Even prior to the emergence of COVID-19, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted every three years in OECD countries, indicated a prolonged period of stagnant school grades in the affluent world. The latest PISA score emphasizes that improving teacher training and motivation is a more effective means of improving grades than investing in smaller class sizes, a policy preference often favored by politicians.
Almost four years have passed since the world's classrooms first closed their doors to around 1.6 billion students due to the rapid spread of COVID-19. At the peak of this crisis, a staggering 80% of students worldwide felt the impact of these closures. During this challenging period, young learners had to adapt to remote education or, sadly, received no formal education at all. This disruption was the most significant disruption to education since World War II and had far-reaching consequences.
What
is particularly striking is that in many countries, these closures continued
long after it was clear that COVID-19 posed a relatively low risk to children's
health and after vaccines became widely available for adults. Even when schools
reopened, students and teachers had to grapple with social distancing and
quarantine rules, which continued to disrupt the learning process. The true
extent of the impact of these policies is only now becoming clear. On December
5th, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which
mostly represents affluent nations, released a comprehensive set of data from
assessments in math, reading, and science. These tests were taken by
fifteen-year-old students between March and November of the previous year and
provide the most insightful picture to date of how the pandemic affected their
education.
While
some countries like Japan, Singapore, and South Korea saw impressive academic
performance despite the challenges, others were not as fortunate. British and
American students generally scored above the average for wealthy nations, but
it is essential to note that many regions fell significantly short of
expectations. Surprisingly, despite the tough circumstances, some students
managed to maintain their academic progress relatively unscathed.
The
OECD has been conducting these tests, primarily on a triennial basis, for the
past two decades through its Program for International Student Assessment,
commonly referred to as PISA. Even prior to the outbreak of the pandemic, PISA
data had already indicated that academic performance in the affluent nations
had remained relatively stagnant for a number of years. However, in the most
recent series of examinations, the results have taken a dramatic downturn (as
depicted in Table 1). On average, students in wealthier countries recorded
scores that were 10 points lower in reading assessments and nearly 15 points
lower in mathematics compared to the previous examination conducted in 2018.
This decline suggests that, in comparison to previous cohorts, those who
participated in these recent tests have experienced an educational setback
equivalent to missing between half to three-quarters of an entire school year.
Table
1: OECD Countries Average PISA Scores by Year
|
Subject |
2003 |
2006 |
2012 |
2018 |
2022 |
|
Math |
502 |
501 |
499 |
496 |
480 |
|
Reading |
497 |
495 |
501 |
493 |
482 |
|
Science |
- |
503 |
505 |
493 |
491 |
Source: Culled from OECD; The Economist
A
decline of this magnitude is nothing short of a calamity. It's widely
recognized that each additional year of schooling a child receives has the
potential to increase their annual salary by nearly 10%. This means that the
lost learning experienced during the pandemic could continue to cast a shadow
on wages for years to come. The repercussions are particularly profound for
young students who, due to a drop in their grades, might fail to graduate from
high school or fail to acquire the skills required for success at the
university level. It's important to note that individuals with degrees in
affluent countries typically earn around 50% more than those who enter the
workforce immediately after high school.
In
regions where the steepest drops in performance have been recorded, the
situation is dire. According to PISA, 15-year-olds in these areas are now
performing at levels that were typical of students a full year younger in 2018.
Among the three subjects assessed by PISA, mathematics has been the hardest
hit, with significant declines observed in countries such as France, Germany,
and Poland. Notably, even Finland, often praised for the effectiveness of its
educational system, has not been immune to these declines.
The
findings for the United States and the United Kingdom are somewhat less
conclusive compared to most other countries. Challenges in administering the
tests to a sufficient number of students require cautious interpretation of
their data. Nevertheless, it appears that test scores have indeed declined in
both countries, albeit not as dramatically as in some of their neighboring
nations. In the case of the United Kingdom, reading scores have regressed to
levels last measured in 2006. The United States, while maintaining relatively
steady reading scores, faces a significant challenge in mathematics, as its
students have consistently ranked in the bottom third among wealthy countries
in the OECD's numeracy assessments. The plummeting scores during the pandemic
period only exacerbate the struggle to bridge this educational gap.
In
2022, PISA tests were administered to students in 81 countries and territories,
with the majority of them being outside the affluent world. Interestingly, many
developing countries that chose to participate in these assessments seem to
have outperformed initial forecasts—though the underlying reasons might be
rather somber. Andreas Schleicher, an expert from the OECD, notes that pupils
in these regions typically exhibit slower rates of progress even under normal
school conditions. Consequently, the disruption caused by being removed from
classrooms may have had a less severe impact on their academic performance than
anticipated.
