Of course, this may be because they think online schooling or homework will be an adequate substitute for in-person schooling, and assume that by default those will be assigned to make up for lost in-class time.
[I think school is highly suboptimal and quite possibly net negative compared to not having mandatory or subsidized schooling, but I think the inference Zvi is trying to draw here is shaky.]
this may be because they think online schooling or homework will be an adequate substitute for in-person schooling
Then we have another curious fact: that we needed the corona virus to notice that schools can be replaced by a much cheaper alternative.
(I mean, previously people have tried to start new online schools, but as far as I know, they didn’t try to replace the existing schools with online schools. But now we see it as a realistic option.)
Online schools have been around for a while, but I think are generally less popular, and the main users are people who live too far from a regular school to think it’s worth the trip, or who got bullied too much by other students, or so on.
More broadly, tho, I think the thing schools are selling is a package, and the ‘book learning’ part of it is something like a third (or less) of the value of that package for the typical student (and parent), but is the main bit that can also be duplicated by online schooling.
I suspect if online schooling continues for more than a couple of months there will be a lot of complaints (likely justified, in my estimation) that it is not an adequate substitute for in-person education. In particular, I think maintaining student motivation would be an issue—more in some age groups than others, but even among college students I believe this is an existing problem with online courses.