Lost learning” is a phrase that has become a staple of the Covid-19 catch-up narratives.

But what does it actually mean? And how useful is the phrase when we talk about what schools should be doing to make up for the unprecedented disruptions to children’s education over the past 12 months?

We spoke to a range of experts across the education sector, to get their views.

The EEF chief

Professor Becky Francis, chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation:

“Learning” refers to a lasting change in pupils’ capabilities
or understanding. It is the development of a broad range
of knowledge and skills, from the academic to the socioemotional and physical. 

The term “lost learning” represents our collective understanding that students’ progress in subjects across the curriculum is likely to be less than would be expected in a year without the disruption of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

But it is important to be careful around the language we use here. Pupils are resilient, so we should be wary of heightening anxieties and inadvertently placing limits on their (and our) expectations of what they can achieve. 

Children’s experiences have not been uniform; while many have struggled during this period, there are those who have thrived. However, we cannot ignore the fact that there are pupils who will need additional support in the coming years, many of whom come from disadvantaged backgrounds. 

Using a common term that clearly signposts that this is
an issue deserving of both our concern and a proportional response can be helpful, but we must be wary of stereotypes and labels.

The cognitive scientist

Jared Cooney Horvath, neuroscientist, educator and author:

“Lost learning” is purely a curriculum argument. Assuming that we must get through a curriculum (my least favourite term in education) by a certain time, any loss to that time means one of two things: either we crunch more into less time (impossible) or we ditch that which we’ve missed. 

Here, lost learning means students missed a large chunk of information that we can’t conceivably find time to bring back in, so it’s lost to the ether. Whether or not this is meaningful depends entirely on your viewpoint of the curriculum.

Learning is not a moment or event - it is a process that stretches from surface recognition through deep levels, into a neverending cycle of transfer. In this sense, one can never lose learning. 

The most one could lose is an opportunity to extend learning, but even that’s a bit of a lie, seeing as literally everything we do contributes to our learning trajectory, whether that’s reading a book or not reading a book - it all counts.

The assessment expert

Dylan Wiliam, emeritus professor of educational assessment at University College London:

I think there are two kinds of “learning loss” and the distinction is important, because they require different solutions.

The first is the things that students used to know, before the schools closed, and they now appear to have forgotten. The important point to note is that this may be more apparent than real. If you test students on the first day back, then they will appear to have forgotten a lot, but this is only because retrieval strength is low. Storage strength - how well something is embedded in memory - never goes down, and therefore a quick review will get students back to where they were.

The second is the learning opportunities that students have missed as a result of school closures. There are basically only three ways to address this aspect. The first is to improve the quality of teaching, through better curriculum and greater use of classroom formative assessment. The second is to systematically assign the best teachers to teach the lowest-achieving and most vulnerable students, and the third
is to extend the amount of time students are studying: longer school days, longer school weeks and longer school years.

The former Ofsted director

Daniel Muijs, dean of the School of Education and Society at Academica University of Applied Sciences and former head of research at Ofsted: 

It is a fact that, as a result of the pandemic, it has been harder for pupils to learn as much as they normally would; there are studies from across the world that show us this is the case, and that this has impacted where pupils are in terms of their knowledge and skills, particularly in English and maths (as these are the subjects we have most data on). As such, there is an issue that needs addressing systemically, and “learning loss” is a useful shorthand to describe that issue.

We do, however, need to be careful in how we interpret and deal with learning loss. It is not uniform. Learning loss differs between pupils depending on things like their home-learning situation. It differs between subjects, with some harder to teach remotely. 

It likely also differs between periods of the pandemic. Though we don’t yet have data showing this, I suspect that learning loss during the first lockdown was far greater than it was during lockdown three, as schools have become more proficient at remote education. We may therefore be overestimating learning loss if we base our thinking on data from lockdown one.

The middle leader

Christian Pountain, head of RE and director of spirituality at St Christopher’s CE High School in Lancashire:

“Lost learning” is a horrible phrase. Of course, we know what the politicians mean, but perhaps “lost content” would be a better phrase, and the discussion could be reframed around that. Learning cannot be “lost”, as though pupils have somehow left it somewhere and can’t remember where they put it. 

In fact, arguably, the pandemic has created some
of the best learning opportunities in living memory: certainly, the much-talked-about capacity it has provided for us all to slow down and notice things. The birds have always been there, but so many pupils have talked about noticing them singing for the first time during the various lockdowns. 

Another word I’ve heard a lot recently is “pivot”. Covid-19 has taught us how to do this effectively: to become agile and responsive to situations as they arise. To tap into the human spirit and find a way to become an overcomer.

Some call this resilience. Whatever it is, I am sure it is good for us, and we all, including our pupils, will emerge at the other side of this leaner, stronger and better equipped for what life throws at us. If this isn’t learning, I don’t know what is.

The inclusion specialist

Divya Jindal-Snape, professor of education, inclusion and life transitions at the University of Dundee:

We learn all the time and we definitely don’t stop learning because we aren’t in a school or university. We learn from all our experiences, sometimes consciously and sometimes unconsciously.

Children are curious and have a huge potential for learning from their natural environment; school is one of those environments, but there are other environments that are important, too. Life is an observatory where we learn continuously.

So, if we use terms like “lost learning”, I believe we are doing
a disservice to young people, families and teachers.

Firstly, because the pandemic provided opportunities to learn
about a lot of different aspects of life, whether it was to do with science, geography, health, politics or the importance of relationships and our responsibility to help others.

Secondly, teachers and families have worked together to ensure homeschooling is effective. Of course, this might not have happened for every child and schools might be the safest environment for some, which brings me to what I believe schools should prioritise going forward.  

The priority should be to support children’s and young people’s, teachers’ and families’ wellbeing. Even if we can control the virus and pandemic, the psychological and emotional impacts will last for a long period, including those related to mass bereavements, change in family dynamics and lack of opportunities to socialise and play.

This article originally appeared in the 19 March 2021 issue