How COVID School Closures Impacted SOL Test Scores

Table 1: 2021 In-Person Instructional Hours (and percentage of 990-hour standard) by Virginia educational region.

This is the fourth in a series of articles discussing Virginia’s Standards of Learning assessments.

by Matt Hurt

The Code of Virginia requires school divisions to provide students a minimum of 990 hours of instruction yearly. During the COVID-19 epidemic, the Virginia Department of Education waived that standard, allowing local school districts to offer remote learning and hybrid remote/in-person alternatives as they found expedient. Local practices varied widely.

Earlier this year VDOE surveyed public school divisions to determine the number of in-person instructional hours offered during the academic year. The table above displays the results collected, broken down by region, race (Blacks and Whites only), and by disability status.

Some broad conclusions emerge from this data.

  • Statewide, only 40% of students experienced full in-person instruction. (No student experienced a full school year. Even divisions that offered in-person five days per week did so on an abbreviated school day.)
  • Southwest Virginia schools provided the most in-person learning (60%), and Northern Virginia schools the least (34.7%).
  • Statewide, Black students experienced far less in-person learning (338 hours on average) than Whites (439  hours) — a gap of more than 100 hours.

Correlating the in-person learning data with Standards of Learning data leads to another important finding: Nearly 30% of the catastrophic decline in SOL pass rates in 2021 can be attributed to the decline in in-person learning. Poor students were impacted most.

Governor Ralph Northam ordered all public schools in Virginia to close March 13, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools did not reopen for the rest of the year. Teachers and administrators were directed to “engage” with students that spring. Teachers spent countless hours preparing packets of work that were sent home with meals as well as attempting to maintain communications with students and families. Precious little of that work was completed and returned. To say that students had an extended summer break in 2020 is an understatement.

During the 2020-2021 school year, Virginia school divisions were tasked with developing plans to provide instruction while also keeping students and staff safe. Every division offered fully virtual instruction options into which families could opt their children. Decisions to open schools for in-person instruction made by school divisions varied widely. Some divisions offered in-person instruction from day one, five days a week. Other divisions opened the year fully virtual, and at some point offered in-person instruction later in the year. One division offered no in-person instruction to the vast majority of students.

Incentives (or lack thereof). Given the extensive disruption, Superintendent of Public Instruction James Lane exercised emergency authority to waive school accreditation for the 2020-2021 and the 2021-2022 school years. Because students were prohibited from coming to school and SOL tests must be administered under standardized conditions, the tests were suspended entirely during the spring of 2020. Verified credits were essentially waived for the purpose of awarding diplomas for the graduating class of 2020. During the 2021 school year, high school students could earn a verified credit if they scored at least 350 on their SOL tests (400 is passing).

Similarly, since accreditation was waived, many elementary and middle schools administered far fewer expedited test retakes than in previous years. Statewide data is not yet available. But within the Comprehensive Instructional Program consortium, of which I am executive director, only 4.23% of attempts were retests compared to 11.6% in the last pre-COVID year. Within these 45 Virginia public school divisions, the degree to which 2021 retake rates changed from 2019 to 2021 accounted for approximately 37% of the difference in SOL pass rate differences from 2019 to 2021. Had school accreditation not been waived, more students would have retaken tests and pass rates certainly would have been higher, although it is unknown by how much.

In-Person Instruction and Poverty. An analysis of the in-person- instructional-hour data and 2021 SOL test data, as seen in the scatter plot below, suggests that that the amount of in-person instruction offered by school divisions in 2021 account for a bit more than 29% of the variance in SOL outcomes.

The divisions that outperformed this trend to the greatest degree tended to have relatively small enrollments of students who lived in poverty. The divisions that underperformed this trend to the greatest degree enroll a significantly higher percentage of students who live in poverty. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the poverty rates of school aged children in Virginia range from Loudoun County at 2.75% to Colonial Beach at 37%. To provide a poverty context, the scatterplot labels the poverty percentile ranks of the top and bottom divisions outliers.

In order to determine the combined effects of poverty and in-person instruction on SOL outcomes, a regression analysis was conducted, wherein SOL pass rates were the dependent variable, and in-person instructional hours and poverty rates were the independent variables. The results of this analysis suggest that the combined variables of in-person instructional hours and poverty rates accounted for approximately 47% of the variation of SOL pass rates among Virginia’s 132 public school divisions in 2021. This means that factors outside of teachers’ and administrators’ control (poverty enrollment and the amount of in-person instruction) accounted for nearly half of the variance among divisions in 2021 SOL outcomes.

Please note that, as described in “Outperforming the Educational Outcome Trends-Virginia’s Region VII,” many divisions have successfully overcome the negative correlation between poverty enrollment and SOL outcomes (which had been declining until 2021), but the added variable of the in-person instructional hours compounded the challenge.

During the 2021 school year, one of the biggest problems teachers and administrators had was getting virtual students to fully participate in the educational process. It seems likely that more affluent parents have a greater capacity than less affluent parents to ensure that their children attend to their school work in a virtual setting. By contrast, when students are in class, teachers have proximal control and can make sure they are doing their work. Socioeconomic status matters far less during in-person instruction.

