scholarly journals The impact of COVID-19 on A level students in England

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalwant Bhopal ◽  
Martin Myers

The global outbreak of the COVID-19 virus created new and challenging circumstances for schools, colleges and universities. In England the closure of schools and cancellation of examinations led to concerns about how pupils would be awarded A Level exam grades. These exam results have a significant impact on outcomes for pupils leaving school including access to the employment market, apprenticeships and university places. This report represents an early analysis of research exploring the impact school closures and cancellation of examinations had on students. The main aims of the study were to examine the impact (mental and academic) of predicted grades being used to award A Level grades; to explore support systems in place for students; and, to analyse differences by race, class, gender and school type. Some of the broader themes that emerged from the research included students concerns about the fairness of their A Level results; and, many students identifying structural inequalities within education being mirrored in the new processes for awarding grades.

Author(s):  
Jamie A. Cohen ◽  
Dina Mistry ◽  
Cliff C. Kerr ◽  
Daniel J. Klein

Background: School closures around the world contributed to reducing the transmission of COVID-19. In the face of significant uncertainty around the epidemic impact of in-person schooling, policymakers, parents, and teachers are weighing the risks and benefits of returning to in-person education. In this context, we examined the impact of different school reopening scenarios on transmission within and outside of schools and on the share of school days that would need to be spent learning at a distance. Methods: We used an agent-based mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission and interventions to quantify the impact of school reopening on disease transmission and the extent to which school-based interventions could mitigate epidemic spread within and outside schools. We compared seven school reopening strategies that vary the degree of countermeasures within schools to mitigate COVID-19 transmission, including the use of face masks, physical distancing, classroom cohorting, screening, testing, and contact tracing, as well as schedule changes to reduce the number of students in school. We considered three scenarios for the size of the epidemic in the two weeks prior to school reopening: 20, 50, or 110 detected cases per 100,000 individuals and assumed the epidemic was slowly declining with full school closures. For each scenario, we calculated the percentage of schools that would have at least one person arriving at school with an active COVID-19 infection on the first day of school; the percentage of in-person school days that would be lost due to scheduled distance learning, symptomatic screening or quarantine; the cumulative infection rate for students, staff and teachers over the first three months of school; and the effective reproduction number averaged over the first three months of school within the community. Findings: In-person schooling poses significant risks to students, teachers, and staff. On the first day of school, 5-42% of schools would have at least one person arrive at school with active COVID-19, depending on the incidence of COVID in the community and the school type. However, reducing class sizes via A/B school scheduling, combined with an incremental approach that returns elementary schools in person and keeps all other students remote, can mitigate COVID transmission. In the absence of any countermeasures in schools, we expect 6-25% of teaching and non-teaching staff and 4-20% of students to be infected with COVID in the first three months of school, depending upon the case detection rate. Schools can lower this risk to as low as 0.2% for staff and 0.1% for students by returning elementary schools with a hybrid schedule while all other grades continue learning remotely. However, this approach would require 60-85% of all school days to be spent at home. Despite the significant risks to the school population, reopening schools would not significantly increase community-wide transmission, provided sufficient countermeasures are implemented in schools. Interpretation: Without extensive countermeasures, school reopening may lead to an increase in infections and a significant number of re-closures as cases are identified among staff and students. Returning elementary schools only with A/B scheduling is the lowest risk school reopening strategy that includes some in-person learning.


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksana Leukhina ◽  
Zhixiu Yu

