Aparajita Srivastava
//The best of two bad solutions//
The Omicron variant is extremely contagious and spreads rapidly through schools. Omicron demonstrates that learning can become ineffective when schools must simultaneously work to stem the surge while educating students. When new COVID surges emerge, schools must go remote. Omicron serves as a perfect case study that illustrates the importance of a cautious response when the situation is dire enough that masking and regular testing are not helping to solve the problem. Stemming future COVID surges through two weeks of remote learning represents a better solution than ineffectively learning through in-person school.
At the Omicron surge’s height, the United States experienced 800,000 new cases per day. Omicron infected vaccinated and boosted individuals almost as much as those unvaccinated and unprotected. Omicron cases were milder than others such as Delta; however, that is because the majority of the cases occurred in vaccinated people, and the vaccine guarantees a quick recovery, demonstrated by its 68% reduction in hospitalization rates. For the unvaccinated population, though, a mild case was not guaranteed. Thus, the spread of COVID-19 can bear immense implications for the health of communities, especially those with large numbers of unvaccinated individuals like young children.
As the pandemic shows, schools are naturally a source of spread, as they consist of a large population indoors with limited space for social distancing. Furthermore, young children often lack the willingness to mask. When a surge occurs, there is no reason to preserve this potential source of infection. Social distancing is an effective way to stop the spread but it is limited, as it is difficult to be disciplined with it, and in the event of a surge, it should not be relied on.
The spread of COVID-19 significantly burdens the ability of teachers to impart knowledge. After a positive test, the CDC recommends five days of isolation, and schools across the country have adopted that policy and instituted individualized requirements of isolation at home. These isolation periods range from five to ten days. This puts numerous students at home for more than a week after receiving a positive test. These policies also extend to teachers, whose absence has a larger ripple effect on the learning of students; one teacher absent from school can affect over a hundred students. Thus, in-person learning during a surge is ineffective. Remote learning, however, is an easier and more effective way to learn and stay safe, because the children are not distracted and affected by fear, which has been proven to affect learning.
Nonetheless, turning to remote learning during a surge represents a short-term solution that should not extend beyond two weeks. Due to data collected from Omicron and the fact that fewer large groups interact on a daily basis will slow down the infection rate itself, which also makes remote learning short term. Individuals opposed to school closings often invoke memories of March, 2020. With a lack of in-person learning, they fear students will fall behind in school and a mental health crisis. This may have held some truth then, but a short-term closing will not have substantial, long-lasting effects on mental health. The core of the mental health crises during the pandemic is prolonged isolation. Taking out the element of time eliminates the possibility of serious illness.
Ultimately, school administrators must weigh two options: a brief turn to remote learning that would stem a surge or a prolonged period of ineffective, in-person learning and widespread transmission of COVID-19. Remote school represents a harmful long-term policy. In the short term, it is not perfect, but it represents the best of two imperfect solutions.
Case numbers spiked rapidly with the circulation of the Omicron variant
Online learning would entail a temporary return to Zoom classes.