Addressing the Spiral Effect in Learning Loss

by Dr. Kathleen Smith

During the COVID-19 pandemic educators did what they had to do in a short amount of time (five months in the case of Virginia) with little resources (extra funding came long after September of 2020) to keep kids learning through the 2020-2021 school year. A wholesale shift to remote and hybrid learning had never been tried before. Perhaps the challenge could have been handled better, but educators did the best they could under trying circumstances.

Rather than panic over the gap between the pre- and post-pandemic Standards of Learning pass rates, educators should focus now on catching up. The good news is that they know what they need to do, and they have many resources to get the job done.

Here is the bad news: teachers have only a finite amount of time to sequence what needs to be taught, and the scope of recouping lost learning is more than can be accomplished in one school year. Their job is made more challenging by the phenomenon of “spiraling” — in which a student must master one skill level before moving on to the next.

For example, in mathematics, the student first learns simple multiplication and then moves on to more complex multiplication.

Here is an example from the SOL Blueprints for Mathematics, a tool that explains to teachers what objectives are tested and how many items are in each reporting category (available for every SOL assessment):

Post-pandemic mathematics scores plummeted. Thus, students who were at Grade 3 in 2018-2019 missed content in Grade 4 and Grade 5 in years 2019-2020 & 2020-2021, and suddenly, were tossed into Grade 6 in 2021-2022. There is a huge difference between Grade 3 content and Grade 6 content, and even more so between Grade 4 and Grade 7 content as demonstrated in the curriculum frameworks and test blueprints here.

Imagine being a 4th grader in 2018-2019 and then being provided 7th grade instruction in 2021-2022 if you had only received a cursory cover without needed mastery of the objectives in between? It would be like taking 1st year French and then going to 4th year French.

Similarly, students in Kindergarten, 1st grade and 2nd grade use the manipulation of concrete objects to understand math concepts. Students in these grades missed many classroom concrete learning opportunities.

For example, the teacher might give students a bag of mixed nuts to count, sort, and divide. This kind of learning is required for mastery at high levels and cannot be gained by simply telling a child how to sort. They have to “hold,” “touch,” and “feel” the sort. Sorts become more complex with each grade. For example, “big” vs “small” to “nuts that make sounds when they are shaken” vs those that do not. Both vocabulary and high-order thinking skills are developed in these grades.

In grades 3, 4 and 5, students are closer to thinking abstractly, but still need concrete manipulatives to solve more complex problems. Abstract thinking is a skill needed for 6th and 7th grade mathematics. Students who are not thinking abstractly will have more difficulty, for example, solving problems with negative numbers (Why does (-7) – (-10) = 3?).

Reading comprehension is dependent upon vocabulary development. Vocabulary development is dependent on two factors: (1) classroom instructional time where students are provided opportunities to learn new vocabulary; and (2) content vocabulary learned in science and social studies.

In many cases, teachers were struggling with covering the content in Reading and Mathematics, and, as an unintended consequence, Science and Social Studies might have been short-changed. Thus, SOL Reading scores showed a wider gap between non-disadvantaged and disadvantaged peers post-COVID as compared to pre-COVID, in some part, due to limited vocabulary instruction.

Was the learning loss so bad it can’t be recovered? Educators have begun the process of determining what needs to be done and are more than capable of meeting the challenge.

One approach is to cram more teaching time into the school year. Administrators are taking many approaches: adding 30 minutes of instructional time each day, providing after school programs, developing summer bridge programs, and trying countless other innovations to get more out of the instructional day. Even with these creative efforts, 180 days x the number of hours per day = a finite number.

Another approach is to equip teachers with more information about the students who are entering their classes. The Virginia Department of Education provides them an analysis of a student’s performance in previous SOL tests along with an analysis of their strengths and weaknesses.

Before politicians jump in with new laws to address the learning loss, let’s give educators a chance. Teachers have the knowledge, skills, and most of the resources needed to get the job done. Politicians may be able to fix things for future pandemics, but for right now, it is time to let educators do what they excel at — teaching.

Dr. Kathleen Smith is an educator living in Petersburg.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

14 responses to “Addressing the Spiral Effect in Learning Loss”

  1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Excellent explanation of the learning process and what needs to be done. I wish you well.

  2. LarrytheG Avatar

    Thank You! Would have been nice to hear the critics here in BR write something similar to what Kathleen has so I’m glad that Kathleen took it upon herself to do it AND I’m hopeful she will follow Matt Hurts lead and write more about how public education DOES work!

  3. LarrytheG Avatar

    Thank You! Would have been nice to hear the critics here in BR write something similar to what Kathleen has so I’m glad that Kathleen took it upon herself to do it AND I’m hopeful she will follow Matt Hurts lead and write more about how public education DOES work!

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    OTOH, some may consider it a challenge. I knew one who when presented 9th grade material in the 7th became determined to master it.

    1. David Wojick Avatar
      David Wojick

      Some well might, but that some is likely not the issue. I read science way above my grade.

    2. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      Absolutely. Kids are more up to the challenge than we think. Higher expectations are always good. Maybe we will inadvertently close some achievement gaps. Possible.

  5. David Wojick Avatar
    David Wojick

    I actually mapped the spiraling in K-12 science education under the traditional standards, that is not the strange Next Generation Science Standards. There are two aspects.

    There are about 36 distinct families of concepts, from astronomy to zoology. Within each family there is a natural sequence, with more complex concepts as grades progress. These sequences generally follow historical development of the science.

    In addition the teaching necessarily spirals around among the families. For example in Virginia as I recall electricity is taught first in 4th grade, then more in 6th, middle school, and in high school depending on the science chosen.

    I call it a marathon of sprints as ten or so concept families are taught each year. This necessary spiraling is likely a significant source of confusion, but there is no obvious alternative.

    Catching up may not be possible.

  6. Matt Hurt Avatar

    I agree with everything, especially the part about politicians intervening. When one compares the vast difference in student performance from 2019 to 2022 and the great similarities between accreditation rates over those years, most of that is due to the through year growth assessment legislation passes in 2021. Public education is not a simple matter that can be easily improved with a simple algorithm. Usually, the further decision makers (in this case legislators) are from the problem in such complex areas, the more likely they are to screw things up. The law of unintended consequences is well enforced by the universe.

    1. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      And more testing as in the useless growth assessments required by the general assembly that require kids to take end of grade level tests at the beginning of that year before they have been taught a thing. Now we have shortened the school year by 20 rather than 10 days of testing. Countdown time to 16o and with prep, 150 days. Why pay for reading specialists when their real job is helping administer tests?

    2. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      And more testing as in the useless growth assessments required by the general assembly that require kids to take end of grade level tests at the beginning of that year before they have been taught a thing. Now we have shortened the school year by 20 rather than 10 days of testing. Countdown time to 16o and with prep, 150 days. Why pay for reading specialists when their real job is helping administer tests?

Leave a Reply