Don’t rush the return to classrooms

Is it better for children to be in school rather than to languish at home? Yes, for several reasons. But let’s not believe the nonsense that we should rush the reopening of schools to avoid causing “generational harm” to our students. The truth is that teachers will adjust instruction and learning losses will be negligible in the long run. Yes, overall achievement as measured by standardized tests this academic year will be lower, but the patterns and ranks of achievement will remain the same.

The Clark County School District has been under continued pressure, as have all urban districts, to return students to school classrooms with their teachers. Please be patient with CCSD, as it is not the “no brainer” decision that many would have you believe. Academic achievement gaps will persist in their usual pattern and should not be used as a rationale for fast-tracking students back into classrooms.

COVID-19 has not increased the negative outcomes experienced by children from low-income families; it has revealed them. The unfortunate reality is that children from low-income families are disadvantaged academically each school year. A sincere effort to address this issue would be welcome.

Student learning gaps are noticeable when children begin formal schooling with different levels of academic readiness. Readiness deficits turn into permanent achievement gaps and are more common in students from low-income families.

How does this happen? First, kindergarteners are separated into ability groups. First-grade students are placed into ranked reading groups. Labeling of student achievement levels begins and self-concepts are formed. By third grade, individual test-taking skill remains consistent through high school.

Student achievement gaps persist despite best efforts to close them. Elementary test scores create enduring labels of academic identity and are strong predictors of future academic performance and college entrance exams. Poor test scores limit opportunities. Students from low-income families are more likely to receive deficient scores.

Reliance on standardized test scores as the principal measure of academic achievement adds to the benefits from education enjoyed disproportionately by the wealthy. Despite many individual exceptions, demographic comparisons of data consistently reflect family income as a predominant factor at all grade levels. The ACT and SAT college admissions exams unfailingly show a direct relationship of family income and scores. Higher incomes, higher scores. Lower incomes, lower scores.

Family wealth influences access to higher education, including more selective programs and colleges. Standardized test scores have been positively correlated with income since their inception. In addition, the high cost of a college education inhibits many low-income students from attending and burdens many graduates with crippling debt.

The urgency to immediately return all students to the classroom is driven by feigned concern for the academic plight of children from low-income families. But usual critics of public education are using unprincipled arguments. Their concern is the loss of daycare for low-level workers. It also affords them the opportunity to bash teacher unions.

If there were sincere motivations for improvement of educational outcomes for low-income students, we would reduce the overreliance on standardized testing. Test scores provide a limited measure of learning and provide a very poor measure of teacher and school quality. They are largely unaffected by curriculum and instruction.

Pandemics cause major disruptions to society and loss of life. Estimating illness as a result of virus exposure at school is not an exact science, so immediately returning students to classrooms and athletic fields still requires caution on the part of school districts.

We have always overreacted to safety concerns in educational settings. There are many required drills and procedures currently followed by public schools that have little impact on ensuring the health and safety of students. Look up “duck and cover drills” for nuclear attacks during the 1950s and 1960s.

Scientists and health experts continue to struggle with recommendations to mitigate the pandemic, resulting in confusion and distrust. This has created a diversity of opinions between parents as to the risk of returning their children to school. Parents should be cautious with recommendations from those who do not have the best interest of students in mind.

The drive to immediately return students and teachers to classrooms is a political argument, not an educational one. It is a major inconvenience not to have public schools fully open but learning deficits caused by the lack of classroom instruction will be alleviated in a short period of time. Long-term academic outcomes for all students will remain unchanged.

Greg Wieman is retired after a 38-year career in public education in which his roles included teacher, coach, principal and superintendent. He holds a doctoral degree in education from Eastern Michigan University. He can be reached at greg.wieman@gmail.com.