When we are thinking about the best learning environment for kids *right now* it seems to me a mistake to use pre-Covid performance as the comparison.

That’s not possible in most places so the comparison it isn’t helping us answer the relevant question:

What works best NOW? 1/
Partially this is bc MANY things have changed with the pandemic.

Who among us isn’t more stressed?

Kids now live under the risk of a deadly disease.

Some have lost family.

Parents have lost jobs.

All have lost freedom and social interaction.

KIDS are different now.

2/
It is absolutely expected that test performance and learning will be lower in these circumstances - even with ideal instruction.

So when we compare Covid to pre-Covid it’s not just in-school vs at home that is being tested but:

in school - Covid vs out of school + Covid. 3/
To me, comparisons of different options now - all online vs hybrid vs other? - are what we need to know what can best continue education.

We need to know what kinds of emotional and other supports kids need so they are in a place where they can learn.

4/
We need to not panic about the existence of losses in test scores but accept that the world has changed, kids & teachers have changed, and expectations must change.

And we’d do well to remember kids may be learning new things not captured by tests, including coping skills!

5/
As much as we all hate it, the world is different now.

So let’s put our efforts into figuring out what works in this reality, bc it’s the only one we’ve got.

And remember that kids are resilient. They are learning - just maybe different things. And maybe that’s ok too.

End.
Addendum: my relevant expertise is in study design, not education.

Anything outside of consideration of what we can learn from this study design and suggestions for future studies are just like my opinion, man.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dominique Heinke

Dominique Heinke Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Epi_D_Nique

10 Oct
A few thoughts on this...

(Other folks who know much more than me should definitely chime in! Looking at you @Theresa_Chapple @JasonSalemi @COVKIDProject @EpiEllie!)

Mini thread. 1/n
I’m all for a data-driven approach & I definitely applaud the work needed to pull this data together!

But.

Epidemics & outbreaks are local.

To me, pooling data across all states-or even within a state-is asking the wrong question.

Especially since testing in kids is low. 2/ Image
One thing to keep in mind is that schools within states have different policies.

The data we see are not that of opening all schools - some are fully virtual, some partly, some not at all.

Not all kids in these analyses are in school.

This will underestimate any effect. 3/ Image
Read 13 tweets
21 Jul
This is based on two pre-print studies (links in thread) one in Ireland and one in Denmark.

A few cautions are warranted in interpreting these studies. I won't cover the papers completely, just a few points 👇🏻
First, these are pretty small studies for the subject matter.

Ex: The Irish study covers only 1381 births in the window they studied (Jan - April). A similar number of births in the prior year led to 8 extremely low birth weight infants and 12 very lbw infants vs 0 & 3 this yr.
While prior yrs consistently showed more births in those categories than this yr, it's a handful off from normal variation.

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
Read 7 tweets
27 May
Since selection/collider bias is currently a hot topic, it seems like a good time for a #tweetorial!

Gather round #EpiTwitter (but not too close!) for a tour of my paper investigating the when's and why's of selection bias in birth defect epi. 👇🏻

1/🤷🏼‍♀️

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pp…
One of the reasons reproductive epidemiology is trick is that you are *always* dealing with selection.

Who becomes pregnant? Who stays pregnant? Who delivers too soon? Who has an induction?

Is the population in your study a biased sample?

2/
link.springer.com/article/10.100…
Let's add in a rare outcome with a strong effect on survival: birth defects.

Because specific birth defects are rare, we need huge samples to do meaningful studies. But many times data sources with these properties only have live births.

Can we still do valid studies?

3/
Read 29 tweets
15 Mar
Hey everyone:

This is a very uncertain and honestly scary time.

There are genuine risks to the health & safety of ourselves & those we care about.

Our lives are being significantly disrupted.

Here’s how I, someone w anxiety, is getting through. 🧵
Step one:

Radical acceptance.

My grandmother is 96. She lives in a rural area and relies on caretakers.

There’s a good chance she won’t make it through this.

I can’t change this.

So I accept this.

Life is different now & will be for a while.

I accept this.

2/
Step two:

Figure out what you CAN do.

Examples:

Sign up for volunteer lists to help those who need assistance with housing, food, funds.

Check in on vulnerable neighbors.

Call/write your local & state reps to ask them to care for vulnerable folx during shutdowns.

3/
Read 9 tweets
21 Jan
#Epitwitter Fun with Numbers:

It’s possible to put bounds on the case-fatality rate (CFR) for this outbreak with the available data.

A quick #tweetorial on the partial identification of absolute risk bounds!

1/n
According to the quoted tweet we have this data:

31 cases with known outcome
6 of whom died

227 with an unknown outcome

First, the CFR among known data: 6/31 = 19%

2/n
Next, we include unknown outcomes, taking them to their logical extremes (all live or all die).

The lower risk bounds is calculated under the “all live” extreme:

6/(31+227) = 2.3%

Given the available data, this is the lowest possible CFR (i.e., if no new cases arise).

3/n
Read 7 tweets
15 Jul 19
If the amazing, cutting edge, in-depth discussions on #EpiTwitter make you feel both *inspired and incompetent*

(out-of-your-depth, totally lost, etc)

Here is your reminder that this is TOTALLY OK!

👇🏻 #SendingToMyself 🧵
Not all methods/issues are relevant to everyone’s work so there’s no reason you should be fluent in all of Epi.

In fact, you can’t be.

What you can be is the expert that I know I can go to when I come across something new that overlaps with your area!
#EpiTwitter is not here to make you an expert on everything.

These discussions & #Tweetorials are here to give you an idea of when things you work on might go wrong and to let you know who can be your phone-a-friend when it does.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!