ClassCast Podcast EP.059 -- TIBBENS -- THE LIES OF LEARNING LOSS

Ep.059 -- Tibbens -- The Lies of Learning Loss

3/8/2021

ClassCast Podcast Ep.059 features host Ryan Tibbens exploring the concept of "learning loss," how it's being applied during the COVID-19 pandemic, and why most of these discussions are biased, flawed, and misleading. If you pay attention to education-related news, then you know that politicians, state education boards, testing companies, university researchers, school choice advocates, and even some local school leaders have been ranting about "learning loss" for months. But you may not have considered how narrow and limited that discussion has been. Are students really 3-6 months behind? Are the disparities between racial and socioeconomic groups insurmountable? If we really want to promote top-quality education for all citizens, if we really want to create life-long learners, then shouldn't we all be concerned?

The sky is not falling. Learning hasn't stopped. "Learning loss" is a talking point for those hoping to capitalize on the pandemic, but the situation isn't nearly as dire as they would have you believe. Tibbens takes the long view and points out why "learning loss" isn't going to cripple a generation. Don't panic (and carry a towel).

The ClassCast Podcast streams on all major platforms, including iTunes/Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, Audible, Stitcher, and more. You can also find us on YouTube and right here at www.ClassCastPodcast.com. Be sure to like, subscribe, follow, share, and comment wherever you listen. Leave a comment below to let us know what you think of the discussion and if you have any questions!

Additional Reading/Listening
- https://www.edweek.org/leadership/opinion-students-respond-to-adults-fixation-on-learning-loss/2021/02

- https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/20/03/harvard-edcast-learning-loss-and-coronavirus

- www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help#

- https://www.epi.org/publication/five-key-trends-in-u-s-student-performance-progress-by-blacks-and-hispanics-the-takeoff-of-asians-the-stall-of-non-english-speakers-the-persistence-of-socioeconomic-gaps-and-the-damaging-effect/

- https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/27590/who-reads-books

6 Comments

Srisha

3/9/2021 03:23:12 pm

Great episode! I loved your nuanced analysis on how recent observations on learning loss are misleading. Citing test scores as a measure for how "behind" a child is in education exposes the flawed definition of being on track in life, which you hit on very well.

However, I battle with the contradictory view expressed of learning loss in the episode.

True learning occurs when a student has the autonomy to pursue what interests them. This propels them to constantly be absorbed with ideas; learning becomes synonymous to play.

The assumption, then, is that school is simply a tool for students to get guidance on what they autonomously desire to learn. Unfortunately this isn't true- a core feature of school is the subjective curriculum assigned to students, which are decided by the state. The effect is that children associate the word "learning" to its antonym- one that involves coercion.

This would explain the reading statistic that you cited, where many never pick up a book when it isn't an assignment for school. We can extend this "learning" loss to summer break, where there is no need to spend extra brain space on regurgitating material that students had no say in.

This is the rational and justified course of actions that a student would take due to the conditioning from a school system. However, isn't this harmful for a child's curiosity? If the only exposure to organic chemistry is mounds of fill- in the blank worksheets, what incentive do they have to pursue it professionally?

From a practical standpoint, I agree that school cannot be tailored to every individual. But do schools even serve a utilitarian function? Does it actually enhance the skills/happiness of most people? If so, then why have we seen such little participation among students with distance learning (where it's easier to not be forced to answer about a subject students don't even care about)?

Maybe learning loss is a lie because there can only be so much true learning in an environment that has limited autonomy.

I'd love to hear your perspective on this.

ClassCast Podcast

3/10/2021 11:57:16 pm

Srisha, thanks for listening to the episode and sharing your thoughts. While I agree with many of your ideas about autonomy, desire, and self-selected pursuits, I disagree that these are required for learning.

You say, "True learning occurs when a student has the autonomy to pursue what interests them. This propels them to constantly be absorbed with ideas; learning becomes synonymous to play." However, "true learning" seems to be an artificial distinction between the kind of learning you want to engage in (or at least want for other students) and the kind of schooling that is readily available. Consider that few people have a genuine, deep seated interest in doing taxes, choosing insurance, fixing a clogged sink, or observing all traffic laws. Yet most people will learn to do those things because they are, at times, required of us. People of economic means may pay someone else to handle these tasks for them, but most will ultimately learn them because situations require it, regardless of true interests or sincere motivation.

I agree that learning is more fun and more enduring when we learn what we want, how we want, when we want. But to expect those opportunities all the time is unrealistic, whether in school or elsewhere. I also balk at the supremacy of autonomy because, in reality, most people only enjoy limited autonomy. Unfortunately, people in school have even less than the average, and that should be remedied. But it is unfair to label any required learning as less than "true learning" simply because the learner didn't choose or love it.

In regard to "learning loss," some of this certainly factors in. When physically removed from school, and when armed with "camera off" and "mute" buttons, students can disengage much easier than in the traditional school environment. And teachers who say they can't perform their job (educating and developing others) well in this situation are likely not worth their salt. While I do have a few students who are disengaged, they wouldn't have been the most engaged students in person either. Most of my students are learning as much, or at least almost as much, as they would have in a "normal" year, so I argue against "learning loss" both because it isn't as universal as some people claim AND because it is a flawed, illogical concept. My primary concern, as you have heard, is that the concept is weak and that it is being used for profit, grift, and control rather than what is best for young people. What would be better? A stronger focus on autonomy, choice, and educational freedom would be good. But I'm not prepared to accept your assumptions about "true" learning as the basis for rejecting "learning loss." I think a long-term view of the purposes of schooling and what students are actually likely to use or need later in life would be a better way to approach our current situation.

