Cited by 308Education during COVID-19 pandemicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare

Modelling the long-run learning impact of the Covid-19 learning shock: Actions to (more than) mitigate loss

Open access
Kaffenberger, Michelle·2021·International Journal of Educational Development

Abstract

This paper uses a calibrated "pedagogical production function" model to estimate the potential long-term losses to children's learning from the temporary shock of Covid-19 related school closures. It then models possible gains from two mitigation strategies. Without mitigation, children could lose more than a full year's worth of learning from a three-month school closure because they will be behind the curriculum when they re-enter school and will fall further behind as time goes on. Remediation when children return to school reduces the long-term learning loss by half, but still leaves children more than half a year behind where they would have been with no shock. Remediation combined with long-term reorientation of curriculum to align with children's learning levels fully mitigates the long-term learning loss due to the shock and surpasses the learning in the counterfactual of no shock by more than a full year's worth of learning. Systems need to begin planning now for remediation programmes, and as they do so they should build programmes and train teachers in ways that can continue to produce benefits beyond the period immediately following reopening.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102326

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaffenberger, M.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Kaffenberger, Michelle
Venue
International Journal of Educational Development
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
81
Pages
102326
ISSN
0738-0593 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3033130336
Cited by
308
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 98 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 4
FWCI
85.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Educational Development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
  • Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Government
  • Department for International Development, UK Government
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Keywords
COVID-19 school closures, learning loss, curriculum reorientation, long-term learning outcomes, teacher professional development, education policy, learning recovery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review