support to students. Future work in this direction could be to analyze the association of different stress busters on the mental health of the students. Moreover, guidelines should be created to anticipate the needs of the vulnerable student population. Improved healthcare management would ensure the delivery of mental health support.

6. Limitations

There are some limitations to our study that should be noted. The first limitation is the sampling technique used. It relies on digital infrastructure and voluntary participation that increases selection bias. The imposed travel restrictions limited the outreach to students who do not have access to online learning. Second, the study is obtained from one specific area, given the lockdown orders and the online medium of classes, we expect these results to be fairly generalizable for schools and universities nationwide. Another limitation of this study is the cross-sectional design of the survey, there was no follow-up period for the participants.

7. Conclusion

In this study, our findings indicated that the Covid-19 outbreak has made a significant impact on the mental health, education, and daily routine of students. The Covid-19 related interruptions highlight key challenges and provide an opportunity to further evaluate alternate measures in the education sector. The new policies and guidelines in this direction would help mitigate some of the negative effects and prepare educators and students for the future health crisis.

Declaration of Competing Interest

There is no conflict of interest.

• Adnan M., Anwar K. Ed606496. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology. 2020; 2 :2–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aucejo E.M., French J., Ugalde Araya M.P., Zafar B. The impact of COVID-19 on student experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey. Journal of Public Economics. 2020; 191 doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104271. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bao W. COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2020; 2 :113–115. doi: 10.1002/hbe2.191. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cao W., Fang Z., Hou G., et al. The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Research. 2020; 287 doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen A.K., Hoyt L.T., Dull B. A descriptive study of coronavirus disease 2019–related experiences and perspectives of a national sample of college students in spring 2020. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2020; 2019 :1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.06.009. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cook D.A. The failure of e-learning research to inform educational practice, and what we can do about it. Medical Teacher. 2009; 31 :158–162. doi: 10.1080/01421590802691393. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Department of School Education & Literacy Ministry of Human Resource Development (2020) PRAGYATA: Guidelines for Digital Education.
• Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., et al. (2020) The Likely Impact of COVID-19 on Education: Reflections based on the Existing Literature and Recent International Datasets.
• Hasan N., Bao Y. Impact of “e-Learning crack-up” perception on psychological distress among college students during COVID-19 pandemic: A mediating role of “fear of academic year loss” Children and Youth Services Review. 2020; 118 doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105355. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson N., Veletsianos G., Seaman J. U.S. Faculty and Administrators’ Experiences and Approaches in the Early Weeks of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Online Learn. 2020; 24 [ Google Scholar ]
• Kapasia N., Paul P., Roy A., et al. Impact of lockdown on learning status of undergraduate and postgraduate students during COVID-19 pandemic in West Bengal, India. Children and Youth Services Review. 2020; 116 doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105194. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee J. Reflections Features Mental health effects of school closures during COVID-19. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 2020; 4 :421. doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30109-7. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Odriozola-gonzález P., Planchuelo-gómez Á., Jesús M., De Luis-garcía R. Psychological effects of the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown among students and workers of a Spanish university. Psychiatry Research. 2020; 290 doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113108. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saha J., Barman B., Chouhan P. Lockdown for COVID-19 and its impact on community mobility in India: An analysis of the COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports, 2020. Children and Youth Services Review. 2020; 116 doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105160. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ye, Z., Yang, X., Zeng, C., et al. (2020) Resilience, Social Support, and Coping as Mediators between COVID-19-related Stressful Experiences and Acute Stress Disorder among College Students in China. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12211. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Understanding health education needs of pregnant women in china during public health emergencies: a qualitative study amidst the covid-19 pandemic.

• 1 Department of Nursing, Quanzhou Medical College, Quanzhou, China
• 2 Quanzhou Women and Children’s Hospital, Quanzhou, Fujian Province, China
• 3 Department of Imaging, Anxi County Hospital，Quanzhou，Fujian 362400, China, Quanzhou, China
• 4 Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Select one of your emails

You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:

Notify me on publication

Please enter your email address:

If you already have an account, please login

You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here

Background: Public health emergencies impose unique challenges on pregnant women, affecting their physiological, psychological, and social well-being. This study, focusing on the context of COVID-19 pandemic in China, aims to comprehensively explore the experiences of pregnant women amidst diverse public health crises.Herein, we investigate the health education needs of pregnant Chinese women in regard to public health emergencies to provide a scientific foundation for the development of targeted health education strategies. Methods: Thirteen pregnant women were purposively selected, and the rationale for this sample size lies in the qualitative nature of the study, seeking in-depth insights rather than generalizability. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews, and the Colaizzi, which is a structured qualitative technique used to extract, interpret, and organize significant statements from participant descriptions into themes, providing a comprehensive understanding of their lived experiences. Results: The analysis yielded six prominent themes encompassing following six areas. Theme I:Personal protection and vaccine safety was analysed with 2 sub-themes( needs for personal protection knowledge, vaccine safety knowledge needs); Theme II:Knowledge of maternal health was analysed with 3 sub-themes( nutrition and diet, exercise and rest, sexual life)); Theme III:Knowledge of fetal health was analysed with 3 sub-themes( medications and hazardous substances, pregnancy check-ups, fetal movement monitoring); Theme IV:Knowledge of childbirth was analysed with 3 sub-themes( family accompaniment, analgesia in childbirth, choice of mode of delivery) ;Theme V:Knowledge of postpartum recovery was analysed with 1 sub-theme (knowledge of postnatal recovery); Theme VI:Knowledge sources of health education for pregnant women and their expectations of healthcare providers was analysed with 1 sub-theme( expectations of Healthcare providers). Sub-themes within each main theme were identified, offering a nuanced understanding of the multifaceted challenges faced by pregnant women during public health emergencies. The interrelation between sub-themes and main themes contributes to a holistic portrayal of their experiences. Conclusion: The study emphasizes the need for healthcare professionals to tailor health education for pregnant women during emergencies, highlighting the role of the Internet in improving information dissemination. It recommends actionable strategies for effective health communication, ensuring these women receive comprehensive support through digital platforms for better health outcomes during public health crises.

Keywords: Pregnant Women, Health Education, Public health emergencies, qualitative research, COVID-19 -

Received: 12 Sep 2023; Accepted: 22 Apr 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 Su, Zhang, Chen, Xu and Liu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Yuezhen Zhang, Department of Nursing, Quanzhou Medical College, Quanzhou, China Meide Chen, Quanzhou Women and Children’s Hospital, Quanzhou, Fujian Province, China Xiangyang Xu, Department of Imaging, Anxi County Hospital，Quanzhou，Fujian 362400, China, Quanzhou, China Guihua Liu, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.