Opinion | As we plan for life post-pandemic, let's pivot to a new normal

In the midst of the pandemic, many people want one thing: a return to normal. Who can blame them?

In few aspects of our country is this yearning for pre-pandemic normalcy more evident than in education. Most of us want a return to all school buildings being open … and full of children. We realize — now more than ever — the power of in-person instruction, of the warmth and wonderment, smiles and satisfactions, affirmations and aspirations, that school can offer. I too want all schools open, not most as we currently have.

Yet a return to pre-pandemic education is not enough. As we plan for next year, as we do every winter, we need to pivot to a new, better normal — not simply back to where we were pre-pandemic.

Michael F. Rice, Ph.D., is superintendent for the state of Michigan

We need to aspire to this goal for two reasons: (1) many of our children haven’t learned as much as they should have in the last year and we have work to do to catch them up to where they should be and (2) we were improving schools in the years before the pandemic, with an understanding that we had, to paraphrase Robert Frost, miles to go before we sleep.

As we aspire to higher goals, we need to be guided by what we knew before the pandemic and what the pandemic has taught us.

Our vision for improving public schools is incorporated in our state’s new strategic education plan, approved in August by the State Board of Education after input from across the state. This plan includes eight goals: expansion of 4-year-old early childhood education to all eligible children; improvement of early literacy; improvement of health, safety, and wellness; expansion of secondary school programs; increase in graduation rates; increase in postsecondary credential rates; addressing of the teacher shortage; and provision of adequate and equitable school funding.

Over the last several years, Michigan has improved its performance on many of these goals. Yet an enormous amount of work remains.

It’s not just pre-pandemic lessons from which we need to draw. We also need to learn from lessons from the pandemic.

Home technology can be very helpful but, for most children, serves best as a support for in-person instruction, not a primary means of instruction. We should continue to narrow and ultimately close the digital divide in the state and nation, not as a substitute for, but as a supplement to, public education.

Many public school partners have stepped up during the pandemic: food banks, child care providers, libraries, and other youth-serving organizations. Their support of our children and partnership will be even more critical as we seek to provide our children post-pandemic with wraparound services that extend beyond the school day and year.

To that point: Many students will have received less instruction this year than any year in their schooling. As districts prepare for next year, they need to consider whether all of their students—or particularly vulnerable groups of students, including children with profound special needs, beginning English learners, and fledgling readers, among others—need more time than the state minimum 180 days and 1,098 hours of instruction.

This is a critical consideration. One could argue that all children need more instructional time next year, given that they have all been disrupted in their education to some degree this year. At the barest minimum, especially vulnerable children will need additional services. Child by child, districts will have to reflect on what is needed and how to meet these needs.

Children’s social and emotional needs, so evident to many of us pre-pandemic, have received added attention during the pandemic. MDE has begun a social and emotional learning (SEL)/children’s mental health network and allocated more than $7 million from its education equity fund for children’s mental health to local school districts. Governor Whitmer and the state legislature allocated a similar amount for related services as well. Local school districts have engaged in SEL work more than ever before.  We need to broaden and deepen our SEL professional development efforts in the coming year.

Importantly, we need more staffing in this area. All staff members need to be trained in and take responsibility for SEL as we build schools that more substantially serve children’s needs, but districts also need more social workers, counselors, nurses, and school psychologists to serve children properly.

We also need to reduce our class sizes, especially at the early elementary level, where educators are laying the literacy and math skill foundation that will be necessary for student success as they continue in school.

Nothing is more critical to the success of young people in school than literacy skills. It was abolitionist Frederick Douglass who wrote, “Once you learn to read, you will be forever free.”

We can continue to improve educator knowledge and use of our literacy essentials as a means of improving students’ technical knowledge of reading and writing. Additionally, we need to increase student engagement in reading by selecting and sharing more diverse literature representative of who our children are and, by extension, who we are as a state and nation. 

School funding is another issue. Six studies in six years have said the same thing: we underfund Michigan public education, to the detriment of our children. The most comprehensive of these studies, the 2018 School Finance Research Collaborative (SFRC) study, noted that different children have different needs, and different needs have different costs. To fully fund Michigan’s school children according to SFRC recommendations, billions of additional dollars are needed.

The 2019 MSU study noted that, from 1995 to 2015, Michigan was last in the country in inflation-adjusted total education revenue increase and third to last in the country in inflation-adjusted per student education revenue increase. The last few years, though better on average, haven’t permitted significant staffing changes in our schools.

The recent federal coronavirus relief act will help districts across the state and country and, with non-recurring funds, will permit many children to benefit from improved services next year. While beneficial, there are limitations to these funds, including but not limited to their one-time nature.

Of encouragement is President-elect Biden’s support of universal preschool; the doubling of the number of social workers, counselors, and psychologists; and large increases in funding for poor children and students with special needs. Whatever materializes needs to be recurring, available to serve children over many years, and not one-and-done funding. Our children’s needs endure; so should their funding.

