-
IANAParent or a teacher, but I'm not disputing that. It's more how we assess what's been missed and how to deal with it. Some kids didn't do anything. Some kids did stuff but not what they would have done at school. Do we label a whole cohort of kids as, essentially, being 'behind' in their learning? I'm probably using it in the wrong sense but there's curriculum as 'things to know about' - which should be flexible, but social skills, critical thinking, reasoning, collaborative working, that kind of stuff is more important in the long run anyway. I'm worried there's going to be a focus on 'quantity of stuff' and quantity of learning time (extended hours, extended terms etc) to the detriment of a generation of kids and those other skills. I don't know much about this.
hoefla-
Do we label a whole cohort of kids as, essentially, being 'behind' in their learning?
I think my concern has more to do with inequalities between those who, and who have not, been "left behind." I think I'm even more concerned that this inequality is almost certainly tied to pre-existing other inequalities. This may, quite possible, have a knock-on effect for many people for years to come - starting now with university admissions.
I'll speak as a dad with a kid in primary school. Some kids didn't do anything for a year.