# **Discussion**

How Do the Simulation Results Compare with Empirical Studies on Learning Losses? <mark>Empirical studies have presented learning losses using two main types of measures of learning: (i) a continuous measure, showing change in standard deviations of test scores or in share of expected acquired learning in a period, and (ii) a discrete measure showing change in share of students achieving certain minimum proficiency levels. Our simulation results are expressed both in terms of a continuous measure (LAYS), and as a share of children below a specific proficiency threshold (Learning Poverty and PISA).</mark> Comparing the simulation results against those from empirical studies highlights two key takeaways. One, as shown by the simulations, a growing number of empirical studies suggest that students have been experiencing learning loss across a range of contexts, from low-income to high-income countries. <mark>In rural Karnataka in India, the share of grade 3 students in government schools able to perform a simple subtraction fell by 8 percentage points (Pratham 2021;</mark> <u>World Bank, UNESCO, and UNICEF 202</u> <u><mark>1). In a few Brazilian</mark></u> <mark>states, the share of second graders who were off-track to become fluent in reading increased by 22 percentage points (World Bank, UNESCO, and UNICEF 2021;</mark> <u><mark>Fundação Lemann, o Instituto Natura e a Associação Bem Comum. 2021). Also in Brazil, the share of second graders at the national level failing to read and write</mark></u> <mark>simple words increased by 18 percentage points between 2019 and 2021 (INEP, 2022). In Uganda, the percent of 6</mark><sup>th</sup> <mark>grade learners rated proficient in English decreased by 4.7 percentage points between 2018 and 2021 (N</mark> <u>APE 202</u> <u><mark>1). In the Russian Federation, 6</mark></u><sup>th</sup> <mark>grade children experienced losses equal to 3-4 months of learning (Zvyagintsev 2021). At the secondary level, close to one-third of children in grade 8 experienced learning losses in Kenya (Whizz Education 2021), measured by knowledge in math topics. In Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation, 8</mark><sup>th</sup> <mark>grade students experienced an equivalent of 1.5 years of lost learning in more than half a period of full school closures (Stanislavovich 2021). The Monitoring Impacts on Learning Outcomes (MILO) report, looked at COVID-19 end-of-primary learning losses in six countries in Sub-Saharan Africa</mark><sup>22</sup> <mark>(UNESCO 2022). In contrast to the results from most other countries, that study showed that in all six countries, students maintained pre-COVID-19 learning outcomes after the onset of the pandemic, at least until mid-2021. This may indicate that in contexts with a very low initial proportion of students meeting minimum proficiency thresholds, a decline in learning may be difficult to observe, among other factors (see</mark> <u><mark>UNESCO 2022</mark></u> for a full discussion) <mark>. The MILO results are also in alignment with our simulation results which indicate the lowest learning losses in Sub-Saharan Africa for the reasons previously discussed.</mark> Two, the learning loss estimates from some of these empirical studies are roughly in the ballpark of the simulation estimates. <mark>Based on existing empirical studies of learning losses during school closures, the W</mark> <u>orld Bank, UNESCO, and UNICEF (2021)</u> <mark>report suggests that one year of school closures results in learning loss roughly equivalent to a normal year’s worth of learning, though there is heterogeneity across countries. We compare simulated loss in LAYS to actual school closures under different scenarios of the simulations, as shown in Table D12 in the annex. Under an intermediate scenario, roughly one LAYS is lost for one year of school closures, as documented in the analysis using the empirical studies on learning loss. There is heterogeneity across regions: the ratio of loss in LAYS to years of school closures is around 1 in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Middle East and North Africa, where LAYS is already low to begin with, and higher than 1 in the remaining regions (see Table D12 in the annex).</mark> <mark>The simulation results highlight the possibility of worsening inequalities in children’s learning and increases in both the Learning Poverty Gap and Severity estimates. Simulation estimates for the Learning Poverty Gap suggest an increase of 2.0 percentage points (intermediate) for low- and middle-income (World Bank Part 2) countries, or an increase of 21% relative to the baseline. Learning Poverty Severity could increase by 1.7 percentage points (intermediate), or 14% relative to the baseline. L</mark> earning loss studies have also presented

> 22 <mark>Burkina Faso, Burundi, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, Senegal, and Zambia.</mark>

20