The
discussion surrounding achievement gaps presents a complex picture. PISA's
findings suggest that, on the whole, the pandemic has not significantly widened
the chasm between the test scores of economically disadvantaged students and
their more affluent peers. However, this conclusion comes with a crucial
caveat: it's primarily because, in most countries, even privileged children
have seen their educational progress stagnate to a similar extent as their less
advantaged counterparts.
This
nuanced perspective on the impact of the pandemic underscores the pervasive
nature of the educational challenges posed by COVID-19. While some developing
countries have managed to weather the storm relatively well due to their
historical patterns of slower educational progress, the pandemic has had a
leveling effect on achievement gaps in many countries. The shared experience of
disrupted learning among students of various socioeconomic backgrounds
highlights the need for comprehensive efforts to ensure equitable access to
quality education and support systems that address the diverse needs of
students as they navigate the path to recovery.
Pandemic
Victories
Education
ministries around the globe would undoubtedly be envious of the fortunate few
wealthy nations that have uplifting tales to share amidst the challenges of the
pandemic. Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan stand out as remarkable
examples where not only did test scores remain resilient throughout the
pandemic period, but they even showed improvement in at least one of the three
core subjects. Additionally, Israel and Switzerland also appear to have
navigated these tumultuous times relatively well, at least based on the
available data.
The
strategies employed by these exceptional performers were diverse yet effective.
Some of these nations succeeded in safeguarding the continuity of learning by
implementing short-term school closures. Analyses within the OECD's dataset
suggest a notable correlation between the duration of school closures and
subsequent test performance among students. Switzerland, for instance, adopted
a fully remote or hybrid timetable for a mere six weeks—a sharp contrast to the
European average of approximately 29 weeks of school closures. Japan also
demonstrated agility by curtailing summer breaks in 2020 to reclaim some of the
lost class hours that students had endured up to that point. Singapore took a
similar approach by modifying school holidays to maximize available learning
time, illustrating their commitment to educational resilience.
For
other top-performing nations, the key differentiator appeared to be the quality
of remote education. South Korea, while enforcing strict and prolonged social
distancing measures, allowed children to attend school only part-time for over
a year after initial classroom re-openings. However, they did not leave their
students to grapple with the challenges alone. In the first year of the
pandemic, the South Korean government hired an additional 30,000 teaching
staff, some of whom were retirees reengaging in their educational service. This
approach, coupled with rigorous remote learning support, played a pivotal role
in maintaining the educational trajectory of South Korean students despite the
challenging circumstances.
These
global examples highlight the multifaceted strategies employed by nations to
protect and nurture their students' educational journeys during the pandemic.
They underscore the importance of adaptability, resource allocation, and a
steadfast commitment to providing quality education, even in the face of
unprecedented challenges.
Helping
Schools Recover
The
question of how to breathe new life into education elsewhere looms large in the
wake of alarming academic setbacks wrought by the pandemic. These disheartening
results should rekindle enthusiasm for targeted programs aimed at helping
students reclaim the learning opportunities lost during this crisis. For
instance, in Britain, the government has allocated a substantial sum of about
£3.5 billion ($4.4 billion) since 2020 to bolster such initiatives. This
financial commitment is roughly equivalent to 6% of one year's total spending
on schools. A considerable portion of these funds has been channeled into
tutoring programs, with available data indicating that children are indeed
making strides in their educational journeys. However, a looming challenge looms
as the funding for this initiative is set to diminish next year.
Across
the Atlantic in the United States, an astonishing $190 billion in federal
relief money has been allocated to support schools since the onset of the
pandemic. This staggering sum approximates one-quarter of the country's typical
annual expenditure on public schooling. Yet, a significant portion of this
funding has granted schools substantial autonomy in deciding how to allocate
resources. Only a minimal 20% of this financial aid is mandated to be used for
programs explicitly designed to steer children back on course with their
learning. A crucial juncture is on the horizon, with the impending arrival of
September next year, when this additional financial support is poised to
evaporate.
Data
made public in July by NWEA, a testing provider with access to scores from over
six million students, paints a sobering picture for American pupils. It
suggests that many students, across various grade levels, have not shown more
significant academic progress than typical during the most recent academic
year. Rather than catching up, these students appear to have advanced at a
somewhat slower pace than the pre-pandemic standard. Compounding this challenge
is the tight labor market, which has made it arduous for American schools to
recruit a sufficient number of tutors who could accelerate the process of
educational recovery. Another obstacle lies in the hesitancy of schools to
extend the school day or add extra days to the academic year. It was always a
formidable task to expect schools, emerging from a catastrophic event, to
suddenly revolutionize the average school day to make it significantly more
productive. In contrast, increasing the time dedicated to learning is a
feasible objective that even the least innovative educational institutions can
embrace.