Abstract Between the months of February and April of 2020, average weekly market hours in the U.S. dropped by 6.25, meanwhile 36% of workers reported switching to remote work arrangements. In this paper, we examine implications of these changes for the time allocation of different households, and on aggregate. We estimate that home production activity increased by 2.65 h a week, or 42.4% of lost market hours, due to the drop in market work and rise in remote work. The monthly value of home production increased by $39.65 billion – that is 13.55% of the concurrent $292.61 billion drop in monthly GDP. Although market hours declined the most for single, less educated individuals, the lost market hours were absorbed into home production the most by married individuals with children. Adding on the impact of school closures, our estimate of weekly home production hours increases by as much as 4.92 h. The increase in the value of monthly home production between February and April updates to $73.57 billion. We also report the estimated impact of labor markets and telecommuting on home production for each month in 2020.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Klementina Ocskay ◽  
Anna Kanjo ◽  
Noémi Gede ◽  
Zsolt Szakács ◽  
Gabriella Pár ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The role of artificial and bioartificial liver support systems in acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is still controversial. We aimed to perform the first network meta-analysis comparing and ranking different liver support systems and standard medical therapy (SMT) in patients with ACLF. Methods The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020155850). A systematic search was conducted in five databases. We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of artificial or bioartificial liver support systems on survival in patients with ACLF. Ranking was performed by calculating the surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve values. The RoB2 tool and a modified GRADE approach were used for the assessment of the risk of bias and quality of evidence (QE). Results In the quantitative synthesis 16 trials were included, using MARS®, Prometheus®, ELAD®, plasma exchange (PE) and BioLogic-DT®. Overall (OS) and transplant-free (TFS) survival were assessed at 1 and 3 months. PE significantly improved 3-month OS compared to SMT (RR 0.74, CrI: 0.6–0.94) and ranked first on the cumulative ranking curves for both OS outcomes (SUCRA: 86% at 3 months; 77% at 1 month) and 3-month TFS (SUCRA: 87%) and second after ELAD for 1-month TFS (SUCRA: 76%). Other comparisons did not reach statistical significance. QE was moderate for PE concerning 1-month OS and both TFS outcomes. Other results were of very low certainty. Conclusion PE seems to be the best currently available liver support therapy in ACLF regarding 3-month OS. Based on the low QE, randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings for already existing options and to introduce new devices.


Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 415
Author(s):  
Sonia Chaabane ◽  
Sathyanarayanan Doraiswamy ◽  
Karima Chaabna ◽  
Ravinder Mamtani ◽  
Sohaila Cheema

School closures during pandemics raise important concerns for children and adolescents. Our aim is synthesizing available data on the impact of school closure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on child and adolescent health globally. We conducted a rapid systematic review by searching PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar for any study published between January and September 2020. We included a total of ten primary studies. COVID-19-related school closure was associated with a significant decline in the number of hospital admissions and pediatric emergency department visits. However, a number of children and adolescents lost access to school-based healthcare services, special services for children with disabilities, and nutrition programs. A greater risk of widening educational disparities due to lack of support and resources for remote learning were also reported among poorer families and children with disabilities. School closure also contributed to increased anxiety and loneliness in young people and child stress, sadness, frustration, indiscipline, and hyperactivity. The longer the duration of school closure and reduction of daily physical activity, the higher was the predicted increase of Body Mass Index and childhood obesity prevalence. There is a need to identify children and adolescents at higher risk of learning and mental health impairments and support them during school closures.


2021 ◽  
pp. 174077452098486
Author(s):  
Charles Weijer ◽  
Karla Hemming ◽  
Spencer Phillips Hey ◽  
Holly Fernandez Lynch

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the challenges of evidence-based health policymaking, as critical precautionary decisions, such as school closures, had to be made urgently on the basis of little evidence. As primary and secondary schools once again close in the face of surging infections, there is an opportunity to rigorously study their reopening. School-aged children appear to be less affected by COVID-19 than adults, yet schools may drive community transmission of the virus. Given the impact of school closures on both education and the economy, schools cannot remain closed indefinitely. But when and how can they be reopened safely? We argue that a cluster randomized trial is a rigorous and ethical way to resolve these uncertainties. We discuss key scientific, ethical, and resource considerations both to inform trial design of school reopenings and to prompt discussion of the merits and feasibility of conducting such a trial.


AERA Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 233285842110187
Author(s):  
Meredith R. Naughton

The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease–2019) pandemic disrupted the education of students across the globe in the spring of 2020. Students who were previously at most risk for falling behind their peers and through the cracks because of academic, financial, racial, and/or generational disadvantage faced a wide range of additional obstacles in the pursuit of their college goals. This qualitative study sought to uncover postsecondary advising implications for students through the perspectives of near-peer college advisers (n = 23) serving in high-need schools in two different states as intensive, in-person advising was forced to adapt to virtual formats. Two key thematic findings reveal that advisers faced new communication challenges and existing systemic barriers for marginalized students became even larger. For seniors who had not yet made final postsecondary decisions or who had remaining to-dos, the impact of school closures and distanced advising may have fatally widened existing cracks in the path to college.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document