This week, as the prime minister formally announced that all year groups will return to the classroom on 8 March, the patience of teachers, parents and pupils was finally matched with a sense of clarity for the future.
Because, despite the amazing efforts to provide digital lessons, we know the ideal learning environment for most pupils is the nursery, the school classroom and the college. And so, as long as the data supports it, this is a very welcome step.
But it is only the first step, and we cannot forget that the young people of our country have lost half a year of normal schooling. They’ve lost a year of clubs, performing, volunteering and socialising. Some will have had the gaps filled with tutors, laptops and broadband connections. Others have fallen further behind.
For some, lockdown has been an opportunity to reconnect as a family. For others, their parents have lost their livelihoods, relatives have lost their lives and the walls are closing in. These losses matter in their own terms, and they matter for opportunities later in life. They matter for the friendships and confidence and wider horizons on which happiness can depend.
Schools reopening: Problems won’t be solved with a short-term fix
And it’s the young people who were already disadvantaged who have had their education damaged most by the pandemic. This is unfairness piled on existing injustice. This will not be solved by a short-term fix. And we must recognise the lack of resilience built into our existing systems.
The announcement of Sir Kevan Collins to coordinate the recovery from the pandemic’s massive disruption to schools and young people was welcome news - particularly with our latest research finding almost three in five (59 per cent of) parents are worried about how prepared their children are to transition into the next academic year.
It reflects a growing sense that children’s futures are one of the most important issues for our national recovery. We have asked the young people of this country to sacrifice a great deal to protect their elders. This may be the right decision, but they are certainly owed a better future in return.
There are many ideas for what we should do, some more practical than others. In some cases, we have good evidence for particular tactics, like tutoring, but we have never used them at scale. So we will be taking risks with everything we do. That’s fine, as long as we evaluate and adapt as we go.
I’d like to suggest six principles to judge these suggestions against. This isn’t advice for teachers, who know exactly what to do. Consider it advice to government on how to help teachers do what they do best. Our national recovery plan should be targeted, balanced, enduring, resilient, humane - and it should work with and through schools.
Covid: The six principles of good catch-up
The disruption has not affected everyone equally. Therefore the first principle is that we should target our limited resources at the young people who need them most. Who are these young people? Where are they? What has lockdown been like for them specifically?
This may be harder than it sounds, as some of our most vulnerable young people are the most easily lost in the fragmentation and isolation of lockdown. Regular physical contact with their school and social care was a lifeline.
The second principle is that we should consider both academic and social losses. We need to provide time for study, and we need time for play and performance. I want to be clear that I think academic gaps are crucial. We do need to bridge them. But this should not be our only focus - the wellbeing of young people is vital, too. And, indeed, it’s inseparable from effective academic progress.
Which brings me to the third principle: there are only so many hours in the day. We cannot cram everything that has been lost into a quick sprint without causing more harm than good. To do it right, we need an enduring long-term plan: three to five years as a minimum. Even better, let’s make permanent changes to our education system in terms of funding and accountability.
If the pandemic has taught us anything, it is the uncertainty of events. We don’t know what is around the corner - more virulent variants of the virus, new lockdowns, further economic problems or other threats. So the fourth principle is that any recovery plans we build should be resilient to a wide range of possibilities and not based on any fragile assumptions. We need contingencies and fallbacks.
Our plans should also put people ahead of systems. Too much of our debate in education seems to concentrate on how we protect the integrity of the system - like how we will maintain confidence in exams, for example.
This is the fifth principle: we need to be focused on how we help each student to progress to the best possible next step for them: for primary leavers to thrive at their new secondary schools, for GCSE students to move on to the right sixth form or college provision. For school leavers to get good jobs, training or university places. We can afford to be generous: we have nothing to lose by it.
Finally, the sixth principle is that we need a trusted institution that can adapt national plans to local circumstances, that can react to the individual stories and that can knit together all the other services upon which families depend.
This institution is the school, led by its teachers and senior leaders. And, by this, I don’t mean that we should make schools do everything - that is folly. But a school can be a stable centre around which other services and systems can revolve.
We therefore need to ensure that the schools serving the most vulnerable communities are equipped with everything they need to thrive, including the space to build support relationships with other schools.
Letting schools lead doesn’t mean abandoning them to get on with it alone: they are usually trying to solve the same problems, so they need to share and we need to listen. And letting schools lead the recovery will also require a renewal of trust and dialogue between the frontline and the centre.
Russell Hobby is the CEO of Teach First
