Blind spots, assumptions, missing storylines, and new angles to consider.

By Alexander Russo

The abrupt closing of nearly the entire American school system is a massive story. It deserves an enormous amount of attention. And so far, the quality and quantity of the coverage that I’ve seen has been encouragingly high — especially given what a fast-moving, complex situation we’ve been in since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic.

With 14,000 or so different districts, the K-12 system is enormously decentralized. With something like 50 million kids and 3.7 million teachers, it’s massive. The frenzy of social media activity is impossible to keep up with, and the news has been breaking with crushing speed. I hope readers, listeners, and viewers appreciate the extraordinary service that journalists are performing right now.

That said, the danger that I see is that a certain “fog of war” mentality in which overwhelmed and exhausted education journalists mainly write stories based on government announcements (such as last night’s passage of a massive stimulus package), what others are doing or what they’re seeing on social media or in their own homes, doubling down on established storylines rather than slowing down enough to decide what’s really most important or to consider storylines and approaches to add.

As you’ll see, a couple of the issues I’m flagging are in the category of potential blind spots or assumptions. Others are storylines that warrant more coverage than they’ve received based on what I’ve seen. One or two of the items ask reporters to question the media narratives that seem to dominate right now.

Sign up here for our free newsletter featuring the week’s best education news & newsroom comings and goings.

Above: This recent LA Times story describes challenges in the rollout of the LAUSD program. 

A MUCH-NEEDED OVERVIEW

What percentage of the nation’s school kids and teachers are essentially home on an extended spring break, and what percentage are currently being provided an online program of some kind?

It was relatively easy to report when school systems announced they were going to shut down and how long they said the shutdown was going to last. EdWeek turned that information into a helpful map. But “closed” means a bunch of different things, and what we now desperately need to know is which states and districts have reopened through other means (virtual and otherwise), and which remain “closed closed.”  That is, what percentage of the nation’s school kids and teachers are essentially home on an extended spring break, and what percentage – I’m guessing it’s quite small – are currently being provided an online program of some kind? For districts that are shut down in terms of school-based services to students, what are the launch dates for remote learning for the remaining districts and states?

EVALUATING STATE AND DISTRICT RESPONSES

Did school leaders react in a timely and thoughtful manner? Have they communicated clearly with the public and key stakeholders? Are they mounting an effective array of services to serve kids’ educational and nutritional needs?

While the press has closely scrutinized the White House and the U.S. Department of Education responses to the crisis, the performance of state and district education leaders has not yet seemed to have received equally careful examination. Did these leaders react in a timely and thoughtful manner? Have they communicated clearly with the public and key stakeholders? Are they mounting an effective array of services to serve kids’ educational and nutritional needs? If so, great. If not, what are the next steps to addressing the problems? Reporters have done a great job depicting concerns about equity and sufficiency of services. Now readers are going to need to know more about what and how well education leaders and district systems are doing. One obvious way to go would be to detail two different districts’ responses to the crisis, as the CT Mirror recently did, or to compare how two different state superintendents have responded. Things don’t seem to be going so well in Boston or Los Angeles thus far.

To learn more about how the media covers education, follow The Grade on Twitter and Facebook.

Above: This recent Boston Globe story describes the effort to ensure all students can participate

WHAT ABOUT SCHOOLS’ MOST VULNERABLE WORKERS?

These are the waiters, retail workers, and cooks of the education economy. Their workplaces are shut down. And there’s no guarantee that they get paid when schools are unexpectedly closed.

Education journalists have done a great job focusing attention on students who need food and other services in addition to classwork — and on the many struggles of remote learning on teachers, students, and parents. But surprisingly little attention has been paid to the most vulnerable workers in any school system: the classified staff who clean the buildings, serve the food, help the teachers, and guard the hallways. These are the waiters, retail workers, and cooks of the education economy. Their workplaces are shut down. And in this case or any other disaster, there’s no guarantee that they get paid when schools are unexpectedly closed. They are not college-educated, by and large, or universally unionized. A handful of outlets have written about this, including Chalkbeat, the Rivard Report, and EdWeek. But these people, whose work is so important to schools and students, are not getting nearly as much attention as they should.

SCHOOL-BASED CHILDCARE FOR ESSENTIAL WORKERS

These new programs put schools at the forefront of the fight against the spread of the virus.

