COVID-19 and the Limits of Educationalizing Social Problems

Abstract

A s many have already pointed out, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Black Lives Matter movement, and political upheavals of 2020 have laid bare the inadequacies and inequities of society and the social safety net in the United States. In addition to the enormous impact of COVID-19 in loss of life, loss of health, and disruption to systems of support, this reckoning has been painful to grapple with. Although these realities are present in nearly every aspect of our lives, there are few sectors in which these issues and their intersections have presented more starkly or been more deeply felt than education. Despite the heroic efforts of administrators, educators, social workers, and other school-based providers, the response of U.S. public education as a whole to COVID-19 could justifiably be characterized as inadequate and inequitable. As the school year began, hundreds of thousands of U.S. students continued remote schooling, a reality which has placed new burdens on families and communities. Many others went back to school in person, absent appropriate resources to prevent the spread of COVID-19, facing the possibility of frequent closures due to quarantine or the more serious threat of illness for students, families, and educators. “There are no good answers,” became the mantra of parents and educators in 2020. Although acceptance of the inescapable realities presented by COVID-19 was critical to survival and resilience, the fact that we did not have better answers for so many of our students is still deeply troubling. Many feel as if they have been shouting into the void. How is this possible? How could we open restaurants and college campuses while many of our most vulnerable youths were learning online without being provided systematic resources for accessibility or adult support? How could we ensure a COVID-safe National Basketball Association season but not a COVID-safe kindergarten experience? Why were we unable to address the dual risks faced by so many of our students for whom online learning is not accessible or adequate, but who come from the families and communities most at-risk of bearing the health consequences of COVID-19 should they attend in person? We can all agree that COVID-19 has offered no easy answers. And yet, it is hard to escape the conclusion that our political system has largely abdicated responsibility to find the best answers for our most vulnerable students. The failures of the public health response nationally and the absence of federal guidance or support have truly left most schools with no good answers. Although many of us have been asking, “How is this possible?,” it might be more appropriate to ask why we expected anything different. A reality in which schools struggle to contain the fallout of public policy decisions that ignore or harm our most vulnerable children and families is nothing new. Notwithstanding the valiant efforts of social workers, educators, administrators, and so many others who make success stories possible, the terms “inadequate” and “inequitable” have characterized our public education system for most of its history. Although this reality has existed for decades, its acceptance has been marked, not by apathy or inaction on the part of schools, but by increased willingness to take responsibility for a wide range of nonacademic concerns. Despite their foundations in structures and systems that are fundamentally inequitable and unsustainable (Anyon, 1997), schools regularly offer services and supports that go far beyond their official mandate. Schools provide assistance with everything from nutrition to transportation, health care and mental health, adult education, housing support, and even laundry. Whereas those