COVID drove a huge wedge. The gaps just got worse.
Five years after the pandemic reshaped American schooling, researchers in Connecticut are finding that the wounds left on student achievement have not healed with the return of normalcy. Morgaen Donaldson of the University of Connecticut's Neag School of Education has documented how chronic absenteeism and widening performance gaps between demographic groups remain stubbornly elevated above pre-pandemic baselines. The pandemic did not invent educational inequality — it exposed and deepened fault lines that were already there, and the data now asks whether the systems meant to serve all children are truly built to do so.
- Chronic absenteeism in Connecticut has nearly doubled from pre-pandemic levels and refuses to fully retreat, signaling that for many students, the habit of showing up was broken in ways reopening alone could not repair.
- Achievement gaps between white students and students of color, English language learners, and low-income students have widened and remain above pre-pandemic levels, concentrating harm in the communities least equipped to absorb it.
- Under-resourced schools serving the hardest-hit communities are recovering more slowly than their wealthier counterparts, turning a temporary disruption into a compounding disadvantage.
- Connecticut's LEAP program — built on the unglamorous work of home visits — achieved 15% attendance gains among chronically absent students, proving that direct, relational outreach can move numbers that policy alone cannot.
- Teachers, reshaped by years of navigating student grief and disconnection, are now embedding social-emotional learning into daily practice at rates far exceeding pre-pandemic norms, offering an unexpected and durable shift in how schools understand their role.
Five years after Connecticut's half-million K-12 students were pulled into remote and hybrid learning, the schools have reopened and the routines of in-person education have returned. But the assumption that recovery would follow reopening has not held up to scrutiny.
Morgaen Donaldson, who leads education research at the University of Connecticut's Neag School of Education, has spent those five years tracking what the pandemic actually left behind. Her finding is unambiguous: the disruption calcified rather than faded. Chronic absenteeism — defined as missing 10 percent or more of school days — jumped from roughly 10 percent before the pandemic to nearly 24 percent when students returned in 2021-2022. By the 2023-2024 school year it had fallen to 18 percent, a real improvement, but still nearly double the pre-pandemic baseline. Some students simply never recovered the habit of showing up.
Absence is only part of the picture. Performance gaps between white students and students of color, English language learners, and low-income students have all widened and remain above pre-pandemic levels. Schools with fewer financial resources — those serving the communities hit hardest by the virus — have struggled most to recover. Donaldson's team has partnered with Connecticut's 36 Alliance Districts, the state's most under-resourced systems, to understand what recovery actually requires.
One answer has emerged with unusual clarity. The Learner Engagement and Attendance Program, or LEAP, sent staff directly into the homes of chronically absent students. The approach was labor-intensive and unglamorous, but it worked — increasing attendance by nearly 15 percentage points among targeted students and drawing national attention as a replicable model.
A survey of more than a thousand Connecticut teachers revealed an unexpected shift as well. Educators reported using social-emotional learning strategies far more than before the pandemic, describing a fundamental reorientation toward students' emotional well-being before academics. That change, born from necessity during years of widespread grief and isolation, has persisted.
Donaldson's broader conclusion is that the pandemic did not create the inequalities now visible in the data — it revealed and amplified structural disparities that were always present. The work of closing the gaps it opened continues, guided by research and by educators willing to ask harder questions about what schools are truly for.
Five years have passed since Connecticut's half-million K-12 students abruptly shifted to remote and hybrid learning. The schools have reopened. The masks came off. The daily rhythms of in-person education have returned. It would be reasonable to assume the pandemic's grip on student achievement has loosened as well. But the data tells a different story.
Morgaen Donaldson, who leads research efforts at the University of Connecticut's Neag School of Education, has spent the past five years investigating what the pandemic actually left behind. Her conclusion is stark: the disruption didn't fade with the reopenings. Instead, it calcified. "COVID really drove a huge wedge," she says. The pandemic didn't create educational inequality—that existed before. What it did was widen every existing gap, and those gaps have proven stubborn to close.