Two weeks ago, one of the main concerns about closing down schools was the need to ensure that frontline health care workers could still go to work. In response, some states and districts said they were going to set up special programs for these essential workers, often using school buildings. Some outlets including Chalkbeat covered the issue early on and have been making it a regular part of their coverage. More recently, MinnPost published a great article, How school-based child care for emergency workers has rolled out in Minnesota. And WNYC has this story about the ramping-up of the program. However, there’s been much less coverage than you might expect, given that these new programs put schools at the forefront of the fight against the spread of the virus. It might not be a purely education story, but it’s a vitally important one. More people should cover it.

GRADES, CREDIT, AND ATTENDANCE

These revelations are a vivid reminder of how easy it is for journalists to overlook immediate, real-world concerns.

Most of the coverage last week seemed to take for granted that, if districts could mount an equitable, special ed-compliant remote learning program, kids who participated could receive credit and grades for their efforts. But, as we learned from Tawnell Hobbs’ Thursday afternoon WSJ story, that is not necessarily the case. “For all the talk of online learning during shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic,” wrote Hobbs, “many U.S. public school students will find that the work they do while at home is actually optional. It won’t be graded and it won’t count.” Another assumption baked into media coverage for the past couple of weeks seemed to be that if districts could mount a decent online program, students would be able and willing to participate. But Sunday’s LA Times story, Teachers find many obstacles as they try to keep kids learning amid coronavirus, revealed that this assumption was faulty. Sure, access to technology, equipment, and high-quality content and instruction are all important. But so are student motivation and the ability of parents and guardians to supervise and support the work. If this period means that little or no learning is taking place for large numbers of students who aren’t “attending” online programs, the ramifications will be huge – and bear much more exploration. These revelations are a vivid reminder of how easy it is for journalists to overlook immediate, real-world concerns.

MORE IDEAS

Some additional storylines that education reporters and editors might consider tackling in the coming week:

*What are the options to support hungry children beyond meal distribution centers and mobile delivery services? I’m told that a program to add additional money onto SNAP EBT cards for families with kids eligible for free or reduced lunch was included by Senate Democrats last week.

*The lack of coverage focused on the experiences of immigrant and English language learning students has been fairly pronounced in recent weeks, which is unfortunate. Now would be a good time to consider covering the challenges facing kids and families whose first language isn’t English, and what, if any, services are being provided to them. What, if any, online resources and programs are available for English language learners?

*In drastic situations like this, the roles of district and school staff change practically overnight, along with those of teachers and students. It might be enormously helpful and enlightening for a reporter to take us inside that radically altered experience, from a superintendent or principal’s point of view. I’ve seen one or two accounts of what it’s like, but none was written by journalists.

*The challenges of mounting an effective, equitable, and individualized online program are many, but the focus shouldn’t be entirely on the obstacles. There have got to be some districts and schools that have taken solid steps toward meeting the needs of students, and reporters should consider highlighting those places.

*While it’s entirely newsworthy to focus on big districts like New York City and Chicago now making a move online, the time might be ripe to check in on one or more of the districts that closed a week or more before everyone else or that mounted an online program from the start. I’m personally most curious about Elk Grove, a big Northern California district that shut down ahead of many others.

Above: Last week’s WSJ story revealed that online offerings don’t necessarily include credit and grades.

Overall, the coverage has been strong. I really can’t repeat that enough. But now is a good time to reflect on the stories that have been published and consider what might have gotten missed.

It’s extremely easy to focus on what’s closest at hand (i.e., Twitter, Facebook, and one’s own home). But many of the kids whose lives education reporters cover are not well represented on these platforms.

This makes it especially important to limit coverage focused on the lives of kids of college-educated parents who are worried and inconvenienced but have not had their lives upended by the sudden disappearance of institutions that provide learning, safety, nutrition, and jobs.

And, now that the initial rush of school system shutdowns has taken place and the immediate nutritional needs of students are in the process of being addressed, it’s time to give readers both the overview of the situation and to shed more light on how schools and districts are responding.

Related columns:

March 19: Coverage challenges in the coronavirus era

March 16: Covering the coronavirus

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alexander Russo

Alexander Russo

Alexander Russo is founder and editor of The Grade, an award-winning effort to help improve media coverage of education issues. He’s also a Spencer Education Journalism Fellowship winner and a book author. You can reach him at @alexanderrusso.

Visit their website at: https://the-grade.org/