Great ideas, all around, even on the "true learning" piece that I disagree with.

Jim Dunning

3/11/2021 11:49:43 am

There's a tension here between what is "required" (coerced, maybe?) and what is voluntary. While Srisha doesn't list specific interests or areas of study that should/could be explored and learned passionately and voluntarily, Ryan does offer what seems to be a contrast to what they could be: "...doing taxes, choosing insurance, fixing a clogged sink, or observing all traffic laws."

Even though this dichotomy risks categorizing common school fare with what many see as very mundane and unappetizing (at best) tasks that we must master to survive society, it aptly illustrates that the things we learn actually fall on a spectrum ranging from the equivalent of having your mouth washed out with soap to winning the Publishers Clearing House contest.

This is true even within endeavors we embrace willingly. For instance, I love cycling and spend a lot of time doing it, fervently enjoying both the rapid descents down curving hills as much as the painful ascents to get to them. However, there are parts of cycling I do not enjoy, such as the routine maintenance required to keep my bike in working order so it doesn't fall apart on those terrifyingly exciting descents; taking a toothbrush and cleanser to the nooks and crannies of the frame and replacing bearings are not necessarily fun but are necessary skills I must not only learn but master. These are examples of relatively unpalatable skills we choose to acquire so we can learn and explore more rewarding activities.

It fairly illustrates the point of where on the spectrum do we transition from passions to survival tasks, as well the larger existential discussion of whether we are truly autonomous beings ("I also balk at the supremacy of autonomy because, in reality, most people only enjoy limited autonomy").

But don't we miss the point Srisha makes, however, if we equate filling out 1040As, stringing instruments, and degreasing bike chains with diving into economics, mastering Blackbird on the ukulele, and flying down hills at 50 mph? In fact, we don't even offer much in the way of seat time in school for "doing taxes, choosing insurance, fixing a clogged sink, or observing all traffic laws." Isn't Srisha focusing on larger interests—like literature and music and history and math and physics and sports and performance arts—rather than some of the "necessary" but tedious (to some) tasks we accept as trade-offs in pursuing those larger passions?

If we accept that framework, then it comes down to the utility of compelling young humans to take the classes a group of adults believe are requisites for life: "I think a long-term view of the purposes of schooling and what students are actually likely to use or need later in life would be a better way to approach our current situation." Srisha questions whether the public school syllabus is of value to the individual and society in the long-term while Ryan seems to be arguing that adolescents should be forced to "learn" things for their own good or the greater good of our culture.

I ask Srisha, then, what benefits and harms result from not taking AP Lang or Algebra and ask Ryan similarly what the consequences are of being forced to take those classes? Does enabling young adults to choose to do whatever they want result in more negatives than the ones that result from compelling them to sit through classes others have chosen for them?

And Ryan knows my question to him is always "What is the purpose of high school?" Again, I don't buy into the idea that choosing to wade through grading hundreds of essays devalues or undermines the agency involved in embracing education as a vocation. Does an English teacher choose the vocation for grading the essays or sharing learning with other humans?

3/11/2021 01:31:37 pm

"While I agree with many of your ideas about autonomy, desire, and self-selected pursuits, I disagree that these are required for learning."

In this podcast episode, Ryan, you state that much of what is taught in high school is forgotten (I think algebra is cited as an example). Are people who choose to engage in algebra out of curiosity more or less likely to forget/lose knowledge/skills than those who sat though 135 hours of classroom instruction because they had to by law?

3/22/2021 10:11:55 pm

Good question. It's hard to say. My guess is that those who learned by choice will forget in much the same way, just slower. Use it or lose it. I know many people who were mathematically inclined throughout school and who now work in finance or accounting; they forget all the same stuff I do, except for the parts they use. I would guess they could re-learn it faster than I could, largely due to the motivation and preference for that subject.

My point in the previous reply to Srisha is that total autonomy and choice are not required for learning. On the other hand, an authoritarian system is unlikely to promote human flourishing. But we shouldn't really have to choose. If tax-payers want to require certain skills or piece of content knowledge in exchange for a public education, that's not unreasonable. And if students want more freedom in what they study and how they specialize, that's not unreasonable either. Personally, I believe basic knowledge of biology, psychology, economics, and government/civics should be required; but they could be taught, tested, and completed (at the basic level) by the end of middle school or early high school. The only things we should require for all 13 years is literacy and numeracy, and those should take different forms, more like a college program of studies or a menu than the current limited, linear, tracked progressions.

All this is to say that learning loss is a reasonable concern if people are losing opportunities they would normally cherish and capitalize upon, if they are "losing" the learning that would have stood the test of time anyway. It is only real if we don't provide students opportunities to continue their literacy and numeracy acquisition.

The learning loss debate has more to do with a brittle system and people's inflexible ideas of what education is.

3/23/2021 09:59:07 pm

"If tax-payers want to require certain skills or piece of content knowledge in exchange for a public education, that's not unreasonable. And if students want more freedom in what they study and how they specialize, that's not unreasonable either."

So, as the Commonwealth of Virginia puts it, "a system of free public elementary and secondary schools" is really a form of conscription, a public service?

I'd like to dig into the idea of whether a free, public education is for the child or for society and, if both, what is the balance and why?

CLASSCAST
Podcast

Ep.059 -- Tibbens -- The Lies of Learning Loss

Leave a Reply.

ClassCast

Archives

Categories

Copyright 2023

​CLASSCASTPodcast

Ep.059 -- Tibbens -- The Lies of Learning Loss

Leave a Reply.

ClassCast

Archives

Categories

Copyright 2023

CLASSCAST
Podcast