What does each child need?  How do we provide it? As educators and policy makers wrestle with the broad policy questions of how to pivot to a new, better normal at the state and national levels in education, these will be the important questions at the local level.

We should be under no illusions that the ideas above — or any significant ideas for improving public education — will be easy to drive in their totality. We can accomplish a great deal in the next eight months and lay the groundwork for more substantial improvement in the midterm as we plan for and implement this new, better normal.

It can’t simply be a return to normal.  Our children deserve more…and better.

Bridge welcomes guest columns from a diverse range of people on issues relating to Michigan and its future. The views and assertions of these writers do not necessarily reflect those of Bridge or The Center for Michigan. Bridge does not endorse any individual guest commentary submission.

If you are interested in submitting a guest commentary, please contact Monica WilliamsClick here for details and submission guidelines.

Facts matter. Trust matters. Journalism matters.

If you learned something from the story you're reading please consider supporting our work. Your donation allows us to keep our Michigan-focused reporting and analysis free and accessible to all. All donations are voluntary, but for as little as $1 you can become a member of Bridge Club and support freedom of the press in Michigan during a crucial election year.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Dear Reader: We value your thoughts and criticism on the articles, but insist on civility. Criticizing comments or ideas is welcome, but Bridge won’t tolerate comments that are false or defamatory or that demean, personally attack, spread hate or harmful stereotypes. Violating these standards could result in a ban.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


Thu, 01/14/2021 - 10:57am

Six thoughts for changes needed in Michigan education:
1. Get rid of the agricultural- based school calendar in favor of one that is more like nine weeks on/one week off, with longer breaks in mid winter and mid summer. Fund air-conditioning in all classrooms. (Not just administrative offices! True story; a textbook salesman once told me he could always locate the principal’s office by looking for an air-conditioning unit)
2. Stop tracking students exclusively by age in favor of ability-based groupings. Some kids are second grade in math but fifth grade in reading. Loosen those boundaries at least a bit more.
3. Stop funneling off tax money to private schools, who can pick and choose which students they accept. Private schools also use public tax dollars to hire teachers for their schools and require these teachers to attend religious services and teach religion in their subject areas.
4. Continue to allow virtual education, or a hybrid version, to students with health issues, often emotional, who struggle to come to school.
5. Don’t ever tie teacher value, including salaries and retention, to student achievement on standardized testing. This penalizes the teacher who happens to draw a classroom of struggling students from at-risk families.
6. Fund. More. Counselors. And separate their responsibilities; some should be guidance counselors, helping students choose coursework and apply for higher education. But most should be personal counselors, helping students navigate emotional issues. Teachers need to have a safe place to send a student who is having a meltdown in class, not just ‘the office.’

Sun, 01/17/2021 - 3:07pm

I agree to a great extent with most of your points, Michigander. Point 1 is going to be tough to implement (I think it is a necessary change, by the way), because of parents who want summer vacation with their kids, and because we humans are fundamentally averse to change. In the era of schools of choice, a concept which I heartily support, the first district to take that step is going to lose students to neighboring districts just because so many families will be reluctant to try a new calendar, or perceive no benefit. I hate one-size-fits-all state mandates, but that might be the only way to accomplish a balanced calendar. Either that, or figure out some incentives for families who agree to keep their kids in a district for a year or two to get used to the change.

Point 2 makes sense, but both teachers and parents, as well as some students, will resist this change. As a student who was placed well above grade level in some classes many years ago, I offer a cautionary note -- younger students may be academically equal to students one or more grades above, but socially, not so much. Picture a socially awkward eighth grader in a high school geometry class with sophomores, juniors and a couple seniors.

Gotta disagree with the third point, since charter and private schools do not choose their students nearly as much as parents and students choose the schools. Private schools generally pay their teachers less, and the teachers who teach in religious schools typically do so because they embrace the same theology. If the state mandates private schools must do certain things, the state should help fund those things as well.

Point 4 is valid, although for most students I believe virtual education should be a minor part of their education, especially in the early grades.

I wish I could say I fully agree with number 5. Evaluating teachers is a very difficult task, and standardized tests alone do not tell the story. However, we need some kind of measurement of student progress, and in Michigan student achievement is mandated to be part of the evaluation process. Rather than comparing test scores across all classrooms, I favor a metric which compares improvement in outcomes from the beginning to the end of the year. The teacher who is blessed with a high percentage of self-motivated high achievers will still see improvement over the year. The teacher with a high percentage of struggling students will probably never see the same test scores as the other classroom, but if he or she is able to motivate and communicate well, they should see progress throughout the year.

Absolutely agree with point 6. Unfortunately, there isn't a large enough pool of qualified candidates out there right now to fill all the needs, if funding did become available. But more counselors/social workers/behavioral specialists are absolutely needed. And beyond the schools, these folks need to try to make inroads with families as well, since many of the factors that affect behavior in school stem from family dysfunction.