In
an ideal world, policymakers would seize this pivotal moment not merely to
address the immediate challenge of mitigating the learning losses incurred
during the pandemic but to institute comprehensive reforms capable of reshaping
the less-than-impressive trajectories that many school systems had been tracing
even prior to the pandemic's onset. The OECD's previous data analysis in 2018
revealed a sobering reality: 15-year-olds in most affluent countries were not
demonstrating improved performance in mathematics, reading, or science when
compared to their counterparts from two decades prior. In several major
nations, including not only Finland but also France, the Netherlands, and New
Zealand, among others, academic achievements were already on a downward
trajectory. In such contexts, disentangling the precise extent to which the
pandemic contributed to declining scores becomes a complex challenge. There is
a substantial risk that underlying systemic issues will remain unresolved if
poor results are simply attributed to a pandemic-induced anomaly.
The
educational challenge at hand extends beyond the simplistic notion of
increasing financial resources. In fact, between 2008 and 2018, per-pupil
spending in wealthy nations increased by approximately 15%, yet this surge
failed to yield significant and transformative results. According to OECD data,
augmenting school funding tends to yield tangible improvements only up to a
threshold of around $75,000 per pupil, distributed over a child's first ten
years in school. Beyond this point, the returns on investment begin to diminish
rapidly. The United States serves as a striking example, allocating more than
$140,000 per pupil, while its academic performance in mathematics, science, and
reading lags behind that of Japan, a nation that invests approximately 40% less
per pupil.
Within
this context, it is only natural for OECD officials to express concern when
they hear education ministers pledging to "build back better" in
response to the pandemic's impact. They fear that such a commitment may
inadvertently result in pouring more financial resources into the same outdated
strategies. A wiser approach would involve "building forward
differently." International evidence underscores that improving teachers'
training and motivation stands as a more reliable means of enhancing academic
performance compared to simply allocating funds towards reducing class sizes—a
measure often favored by politicians due to its apparent simplicity. Moreover,
many education systems struggle to ensure that resources are distributed
equitably, reaching the schools and students in greatest need. There is a
looming risk that a golden opportunity for reform may be squandered if mediocre
educational systems are reconstituted without addressing their inherent
deficiencies.
Notes
Ajilore, O. (2013). Estimating the Spillover Effects of
School District Demographics on Per-Pupil Spending. Journal of Education
Finance, 39(2), 101-114. Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/539784
Barshay, J. (n.d.). Per pupil spending by school district
in the United States. Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from Teachers College, Columbia
University:
http://educationbythenumbers.org/content/per-pupil-spending-by-school-district-in-the-united-states_57/
Bracey, G. W. (2007). The Proficiency Illusion. Phi Delta
Kappan, 89(4), 316-317. Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from
https://questia.com/library/journal/1g1-172516996/the-proficiency-illusion
Cronin, J. (2004). Aligning the NWEA RIT Scale with the
South Carolina High School Assessment Program. Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from
https://nwea.org/content/uploads/2004/07/south carolina high school study full
report_07.pdf
Goodman, A., & Sibieta, L. (2006). Public spending on
education in the UK: prepared for the Education and Skills Select Committee.
Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from https://ifs.org.uk/publications/3667
How much money does the United States spend on public
elementary and secondary schools? (n.d.).
Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from US Department of Education:
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66
List of OECD Member countries – Ratification of the
Convention on the OECD. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 6,
2023, from OECD:
http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/list-oecd-member-countries.htm
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results: Preparing Students for a
Changing World. Retrieved from
https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from Oecd.org:
http://www.oecd.org
Springer, M. G. (2008). Accountability Incentives: Do Schools
Practice Educational Triage?. Education Next, 8(1), 74-79. Retrieved 12
6, 2023, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ej780981
The Economist. (2023, December 5). PISA Marks Decline: The
Pandemic’s Toll on Schooling Emerges in Terrible Exam Results. Retrieved
from
https://www.economist.com/international/2023/12/05/the-pandemics-toll-on-schooling-emerges-in-terrible-exam-results
Warne, R. T. (2014). Using above-level testing to track
growth in academic achievement in gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly,
58(1), 3-23. Retrieved 12 6, 2023, from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0016986213513793
No comments:
Post a Comment