So, I know it's the weekend but if I don't say all this I may burst.

A thread for those who think school days should be extended and holidays shortened to make up for 'lost learning'.

The narrative of 'lost learning' is based on the myth that in-school learning is the be-all-and-end-all for all pupils at all times. It isn't. Not all pupils engage all day in school. Not all pupils complete every task set every day, in school or as part of home learning
Part of a teacher's job, and one that we do hourly, is to assess where pupils are along a progression of learning. When they reach a milestone we challenge and extend, where we think revision and consolidation of previous learning is needed we plan and deliver that.
What we don't do when there is revision and consolidation required is declare that any child's life chances are lost. We seek support in school, at home and when necessary from our colleagues in education and third-sector partners.
When a child misses schooling through illness, family circumstance, war, refugee status, any non-attendance, we don't write off their life chances, we don't make them work longer hours and shorten holidays. We take a holistic approach to the support needed and work to meet that.
And the support isn't always for academic advancement. It can be social strategies that are needed, behavioural strategies, coping strategies that bring emotional support. All of that and more, for every pupil, all the time.
Lockdown and remote learning doesn't change that - it changes how it's delivered. Does it suit every learner? No. But neither does in-school learning. Will every learner engage with it in the same way and at the same time? No. But that doesn't happen in school either.
What's needed on our return to school is more teachers and smaller class sizes; taking a holistic view of every child and what they need. Some will have thrived over this period - how do we support and sustain that?
Some will have progressed as expected - we need to maintain that, and some will have disengaged and we need to consider how we re-engage them and progress their learning. One-size-fits-all 'extra' learning won't work. We need to get it right for every child and young person.
The narrative of 'lost learning' does a huge disservice to education staff who have worked tirelessly ensuring learning continues. Upskilled in IT, producing innovative and creative ways to engage and teach whilst coping with the same home/life tensions as the rest of world,
rota'd in learning hubs to ensure key workers can work and teaching the most vulnerable of our young people in school. Because our most vulnerable young people have not been forgotten and have not been left behind. They have been identified and targeted for support.
To brand an entire school cohort as Covid's 'lost generation' does a huge disservice to our young people. They have been amazing though this: learning new IT skills and a whole new way of working, planning their own learning schedule and engaging independently,
coping with changes they have no control over and no say in. Our young people are, and will continue to be, resilient and incredible. They are not lost, they are not 'behind', their life chances are not destroyed. And they need to know that.

More from Education

Time for some thoughts on schools given the revised SickKids document and the fact that ON decided to leave most schools closed. ON is not the only jurisdiction to do so, but important to note that many jurisdictions would not have done so -even with higher incidence rates.


As outlined in the tweet by @NishaOttawa yesterday, the situation is complex, and not a simple right or wrong https://t.co/DO0v3j9wzr. And no one needs to list all the potential risks and downsides of prolonged school closures.


On the other hand: while school closures do not directly protect our most vulnerable in long-term care at all, one cannot deny that any factor potentially increasing community transmission may have an indirect effect on the risk to these institutions, and on healthcare.

The question is: to what extend do schools contribute to transmission, and how to balance this against the risk of prolonged school closures. The leaked data from yesterday shows a mixed picture -schools are neither unicorns (ie COVID free) nor infernos.

Assuming this data is largely correct -while waiting for an official publication of the data, it shows first and foremost the known high case numbers at Thorncliff, while other schools had been doing very well -are safe- reiterating the impact of socioeconomics on the COVID risk.

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.