Educators in Virginia are aware of the effects of Covid-19 on schooling in 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and now 2021-22. The State Board of Education reported that staff shortages, unfinished learning, and enrollment loss are identified as the top three challenges facing Virginia public schools.
The McKinsey & Company report, “Covid-19 Education: The Lingering Effects of Unfinished Learning,” addresses these challenges outside the context of classroom in terms of what
learning loss may mean for the nation’s future. The report serves as a reminder to educators of why urgent actions are needed. First, to understand the complexity of the problem, the Virginia context of data is revisited.
Virginia Contextual Data Revisited
• Virginia data indicated that considering all students, only 397 hours or 40 percent of the required 990 in-person instructional hours were met. This is a decrease of 593 instructional hours in 2021.
• Nearly 30 percent of the decline in 2021 SOL pass rates was attributed to the decline in in-person learning.
• In another study in which data from 12 states was analyzed, Virginia students experienced the biggest drop in test scores and the lowest rate of in-person learning.
• In 2020-2021, Mathematics scores dropped 28 points from 2018-2019. In the same period, History dropped 25 points, Science dropped 21 points, Reading dropped nine points, and Writing dropped seven points.
• In 2020-2021, certain requirements for verified credits were waived by the Virginia Board of Education (required a score of at least 350-399 on the SOL assessment- a drop from a score of 400). More flexibility was provided by the waiver for verified credits in History and Social Science. There were also waivers in place for the 2019-2020 year. Further, state accreditation was waived in 2020-2021.
• Also, across the nation, absenteeism among students in 8 through 12 grades negatively increased from 2.3-4.6 percent to 5.4-7.7 percent.
• Virginia chronic absenteeism (10% or more days missed) negatively increased for all students K-12 at 10.7 in 2018-2019 to 11.1 percent in 2020-2021.
• The Virginia On-Time Cohort Graduation Rate positively increased from 91.5percent in 2019 to 93 percent in 2021.
Inadvertently Misinterpreting Leading and Lagging Data During the COVID-19 Era
Decreasing leading and lagging indicators, or in the case of absenteeism, a negative increase, was indicated in the above data. However, the on-time cohort graduation rate indicated a positive increase: 91.5 percent in 2019, 92.3 percent in 2020 and 93 percent in 2021. Why was the graduation rate so different?
The waiver that required an SOL score of 350 rather than 400 to earn a verified credit unintentionally could have impacted the pass rate. In previous years, students earning a score of 350-399, re-took the assessment to earn a passing score of 400. A passing score of at least 400 secured a verified credit, also inflating the overall pass rate. In 2021, when students earned the verified credit with a passing score 350-399, they were less likely to retake the assessment, deflating the overall pass rate.
Likewise, SAT data in 2021, like graduation data, was also surprising. In September 2021, VDOE released a media communication indicating that Virginia students outperformed peers on the SAT. Virginia’s average overall score of 1151 was 91 points higher than the average for all 2021 tested graduating seniors. Virginia’s average of 584 on the reading and writing section of the SAT was 51 points higher. Virginia’s average score of 567 in mathematics was 39 points higher. In 2019 and 2020, media communications indicated similar data.
Further, in 2021 the Virginia Department of Education indicated that 41 percent of Virginia’s 2021 graduates took the SAT, compared to 64 percent of the commonwealth’s 2020 graduates. A decrease of 23 percent. Again, like the SOL drop referenced to the waiver for a lower score needed for a verified credit, the context of COVID-19 conditions must be considered. SAT scores in some subjects can be used as a substitute assessment to earn a verified credit in exchange for the required pass of 400 on the SOL assessment. Likewise, if the SOL cut of 400 for a pass changed, then less students needed to take the SAT for a substitute.
Since Virginia public-school enrollment dropped by 45,000 students during the height of the COVID-19 epidemic last year, it is critical to dig much deeper into the pool of data. Is the drop in 45,000 students due to wealthy students now attending private schools, thereby increasing the enrollment percentage of economically disadvantaged students? Or did economically disadvantaged students not return to school, thus, decreasing the enrollment percentage of those same students?
The answer to many questions can only be provided by each school’s data set. There are too many variables to compare national data to state data or state data to local data or one high school in Richmond City to another high school in Richmond City. Point here: Proceed with caution when analyzing data in this COVID-19 era. Compare apples to apples, not apples to rib eye steak.
Fixing the Problem from a Local and Individual Student Perspective
The McKinsey & Company report on Covid-19 Education: The Lingering Effects of Unfinished Learning revealed many insights to the question of fixing the problem. Although the report highlights some national trends, it lends prudence to ensuring that the problems of unfinished learning being fixed at the local level. It also lends clarity to understanding that unfinished learning from Covid-19 is much greater than the impact of a decrease in state assessment pass
rates:
• Unfinished learning could result in a decrease in lifetime-earning for K-12 students by an average of $49,000 to $61,000.
