Simon Burgess, Hans Henrik Sievertsen 01 April 2020
The
global lockdown of education institutions is going to cause major (and likely
unequal) interruption in students’ learning; disruptions in internal
assessments; and the cancellation of public assessments for qualifications or
their replacement by an inferior alternative. This column discusses what can be
done to mitigate these negative impacts.
The
COVID-19 pandemic is first and foremost a health crisis. Many countries have
(rightly) decided to close schools, colleges and universities. The crisis
crystallises the dilemma policymakers are facing between closing schools
(reducing contact and saving lives) and keeping them open (allowing workers to
work and maintaining the economy). The severe short-term disruption is felt by
many families around the world: home schooling is not only a massive shock to
parents’ productivity, but also to children’s social life and learning.
Teaching is moving online, on an untested and unprecedented scale. Student
assessments are also moving online, with a lot of trial and error and
uncertainty for everyone. Many assessments have simply been cancelled.
Importantly, these interruptions will not just be a short-term issue, but can
also have long-term consequences for the affected cohorts and are likely to
increase inequality.
Impacts on education: Schools
Going
to school is the best public policy tool available to raise skills. While
school time can be fun and can raise social skills and social awareness, from
an economic point of view the primary point of being in school is that it
increases a child’s ability. Even a relatively short time in school does this;
even a relatively short period of missed school will have consequences for
skill growth. But can we estimate how much the COVID-19 interruption will
affect learning? Not very precisely, as we are in a new world; but we can use
other studies to get an order of magnitude.
Two
pieces of evidence are useful. Carlsson et al. (2015) consider a situation in
which young men in Sweden have differing number of days to prepare for
important tests. These differences are conditionally random allowing the
authors to estimate a causal effect of schooling on skills. The authors show
that even just ten days of extra schooling significantly raises scores on tests
of the use of knowledge (‘crystallized intelligence’) by 1% of a standard
deviation. As an extremely rough measure of the impact of the current school
closures, if we were to simply extrapolate those numbers, twelve weeks less
schooling (i.e. 60 school days) implies a loss of 6% of a standard deviation,
which is non-trivial. They do not find a significant impact on problem-solving
skills (an example of ‘fluid intelligence’).
A
different way into this question comes from Lavy (2015), who estimates the
impact on learning of differences in instructional time across countries.
Perhaps surprisingly, there are very substantial differences between countries
in hours of teaching. For example, Lavy shows that total weekly hours of
instruction in mathematics, language and science is 55% higher in Denmark than
in Austria. These differences matter, causing significant differences in test
score outcomes: one more hour per week over the school year in the main
subjects increases test scores by around 6% of a standard deviation. In our
case, the loss of perhaps 3-4 hours per week teaching in maths for 12 weeks may
be similar in magnitude to the loss of an hour per week for 30 weeks. So,
rather bizarrely and surely coincidentally, we end up with an estimated loss of
around 6% of a standard deviation again. Leaving the close similarity aside,
these studies possibly suggest a likely effect no greater than 10% of a
standard deviation but definitely above zero.
Impacts on education: Families
Perhaps
to the disappointment of some, children have not generally been sent home to
play. The idea is that they continue their education at home, in the hope of
not missing out too much.
Families
are central to education and are widely agreed to provide major inputs into a
child’s learning, as described by Bjorklund and Salvanes (2011). The current
global-scale expansion in home schooling might at first thought be seen quite
positively, as likely to be effective. But typically, this role is seen as a
complement to the input from school. Parents supplement a child’s maths
learning by practising counting or highlighting simple maths problems in
everyday life; or they illuminate history lessons with trips to important
monuments or museums. Being the prime driver of learning, even in conjunction
with online materials, is a different question; and while many parents round
the world do successfully school their children at home, this seems unlikely to
generalise over the whole population.
So
while global home schooling will surely produce some inspirational moments,
some angry moments, some fun moments and some frustrated moments, it seems very
unlikely that it will on average replace the learning lost from school. But the
bigger point is this: there will likely be substantial disparities between
families in the extent to which they can help their children learn. Key
differences include (Oreopoulos et al. 2006) the amount of time available to
devote to teaching, the non-cognitive skills of the parents, resources (for
example, not everyone will have the kit to access the best online material),
and also the amount of knowledge – it’s hard to help your child learn something
that you may not understand yourself. Consequently, this episode will lead to
an increase in the inequality of human capital growth for the affected cohorts.
Assessments
The
closure of schools, colleges and universities not only interrupts the teaching
for students around the world; the closure also coincides with a key assessment
period and many exams have been postponed or cancelled.
