Learning Lost?

I promised Priscila Heredia a post reflecting on the idea of learning loss in the last year due to the COVID pandemic, as she has noticed as an educator herself, that her son has regressed in certain aspects of his education. So as I am in managed isolation back in New Zealand, I thought I would take the time to deep dive into the issue. 

According to a recent OECD report on the economic impact of learning loss, the idea that students have undergone learning loss is a fait accompli. 

"There is no doubt that the school closures in the first half of 2020 have resulted in significant learning losses to the affected cohort of students – and some of the re-opening strategies being implemented will only further exacerbate these already incurred learning losses"

While remote learning surely affects students, we don't know yet exactly how or how much. Does learning loss provide a meaningful answer?

If we have a loss, what learning has exactly been lost? Do students forget facts?  Skills? Are memories erased? Can they find what's lost? The concept of learning loss from the OECD report mentioned above and from governments is vague, so how can it be so easily and precisely measured?

The term "learning loss" primarily comes from the analysis of test results. This makes the assumption that learning is disseminated to students over time. You can then measure the accumulated knowledge by the number of correct answers on a test. So by administering two comparable tests before and one after, you can measure success or failure for learning. An increase in correct responses is gain; a decrease is a loss - simples.

So let us assume this is our measure of learning loss (though I will challenge this later). Let's look at the data. A major Dutch study was headlined with "Students lost 20 percent of a school year." Yet looking at research, the average effect size of reading and math in their study, compared to pre-COVID years, was only -0.08, not quite the dire result expected. In another study from Webber (2020) showed that while math and reading scores, on average, have remained similar to previous years, there has been a more marked decline in writing. These results were consistent with the observations of my colleague Priscilla with her own son.

So, is testing the most effective way to measure learning loss? If a student does more poorly on a test later, has learning really been lost? I would suggest this seems doubtful, or at least not the incomplete picture. When you step away from a topic for a while, time is required to recollect the learning when you return. The learning is not lost—it only requires reassembling, and often the reassembling leads to greater understanding. Just like riding a bike or playing the guitar.

We all know as educators the learning is complicated. To paraphrase Plutarch:

"Minds are not vessels to be filled but fires to be kindled" 

You can't measure how to light a fire. Learning loss is not a valid concept when critiqued.

One thing that the pandemic exacerbated was the disparities in equity, worldwide. Students who live in poverty are at a severe disadvantage when teaching goes remote. No internet, no computer, sometimes little parental support. We need to solve the equity problem permanently, not just in the pandemic. This was an opportunity for governments to address these issues, rather than focus on the boogie man of learning loss.  

While acknowledging the impact of disruption and the lack of equity, one can also the pandemic as a learning gain for both students and teachers. A majority of students have had to be more independent in their learning and will have developed associated skills as a result.

As an example, one skill I have noticed developing in my own students is self-regulation. They have been monitoring their progress and what to do next. Many of my quieter, more introverted students have done so much better online teaching than they did at school.

Also, the pandemic has forced teachers to change the way they teach. In a face-to-face class, teachers tend to talk more, asking questions about the facts, which require less than three-word responses from students. However, teachers using that strategy online, saw that approach failing. 

Talking to my own students on their experience online, the students in my high ability class preferred me to talk more and ask more questions about the facts, they felt comfortable with that, so online learning was difficult for them. Conversely, my low-ability groups thrived with the slower speed of lessons and more bitesize activities focused on practicing what had been taught.

So for those teachers moving back to face-to-face teaching, do not obsess about learning loss, start by focusing on learning strategies that work like summarising and outlining, get those connections between facts going. Then consolidate the learning using deliberate practice like spacing over time compared to just drowning them in information. Your students can then make relationships and see patterns and then, finally, transfer to new contexts. See the helpful infographic from Impact Wales below: 

So rather than focusing on learning loss, it’s time to utilize the emerging science of learning and focus on reducing inequity. The size of this moment requires a commensurate response. We need to find the will to challenge the notion that learning is testing and return some agency to both our teachers and our students, bring the science of learning into our classrooms, and honor all our students with challenging, engaging learning that ushers in a new, better, fairer era in education.

References

Webber, A. (2020). Using e-asTTle to model short-term learning. Pepa Mahi, EDK Working Paper, Ministry of Education, New Zealand.