• An annual GDP loss of $128 billion to $188 billion could be felt by 2040 when most K-12 students enrolled last year are in the workforce.
In May of 2021, Governor Ralph Northam announced $62.7 million in Virginia Learns Education Recovery grants. Additionally, the Virginia Department of Education announced $147 million from the American Recovery Program (ARP) funds to support instructional recovery efforts.
This is not “chump change.” Since the ARP funding needs to be obligated by September 2023, funding must be spent quickly and wisely, as educators will not see high funding levels in the future.
Programs and initiatives implemented with these funds must be monitored closely by defining appropriate leading indicators (i.e., growth, attendance, verified credits earned, SOL data) needed for successful lagging indicators (i.e., grades 5, 8 and 11 SOL results, NAEP results, SAT scores, ACT scores, and Graduation Rate). Choosing the right leading and lagging indicators important based on the data available is very critical. Baseline scores may be terribly
misleading.
For example, parents of students who earned a verified credit AND scored between 350-399 on the SOL assessment in 2021, could falsely believe that the students is going to do well on the SAT or ACT test when, if fact, that may not be the case. More importantly, as the waiver for a lower SOL score phases out, will the cohort of students graduating in 2023 and beyond have more difficulty earning verified credits with a return of the SOL pass rate of 400? Last year’s 8th graders are this year’s 9th graders. What are the effects of unfinished learning for those students?
The McKinsey Report indicated that 35 percent of parents surveyed said there were very or extremely concerned about their child’s mental health (clinically depressed, exhibiting social withdrawal, self-isolation, lethargy, anxiety, or irrational fear). EdWeek and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that violence in schools intensified before the Oxford shooting last week. If students with poor mental health do not have their problems addressed now, what roles will colleges, high schools, and middle schools tackle in the future?
As school divisions and principals make decisions on how to spend recovery funding and begin implementing and monitoring the use of those funds, it is critical they examine their own data, drilling down to the specific needs of each student. Principals should not assume that national trends are the same as local trends nor visa-versa. For example, after school programs are often a way of improving instructional outcomes. Implementing a voluntary division-wide after school program for twelve weeks may sound like a great idea, but what if only 20% of students attend the program? What if 90% of those in attendance scored above 375 on the 2021 SOL in reading and/or mathematics? Is that a good use of the funds? Or should each school independently develop an after-school program based on the specific needs of individual students who scored less than 375 on the 2021 SOL in reading and/or mathematics? Perhaps, hire a tutor to serve students 30-45 minutes per day after school with a ratio of no more than a 5:1 pupil to instructor ratio for six weeks? It would be an easy sell to a parent – “The school texted me today. They hired a tutor for my son/daughter. They will need him/her afterschool for six weeks. He/she will be with no more than five other students so that the school can target his needs.”
The State Board of Education should be careful not to “over policy” the use of recovery funds, but at the same time, demand accountability. The students in localities need what professionals in localities determine, not similar look-a-like programs throughout the state. Likewise, school boards need to ensure that each school’s review of data determines if programs or initiatives are working for their students, and when they are not working, ask that the program or
initiative be modified accordingly.
Finally, the State Board of Education should thoroughly think through the unintended consequences of any new policy agendas. The long-term consequences of policy actions should be given much consideration prior to approval. The consequences of the waiver implemented to help students earn verified credits is, at-best, perplexing.
VFEL/VASSP is a resource that always strives to support best practices to serve the students in our Commonwealth. Across our nation, we are all struggling with the challenges presented in responding to the unique needs of our children. Needs that are presented both in the academic realm as well as in the social emotional realm. Needs that we have never experienced to date, and needs that cross over the demographic platforms usually discussed.
There is a wealth of data and information referenced within this article, yet our focus must remain on how best to help all of our students grow and move forward. Taking the time to digest the data will help administrators use their resources to make sound decisions in support of our mission – helping all students grow into being productive lifelong learners who collectively contribute to our ever-evolving society.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR – Dr. Kathleen Smith has been a VFEL Faculty Member since 2013. She has a thorough
understanding of federal and state regulations and requirements for public schools. She was the Director of the
Office of School Improvement with the Virginia Department of Education for 15 years. Kathleen recently served as
the Regional Director for the Mid-Atlantic States for Cognia, formerly AdvancED. Kathleen’s career in education has
afforded her many opportunities to work with diverse student populations. She has extensive experience in school
and district improvement processes, federal grant writing, student engagement, formative assessment, fidelity of
program implementation, inclusive teaching practices, instruction for students with disabilities, differentiating
instruction, unit and lesson planning, understanding standards-based education, improving graduation outcomes,
survey design, and data analysis. Contact Kathleen at kathleen.smith.petersburg@gmail.com.