The most visible measure of this persistence is chronic absenteeism, defined as missing 10 percent or more of school days in a year. Before the pandemic, Connecticut's rate hovered around 10 percent. When students returned to in-person learning in 2021-2022, that number spiked to nearly 24 percent. Three years later, in the 2023-2024 school year, it had fallen to 18 percent—a meaningful improvement, but still nearly double what it was before the virus arrived. Some students never came back to the habit of showing up.
The attendance problem is only part of it. Performance gaps between white students and students of color have widened. The same is true for English language learners and students receiving free or reduced-price lunch. These disparities are slowly shrinking, but they remain well above pre-pandemic levels. Not all schools have bounced back equally. Schools with fewer financial resources—those serving the communities hit hardest—have struggled most to recover. The Neag School has partnered with Connecticut's 36 Alliance Districts, the state's most under-resourced school systems, to understand what they need and develop practical solutions.
One intervention has shown remarkable results. The Learner Engagement and Attendance Program, known as LEAP, deployed a simple but labor-intensive strategy: home visits to families whose children were chronically absent. The program increased attendance by nearly 15 percentage points among targeted students, essentially erasing the gap between chronic absenteeism and normal attendance. The approach attracted national attention, including coverage in the New York Times, because it worked at scale.
Donaldson's research team surveyed over a thousand Connecticut teachers and found an unexpected silver lining. Teachers reported using social-emotional learning strategies far more frequently than before the pandemic. Many described a fundamental shift in how they approached students—prioritizing emotional and social well-being before diving into academics. This reorientation, born from necessity during a time of widespread loneliness and grief, has persisted. The Neag School developed tools like the award-winning Feel Your Best Self toolkit to support this whole-student approach.
The question now is whether these innovations can close the gaps the pandemic opened. Donaldson emphasizes that meeting students where they are—not where they should be—is essential. The pandemic didn't just disrupt learning; it revealed and amplified the structural inequalities that have always shaped American education. Five years on, the work of addressing those inequalities continues, informed by research and driven by educators willing to think differently about what schools can do.
Notable Quotes
COVID really drove a huge wedge. There were big gaps in learning and achievement between different groups to begin with, but COVID just made them even worse.— Morgaen Donaldson, Associate Dean for Research at UConn Neag School of Education
Teachers reported that they were much more likely to use social-emotional learning strategies in the classroom than they were prior to the pandemic, and many took a different stance towards students—approaching them with the social-emotional lens in mind first.— Morgaen Donaldson, based on surveys of over 1,000 Connecticut teachers
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
When you say the pandemic "drove a wedge," what exactly widened? Were these gaps that already existed?
Yes, but that's the crucial point. Inequality in schools didn't start with COVID. But the pandemic accelerated it dramatically. Students with resources—stable internet, quiet spaces to study, parents who could help—adapted. Students without those things fell further behind. And that gap didn't close just because schools reopened.
The chronic absenteeism number is striking. From 10 percent to 24 percent. Why do you think students stopped coming back?
Some of it was practical—families dealing with illness, economic disruption, childcare issues. But a lot of it was psychological. Students lost the rhythm. Some developed anxiety about being in crowds. Others had fallen so far behind they felt defeated. Once you miss that much school, catching up feels impossible.
And LEAP—the home visit program—that actually worked. Why home visits specifically?
Because you can't solve an attendance problem from behind a desk. You have to meet families where they are, understand what's actually keeping kids home. Is it transportation? Illness? A parent working nights? Once you know, you can actually help.
You mentioned teachers shifting toward social-emotional learning. Was that a choice or a necessity?
Both. Teachers saw students who were grieving, isolated, traumatized. You can't teach algebra to a kid who's falling apart. So they adapted. And what's interesting is that shift didn't reverse when things got "back to normal." Teachers realized that approach actually works.
So what happens now? Do these gaps close?
Only if we keep doing the work. The pandemic didn't create these inequalities, but it exposed them. We have tools now—we know what works. The question is whether we have the will to fund and sustain them.