Other Factors. Table 3 displays the number of divisions that administered each SOL test during the 2021 school year. VDOE allowed divisions to administer Performance Based Assessments (PBA) in lieu of some SOL tests (elementary/middle history and writing, high school history) last year. For example, 56 divisions administered the PBA in Writing 8, which is historically among the SOL tests with the lowest pass rates each year. Divisions making that choice would have received a bump in their overall and writing SOL pass rates by not including the traditionally lower scoring tests in their data. Overall, 38% fewer SOL tests were administered in Virginia in 2021 than in 2019.

Table 3

Conclusion. It is quite clear that the 2021 SOL data provides a less reliable evaluation of our instructional efforts than it did in pre-COVID. Decisions made by our elected officials and unelected bureaucrats impacted our SOL outcomes as much as the efforts of our teachers and administrators. What can be accurately said at this point is that we have far more students behind where they should be than at any point in recent history.

Given this predicament, it is imperative that the elected and appointed leadership in Virginia restrict any initiatives that do not guarantee a positive return on investment as measured by our student outcome metrics, primarily in the core reading and math skills. Many current initiatives claim to address this issue, but in effect may only do so in a tangential manner. These will serve only to dilute our efforts (more on that in the next article). If we want our students to overcome the loss of in-person instruction time during the 2020 and 2021 school years, we must rely on valid data to drive our efforts, set appropriate expectations for performance, and allow teachers and administrators the autonomy to meet those expectations based on their skills, resources, and the specific needs of their students.

Matt Hurt  is director of the Comprehensive Instructional Program based in Wise.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

19 responses to “How COVID School Closures Impacted SOL Test Scores”

  1. Thank you for this insightful article. I would add that in addition to reading and math there is extra focus on handwriting. The data on brain development and handwriting is crystal clear. It is one of the many items not tested on the SOL. I would bet there has been little focus on this antiquated practice. Yet, reading and writing combined are by definition what makes one literate.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      That’s an interesting observation and I can’t disagree with it.

      But I’ll point out that some people I know don’t email or participate in online activities that require a fair amount of words that need to be typed because they never learned keyboarding and are “hunt and peckers”.

      Further, is it possible these days with touch screens and OCR to maybe allow input from handwriting rather than keyboarding and if so, would it eventually become more preferred than typing?

      Finally, if one has a spelling and grammar check, it can essentially “teach” you when words are misspelled or grammar mangled… though I will admit even with these tools being used, some of us are still quite awful.

      1. Larry, I understand your point. Yes, in today’s society keyboarding is necessary. My point deals with how handwriting trains the brain. There’s a great article in the WSJ. Unfortunately, I can’t link it because you need a subscription. Certain college professors will not let their students take notes with a computer because retention of material is significantly greater if you write by hand. Try this experiment if you want. Make a list to take to the store. One week write it by hand. The next week write it on the computer. See which list you remember more without looking at it. Usually, it will be the one written by hand.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          if you can give me some keywords, I’ll get it and post it.

          Teacher friend agrees with you but also says it’s a technique like mnemonics to improve memory but other techniques also used to train “memory”.

          Not required in Va or other any state, I don’t think.

          is this the Article: ” Can Handwriting Make You Smarter?
          Students who take notes by hand outperform students who type, and more type these days, new studies show”

          1. Larry, the article is entitled, “How Handwriting Trains the Brain.” It’s a good laymen’s article. There are other more scientific, nero-science articles that go deep into brain function if you really want to go down that rabbit hole.

            Handwriting plays a role in not just memory but many other brain functions as well including but not limited to visual spatial relations.

            Cursive takes handwriting to another level in terms of brain development. Just a fun fact to know and share.

            Yes, spell check/word processing can become a crutch but it is also wonderful assistive technology for dyslexics/dysgraphics. It is also helps those of us who aren’t great typists.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            I saw it in some related article and will read it.

            I just got back from a fairly long conversation with a retired teacher on this…. and … it’s … “complicated”!

            ๐Ÿ˜‰

            we got into handwriting notes in a lecture versus keyboarding them or recording them and later listening to to the recording.

            The retired teacher now agrees I need to read the article you point to, so I will and get back and see where we get to and my understanding.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            The writer of the WSJ article does not have an academic background in education or related fields, and she barely references background information on the subject.

            However, she does sorta reference an Indiana University study and some googling brings it up along with another interesting study on PubMed:

            ” The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children”

            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25541600/

            ” Abstract
            In an age of increasing technology, the possibility that typing on a keyboard will replace handwriting raises questions about the future usefulness of handwriting skills. Here we present evidence that brain activation during letter perception is influenced in different, important ways by previous handwriting of letters versus previous typing or tracing of those same letters. Preliterate, five-year old children printed, typed, or traced letters and shapes, then were shown images of these stimuli while undergoing functional MRI scanning. A previously documented “reading circuit” was recruited during letter perception only after handwriting-not after typing or tracing experience. These findings demonstrate that handwriting is important for the early recruitment in letter processing of brain regions known to underlie successful reading. Handwriting therefore may facilitate reading acquisition in young children.”

