By Franklin Schargel
“For the past six months, policymakers and the U.S. public have weighed economic against public health considerations in debating what limits to set on individuals and collective behaviors in attempting to control the Covid-19 pandemic.”
– The New England Journal of Medicine
Public education in the United States has long been treated differently from other essential services such as police, fire, sanitation, hospitals and grocery supply. Historically, funding has fallen short—especially for schools in inner cities, rural districts, Native American communities and other high-poverty areas. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation’s school infrastructure a D+; nearly 27 million K–6 students and roughly 6 million adults occupy close to 100,000 public school buildings every school day. Despite that scale, the nation underinvests in school facilities, producing an estimated $38 billion annual funding shortfall. As a result, nearly a quarter of school buildings have been rated in fair or poor condition.
Data from the National Center for Education Statistics show that in 1998 the average age of public-school buildings was 42 years, with 31 percent using so-called temporary buildings. Only 6 percent of schools were judged excellent, 49 percent good, 36 percent fair and 9 percent poor. Many temporary classrooms lack basic amenities such as heat, air conditioning and adequate restrooms. Education Week reported that 42 percent of schools lacked adequate air conditioning. In 2020, it is difficult to imagine effective teaching and learning in buildings without reliable heating, cooling and modern air filtration systems.
Some schools still rely on coal for heat; the author cites five public schools in West Virginia and four in Cumberland, Maryland, as examples. The National Air Filtration Association notes that 53 million schoolchildren and 6 million teachers, administrators and staff enter some 120,000 school buildings each day, and at least half of those schools have documented indoor air quality problems. The American Lung Association identifies asthma as a leading cause of chronic absenteeism, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates roughly 14 million school days are lost each year due to asthma exacerbated by poor indoor air in schools.
Responsibility for national education policy and the resources needed to implement it rests in part with the executive branch, yet past administrations have often fallen short. Federal leaders have not consistently engaged local authorities—mayors, school boards and unions—or the educators who must implement policy. A recent National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) survey found that only 35 percent of elementary principals felt they knew “a lot” about their district’s reopening pre-planning; 9 percent reported knowing nothing. Instead of clear guidance and resources, federal messaging at times has emphasized reopening as critical while threatening funding cuts if directives are not followed, leaving governors, superintendents and principals to interpret policy unevenly across 50 states.
School leaders carry the dual responsibilities of protecting health and ensuring instructional quality. That requires clear safety protocols, sufficient staffing, up-to-date facilities, reliable HVAC and filtration systems, and training so teachers can deliver strong instruction whether in person or remotely. It also requires that students and educators have access to computers and dependable internet at school and at home. Schools should remain closed only where there is widespread virus transmission or where safety cannot be guaranteed; otherwise, opening without adequate protections risks illness and even death among staff and students.
Professional organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics have highlighted the physical, social and emotional harms of extended school closures—learning loss, food insecurity and reduced vaccination rates among children are among the concerns—while also insisting that schools reopen only when it is safe to do so. The result has been a patchwork of state policies balancing the competing imperatives of economic recovery and public health safety.
It is difficult to reconcile how federal relief has been directed in some cases to businesses and organizations while long-standing deficits in school infrastructure remain unaddressed. Some states have exhausted reserves to respond to the pandemic, and many face looming budget shortfalls. New York City, for example, reported a multibillion-dollar budget gap that threatens teacher layoffs, higher unemployment and reduced municipal services. At the same time, COVID-19 contagion rates fluctuate regionally, with surges across many states.
Schools serve vital roles beyond instruction: they provide meals to about 30 million children each day, social interaction, and public health oversight such as checking vaccination compliance. Isolating children from peers carries measurable social and emotional costs that vary by age and are difficult to fully quantify. Reopening schools safely would also enable parents to return to work, help restore tax revenue and reduce pressure on municipal and state budgets. For these reasons, schools should reopen when conditions permit—but only with robust safety measures in place to protect students, staff, educators and communities.
About the author
Franklin P. Schargel is a former classroom teacher, school counselor and administrator who designed and implemented programs that substantially increased parental engagement, raised postsecondary attendance and reduced dropout rates at a Title I high school. His work has been recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, BusinessWeek, Fortune, NPR, PBS and The New York Times. Schargel served as Education Division Chair of the American Society for Quality and helped develop the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award criteria for education.
He is an international speaker, trainer and the author of thirteen books, including Creating Safe Schools: A Guide for School Leaders, Classroom Teachers, Counselors and Parents, published internationally. He has written more than 100 articles on school reform.
This article was originally published by The Learning Counsel, a research institute and news media hub focused on the shift in education toward digital curriculum.