3 ms·

Why would we expect "learning loss" (whatever the term is for reduced learning outcomes) to follow such a neat trend? If you neglect a kid for a year, then we

• giraffe_lady 4y ago
  What is a year in the end? You got dozens of them, you can spare one if you really have to, to preserve life, say. The damage comes from the tiering of education, where anyone not "ready" at the next stage doesn't get access to it at all. That structure is a policy decision we've made, not a necessary fact of education or life.
  • lm28469 4y ago
    That's not how it works though. You can't skip socialisation and languages for 2-3 years and expect to just pick these thing as if you were 5 years old again. And even if you could your second point is moot, it is a social construct but it will stay like that, so it end up being a fact of life for everyone.
  • Night_Thastus 4y ago
    What other structure is there? All knowledge and skill is based off of more basic knowledge and skills. If someone doesn't have a grasp of simple addition, calculus isn't going to make much sense. That's true at the lowest levels and the highest levels. Now if you're arguing that the way we test if someone is ready for the next level of a given field is done poorly, that's different and there could be a strong case for it depending on the field and school.