Internal
assessments are perhaps thought to be less important and many have been simply
cancelled. But their point is to give information about the child’s progress
for families and teachers. The loss of this information delays the recognition
of both high potential and learning difficulties and can have harmful long-term
consequences for the child. Andersen and Nielsen (2019) look at the consequence
of a major IT crash in the testing system in Denmark. As a result of this, some
children could not take the test. The authors find that
participating in the test increased the score in a reading test two years later
by 9% of a standard deviation , with similar effects in mathematics. These
effects are largest for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Importantly,
the lockdown of institutions not only affects internal assessments. In the UK,
for example, all exams for the main public qualifications – GCSEs and A levels
– have been cancelled for the entire cohort. Depending on the duration of the
lockdown, we will likely observe similar actions around the world. One
potential alternative for the cancelled assessments is to use ‘predicted
grades’, but Murphy and Wyness (2020) show that these are often inaccurate, and
that among high achieving students, the predicted grades for those from
disadvantaged backgrounds are lower than those from more advantaged
backgrounds. Another solution is to replace blind exams with teacher
assessments. Evidence from various settings show systematic deviations between
unblind and blind examinations, where the direction of the bias typically
depends on whether the child belongs to a group that usually performs well
(Burgess and Greaves 2013, Rangvid 2015). For example, if girls usually perform
better in a subject, an unblind evaluation of a boy’s performance is likely to
be downward biased. Because such assessments are used as a key qualification to
enter higher education, the move to unblind subjective assessments can have
potential long-term consequences for the equality of opportunity.
It
is also possible that some students’ careers might benefit from the interruptions.
For example, in Norway it has been decided that all 10th grade students will be
awarded a high-school degree. And Maurin and McNally (2008) show that the 1968
abandoning of the normal examination procedures in France (following the
student riots) led to positive long-term labour market consequences for the
affected cohort.
In
higher education many universities and colleges are replacing traditional exams
with online assessment tools. This is a new area for both teachers and
students, and assessments will likely have larger measurement error than usual.
Research shows that employers use educational credentials such as degree
classifications and grade point averages to sort applicants (Piopiunik et al.
2020). The increase in the noise of the applicants’ signals will therefore
potentially reduce the matching efficiency for new graduates on the labour
market, who might experience slower earnings growth and higher job separation
rates. This is costly both to the individual and also to society as a whole
(Fredriksson et al. 2018).
Graduates
The
careers of this year’s university graduates may be severely affected by the
COVID-19 pandemic. They have experienced major teaching interruptions in the
final part of their studies, they are experiencing major interruptions in their
assessments, and finally they are likely to graduate at the beginning of a
major global recession. Evidence suggests that poor market conditions at labour
market entry cause workers to accept lower paid jobs, and that this has permanent
effects for the careers of some. Oreopoulos et al. (2012) show that graduates
from programmes with high predicted earnings can compensate for their poor
starting point through both within- and across-firm earnings gains, but
graduates from other programmes have been found to experience permanent
earnings losses from graduating in a recession.
Solutions?
The
global lockdown of education institutions is going to cause major (and likely
unequal) interruption in students’ learning; disruptions in internal
assessments; and the cancellation of public assessments for qualifications or
their replacement by an inferior alternative.
What
can be done to mitigate these negative impacts? Schools need resources to
rebuild the loss in learning, once they open again. How these resources are
used, and how to target the children who were especially hard hit, is an open
question. Given the evidence of the importance of assessments for learning,
schools should also consider postponing rather than skipping internal assessments.
For new graduates, policies should support their entry to the labour market to
avoid longer unemployment periods.
References
Andersen,
S C, and H S Nielsen (2019), "Learning from Performance Information",
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.
Bjorklund,
A and K Salvanes (2011), “Education and Family Background: Mechanisms and
Policies”, in E Hanushek, S Machin and L Woessmann (eds), Handbook of the
Economics of Education, Vol. 3.
Burgess,
S and E Greaves (2013), “Test Scores, Subjective Assessment, and Stereotyping
of Ethnic Minorities”, Journal of Labor Economics 31(3): 535–576.
Carlsson,
M, G B Dahl, B Öckert and D Rooth (2015), “The Effect of Schooling on Cognitive
Skills”, Review of Economics and Statistics 97(3): 533–547
Fredriksson,
P, L Hensvik, and O Nordström Skans (2018), "Mismatch of Talent: Evidence
on Match Quality, Entry Wages, and Job Mobility", American Economic
Review 108(11): 3303-38.
Lavy,
V (2015), “Do Differences in Schools' Instruction Time Explain International
Achievement Gaps? Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries”,
Economic Journal 125.
Maurin,
E and S McNally (2008), "Vive la revolution! Long-term educational returns
of 1968 to the angry students", Journal of Labor Economics 26(1):
1-33.
Murphy,
R and G Wyness (2020), “Minority Report: the impact of predicted grades on
university admissions of disadvantaged groups”, CEPEO Working Paper Series No
20-07 Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunitites, UCL Institute
of Education.
Oreopoulos,
P, M Page and A Stevens (2006), “Does human capital transfer from parent to
child? The intergenerational effects of compulsory schooling”, Journal of
Labor Economics 24(4): 729–760.
Oreopoulos,
P, T von Wachter, and A Heisz (2012), "The Short- and Long-Term Career
Effects of Graduating in a Recession", American Economic Journal:
Applied Economics 4(1): 1-29.
Piopiunik,
M, G Schwerdt, L Simon and L Woessman (2020), "Skills, signals, and
employability: An experimental investigation", European Economic Review
123: 103374.
Rangvid,
B S (2015), "Systematic differences across evaluation schemes and
educational choice", Economics of Education Review 48: 41-55.
No comments:
Post a Comment