Don’t be magical thinkers about the risks and realities of reopening schools
Parents, teachers, school administrators, and kids anxiously await decisions about school reopening. News feeds and leaders on both the left and right across the country have weighed in on this debate. One voice that has had some influence at the national level in framing the debate on the when and how of re-opening schools is that of the American Academy of Pediatrics. On Friday, June 10, AAP, jointly with the American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association and the School Superintendents Association, offered a joint-statement with the headline advising that “Science and community circumstances must guide decision-making; funding is critical”. The statement further asserts:
“Returning to school is important for the healthy development and well-being of children, but we must pursue re-opening in a way that is safe for all students, teachers and staff. Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools … We should leave it to health experts to tell us when the time is best to open up school buildings, and listen to educators and administrators to shape how we do it. …. A one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for return to school decisions.”
Decisions around school re-openings should take into consideration the health burden risks imposed on school employees and parents. Recent media has highlighted a few studies suggesting that children may not play a significant role in COVID-19 disease transmission, however, all of these studies have limitations and there currently is no convincing body of scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates that kids are less susceptible to COVID-19, nor is it known if kids are less contagious once they are infected. We do know that children are much more likely to be asymptomatic and less likely to get tested, so the true number of infections in children is likely underestimated. Also, it is plausible that children have been less likely to contract COVID-19 precisely because schools and extra-curricular activities have been closed, while many adults remain in the workforce and face exposure. The reopening of in-person instruction in schools is likely to increase the spread of COVID-19, unless measures are taken to drastically reduce both the density of students gathering and the time spent indoors together.
We all want our kids back in the classroom. But we need to set aside magical thinking about what re-opening schools and in-person instruction will look like or else we risk miserable failure. An important factor that is oft missing from the debates to re-open school is the current mandate for public health to isolate all COVID-19 cases and quarantine all close contacts for at least 14 days. Even my 10 year old son knows to ask, “What happens once one of my 26 classmates tests positive for COVID-19? Won’t my whole class need to quarantine for at least 14 days?” At current levels of disease activity, re-opening schools with in-person instruction is going to entail frequent and abrupt student, teacher and other school employee quarantines of at least 14 days, with entire classrooms and potentially schools and school districts being shut-down abruptly throughout the year.
Unless we can slow the spread of the COVID-19 in the community, our schools are destined for closure. If we aren’t honest with ourselves and set a plan that is feasible, then the 2020-2021 school year will be full of uncertainty to parents, teachers and our children. While we know there are benefits to in-person school, it is also well established that uncertainty is a significant cause of anxiety and stress.
One primary motivator to send children back to school is social services provision. This spotlights the unfortunate reality that in the United States school instruction and child social services are bundled together. Perhaps we should be asking ourselves how the fulfillment of social service needs of children can be separated from the learning experience. The services and stability that schools provide children cannot be minimized, but there may be ways to overcome social isolation, food insecurity and heightened risks of domestic violence besides attending school with in-person instruction administered by teachers. Indeed, the overall approach to education should be framed with the assurance that children can have basic needs met even when classroom doors are closed. When governments look at their budgets, remember that schools and social services need more funding this year, not less of it.
The debate over schools re-opening lacks a community-wide cohesive strategy for coordinated efforts to combat COVID-19. How do we, as a community, respond to COVID-19?
Given the current case counts, many parents are wondering whether we have already sacrificed our five year-olds starting kindergarten this August so that we could enjoy a little beach time, or large gatherings with friends and family, or a drink at the bar, or any number of social gatherings that are non-essential, yet contribute to spreading COVID-19. Going forward we need to have a societal reckoning of our priorities and how we rank them within our communities.
We are all in this together. Our decisions about schools will impact daycares, restaurants, bars, social venues and businesses of all types, hospitals, nursing homes, churches, sports clubs, and even the horse industry, and visa versa. We, as a community, must advance a creative and cohesive response reflecting the diverse values of our community. Beyond protecting the lives of those most vulnerable to complications from COVID-19, we hope our children and equity are among the top priorities.
Kathleen Winter is an infectious disease epidemiologist and faculty in the UK College of Public Health. Steve Buck is an applied economist and faculty in the UK College of Agriculture, Food and the Environment.
This story was originally published July 20, 2020 at 12:24 PM.