Mar 20 2025 9 mins 112
Most headlines have said something like New NAEP Scores Dash Hope Of Post-COVID Learning Recovery, which seems like a fair assessment.
I feel bad about this, because during lockdowns I argued that kids’ educational outcomes don’t suffer long-term from missing a year or two of school. Re-reading the post, I still think my arguments make sense.
So how did I get it so wrong?
When I consider this question, I ask myself: do I expect complete recovery in two years? In 2026, we will see a class of fourth graders who hadn’t even started school when the lockdowns ended. They will have attended kindergarten through 4th grade entirely in person, with no opportunity for “learning loss”.
If there’s a sudden switch to them doing just as well as the 2015 kids, then it was all lockdown-induced learning loss and I suck. But if not, then what?
Maybe the downward trend isn’t related to COVID? On the graph above, the national (not California) trend started in the 2017 - 2019 period, ie before COVID. And the states that tried hardest to keep their schools open did little better than anyone else:
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/what-happened-to-naep-scores
