Should schools restrict in-person learning in response to COVID-19?
A recent blog post documented the increase in schools shifting back to remote learning as COVID-19 cases are surging. That post did not address whether these closures are justified given the evidence of how the disease spreads, mostly because we don’t have any expertise relative to that question. It’s worth noting, however, that we are seeing quite a bit of pushback against school closures just as more states and districts are reducing in-person learning.
For example, Ed Week notes that “Schools Are Retreating to Remote Learning as COVID-19 Surges” and asks, “Do They Have To?” From the article:
"As coronavirus rates surge across the country, hundreds of school districts are pulling back on in-person learning—even as a rising chorus of researchers insists that with proper safety protocols, in-person schooling does not appear to be a major driver of COVID-19 transmission….
The unsettling conclusion from these two trends—newer research and the frightening uptick in coronavirus cases—is that many districts were probably overly cautious about in-person learning in the beginning of the school year, when COVID-19 rates were far lower. Now the recent wave of closures raises the specter that much of the rest of the school year could be lost."
The article goes on to argue that many states allowed bars and restaurants to remain open despite evidence that these establishments were a significant source of disease spread, while schools were restricted even though they appeared to be less of a cause of transmission.
Even if the evidence does support the view that schools could have remained open more than they did, the criticism of district leaders being “overly cautious” seems to be an example of the saying “hindsight is 20/20.”
In the spring and summer, far less information was available than is accessible now. Even as new information about COVID-19 continues to emerge, leaders remain in a “fog of war” situation where the information is often hard to interpret or even conflicting in many cases. In addition, it’s not clear what the best calculation is between the risk of extended learning loss versus the risk of increased deaths and long-term illnesses in families and communities.
Ed Week isn’t the only outlet reporting that perhaps schools should lean towards being a bit less conservative when deciding on in-person versus remote learning options. An advisor to Joe Biden says that “Schools are essential while restaurants are not.” An opinion piece argues that “We’ve figured out it’s safe to have schools open. Keep them that way. The Dispatch (email subscription) argues that
“School closures, with all their severe short-term and long-term consequences, seem to have little payoff in slowing down transmission rates.”
Some of the arguments come in the form of arguing that, as the Washington Post says, “Schools are not spreading covid-19. This new data makes the case.”
"The best available data suggests that infection rates in schools simply mirror the prevalence of covid-19 in the surrounding community — and that addressing community spread is where our efforts should be focused."
It’s not hard, however, to find competing claims from solid sources, such as this columnist from the Post arguing that “Most schools should close and stay closed through winter.”
“It’s important to note that many proponents of keeping schools open cite studies that show low risk of transmission when effective mitigation methods are put in place. Some well-resourced schools have implemented measures including decreased classroom capacity, improved ventilation and strictly enforced mask-wearing. Some have even moved entire classes outdoors. With all these measures, students, teachers and staff have a much-reduced risk of acquiring covid-19. But most schools lack the resources to implement such changes.” (Emphasis in original.)
Further:
“Imagine you’re a teacher who works in a poorly ventilated classroom for multiple hours a day. It’s challenging to keep physical distancing, and there’s a high likelihood that one of your students has the coronavirus and could transmit it to you. Being told that school transmission isn’t the main driver of community spread is hardly reassuring when you’re the one shouldering the individual risk.”
The bottom line, in my view: public education in the United States is governed based on decisions made mostly at the local level, by nearly 14,000 school districts and many thousands of private schools. Good faith arguments can be made on both sides as to whether a particular school or district should offer f2f learning options for all students, be remote for all students, or somewhere in between. Anyone who says the direction that districts should take is obvious, probably isn’t thinking very hard about these issues.