Bit of a rant last night about the way an economist's gaze has interpreted education in terms of "learning loss" this last year. Lots of reasons to worry about what children are missing - but this is just about how economics sees it. So how do economists calculate learning loss?

Key economics concept underpinning learning loss calculations is "hysteresis". Great name for a metal band, but what does it mean?

Hysteresis in economics "refers to an event in the economy that persists into the future, even after the factors that led to that event have been removed". COVID is an obvious event that will exert huge effects. So...

Hysteresis in education refers to Covid school closures (for majority of students) leadinģ to long term economic effects. The model is this:

Less learning = less human capital = weaker productivity

This is why OECD, World Bank etc are so concerned about learning loss. So what?

Economization of education is nothing new. Education has been positioned as integral to economic development for years. States compare and compete over education. So "learning loss" is just a new anxiety of a much longer trend to instrumentalize education. But...

Now with learning loss anxieties, pandemic hysteresis looks like becoming a major driver of edu policy. Who can "catch up" fastest? The big tech and edtech industries are already aiming to support this. We're already seeing hysteresis edtech aimed at workforce optimization...

Nothing new really, just a heads up that economists' pandemic hysteresis theories of "learning loss: as future economic loss are likely to shape education policy in months/years to come. There may be other ways of thinking about what millions of children have lost lately.

Links in thread here - hysteresis education policy, mostly to be addressed with edtech, is being proposed here. What would an alternative post-pandemic hysteresis policy for education look like? https://twitter.com/BenPatrickWill/status/1355303410250092547?s=19