            Okay, so a good question might be – given this research WHY is handwriting not being taught ESPECIALLY for some kids who struggle with learning – and instead keyboarding is taught?

            Then below that a bunch of related articles that all seem to support your view.

            also: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/science/whats-lost-as-handwriting-fades.html

            I appreciate the conversation and “education”! ๐Ÿ˜‰ but also point out, WE are having this conversation via keyboard, not handwriting! ๐Ÿ˜‰

            still puzzled why VDOE and other states don’t do this and their reasons for not land maybe a question to Matt Hurt – does Region 7 teach handwriting?

      2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        Spell check does not “teach” you. It is a crutch and allows one to become lazy in spelling. I speak from direct experience.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          well it tells you when you got it wrong and if you pay attention, you remember the correct spelling next time.

          Isn’t that “learning” just as good as if a teacher scolded you and you did better next time? ๐Ÿ˜‰

  2. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    Makes a good point! Well done. Enjoyed the series! Be careful, a flock of NOVA mother birds might move your way and to become SOVA mother birds.

  3. killerhertz Avatar
    killerhertz

    Also, who the hell would even trust scores based on a test (SOLs) produced by the provider, i.e. school system bureaucracy? They can just lower the freakin bar!

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      The heck you say! How would JAB be able to impugn and castigate the “failures” of public education without that data? ๐Ÿ˜‰

  4. LarrytheG Avatar

    A pretty meaty article and no surprise as this is Mr. Hurtt’s standard practice, and it is appreciated.

    His article is based on objective facts and accurate information, not conjecture and what-about-ism thank goodness.

    There is no question that conventional Public Education does not do remote learning well and especially so in the lower grades.

    Also true, kids are behind and have to be caught up and agree we should prioritize reading, writing and math over other until caught up. If you can’t read and understand – trying to learn history or social studies is a fail anyhow.

    But I still continue to disagree that remote learning is a fail and no way to do it, so it’s effective.

    It’s a very different way of teaching and there are commercial providers that do it more right.

    And home schoolers use it as do some kids in circumstances where they cannot attend public school and some private schools are using it also.

    Virtual Virginia also offers remote learning as do more and more Colleges.

    It also can help even help kids who actually receive in-person but need more help – at home, with homework, etc.

    Finally, with all the uproar over what should or should not be done in public schools these days, it can be an alternative for parents who do not want their kids in public schools anymore.

    So we should not throw out the baby with the bath water on remote, IMHO.

    It’s not going to go away, and we should treat it as a tool in the tool chest and incorporate it when it makes sense and can benefit.

    1. Matt Hurt Avatar

      Please don’t take this to mean that I don’t believe there’s no place for virtual instruction, because I believe it can be effective for students who meet at least one of the following conditions.
      1. Students who are self motivated
      2. Students who are motivated by someone in their home.

      If the student doesn’t choose to log into their virtual lesson, and no one forces them to do so, that virtual lesson does them no good. There was a crap load of kids in that scenario last year across the Commonwealth. This, I believe, was the driving factor that caused the correlation between SOL outcomes and virtual instruction- not the actual quality of the virtual instruction.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        Agree but I DO think the design and quality of the software can affect how much the student might be engaged and doing a remote lecture is on the lower end of quality in my view.

        So virtual “instruction” as opposed to “virtual education”. ๐Ÿ˜‰

        Well designed interactive software can draw in some kids, actually better than classroom for some kids.

        And it can and should be a major part of some education in the 21st century IMHO again.

        Also -not all “in-person” instruction is nirvana.

        A LOT depends on the teacher. Some teachers ARE themselves life-time learners and are actually role models to set fire to some students.

        Other teachers may not be and it’s just “instruction”.

        And my teaching friends and you have convinced me of that – that some teachers ARE leaders and role models and other teachers need to learn from them and follow their lead.

  5. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Thanks for this description and analysis, Matt. Rather than use your findings for political or ideological points, as some have done, it would be best to concentrate on the points you made in your summary:

    1. Leave the schools alone to do their basic job and do not heap any more initiatives on them.

    2. “Allow teachers and administrators the autonomy to meet those
    expectations based on their skills, resources, and the specific needs of
    their students.”

    1. Matt Hurt Avatar

      I have no interest in such foolishness (political or ideological points), and I hope that my article didn’t lead anyone to believe otherwise. I believe that both Democrats and Republicans can impede educational progress equally well. I’m attempting to build the case for my next article, which will lay out some recent actions that I strongly believe will help propagate the achievement gaps among our subgroups, or at least hinder real progress in reducing them.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        And hope that you continue to share your views and perspectives despite some partisan back and forth which is ongoing not just in this blog.

  6. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    The school leaders of SW Region 7 should be promoted to run the VDOE. Impressive results given the situation. Appreciate Mr. Hurt’s series very much.

Leave a Reply