Opinion | This is the solution to the covid learning loss crisis

The problem was not just that some students lacked internet access; it was also that online learning, the evidence suggests, did not work as well as in-person instruction. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, an evaluation commonly referred to as the nation’s report card, came in last year with alarmingly low marks for the country’s children: Two decades’ worth of progress in math and reading among 9-year-olds was gone. Eighth-graders’ math scores fell in 49 of 50 states. Worse, those already the furthest behind fell behind further still. Black and Hispanic students, as well as students in high-poverty districts, suffered particularly. The longer kids took classes remotely, the worse the numbers look.

These declines matter. Already, there has been a national dip in college enrollment among recent graduates — in single digits overall but almost 30 percent the year the pandemic began among low-income students. A study by a Stanford University economist estimates pandemic-related learning loss could reduce the lifetime earnings by an average of $70,000.

Reversing this crisis will require a historic investment. The good news is, that’s just what states and school districts have gotten from Congress: approximately $190 billion from coronavirus rescue plans, including the $122 billion chunk in the American Rescue Plan, known as the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund. Think tank FutureEd’s most recent analysis found that states and school districts have so far managed to spend about half the money they’d been allotted. They’ll need to spend the rest by 2024 or else it will evaporate. But spend it on what, exactly?

Staffing has, understandably, swallowed up a substantial portion of funding — and schools should ensure they’re paying a premium for good teaching rather than just teaching. Spending on facilities and operations has inspired more skepticism. It’s easy to roll one’s eyes at AstroTurf playing fields popping up across the country while students are struggling with long division. But at least half the facilities spending has focused on HVAC systems, a sensible choice in the face of an airborne virus. And in many low-income and rural communities where buildings have long been in substandard condition, safe, well-maintained classrooms can help students learn better.

It seems that officials plan to use about a quarter of the remaining money to address learning loss directly. There’s a playbook for how to spend these dollars well. If students are going to learn more than schools usually manage in a year, they’re going to need more time to learn. Yet those extra hours are wasted unless they’re devoted to the types of instruction research reveals work. Foremost among those is what’s known as high-dosage tutoring.

This is basically what it sounds like. Students get relatively individualized instruction, and they get it often — ideally, three or fewer kids per teacher for three hours each week. The average child in districts that reopened quickly during the pandemic lost the equivalent of about seven to 10 weeks of progress, about a quarter of a normal school year; the average student at high-poverty schools that stayed remote for the majority of the 2020-2021 school year lost the equivalent of about 22 weeks. High-dosage tutoring, done correctly, could compensate, giving kids as much as an additional year of growth every year it’s implemented.

There are caveats, mostly having to do with what “correctly” looks like. Less frequent, less intensive versions of the practice produce dramatically worse results. Tutors must be well-trained. Attendance must be mandatory, a goal easier to achieve if the extra instruction happens during school hours. One way to make that happen is to lengthen the school year. Summer sessions could be valuable, too, but also only under certain conditions. A six-week or so summer opportunity can offer about an academic quarter’s worth of growth, provided at least half the day is devoted to academics and provided kids show up — an eventuality not to be taken for granted.

Editorial Board: Learning loss is a generational emergency. Here is how to fix it.

And no matter when high-dosage tutoring happens, both finding and paying for teachers is a challenge. Focusing on the students left furthest behind is crucial to contain costs, which experts estimate could land at $4,000 per student per year. Thinking creatively about tutor recruitment can also help; schools could consider teachers-in-training or undergraduates or even parents. One paper suggests that high school students could mentor elementary school students, college students could mentor middle school students and college graduates in the AmeriCorps program could mentor high school students.

High-dosage tutoring is essential to make up for the learning loss covid-19 has wrought. It could also help to ensure future students don’t lose so much to begin with.