Teaching inclusive and special education during the COVID‐19 pandemic: needed support for learning and research of effects on teachers and students

Abstract

The COVID‐19 pandemic drastically altered K‐12 teaching and learning and is likely to affect the students' and teachers' futures. This is true for both general and special education. Lingering, long‐term issues will affect teachers and students at all levels of education. However, ‘silver linings’ of the pandemic might nudge education into better practices. Reliable quantitative research of the pandemic's effects is needed, and this includes research of new supports for learning.

When the virus known as COVID‐19 (so named because of its emergence in 2019; also SARS‐CoV‐2) began to drastically affect the lives of adults and children around the world in 2020, many schools were closed and teachers and students in many of the wealthier nations immediately started ‘distance learning’ or ‘virtual learning’ as an alternative to in‐person schooling (NBC News, 2021; Schuck and Kambert, 2020). Bad actors promoted a great deal of disinformation about vaccines and created the resistance of many adults to public health measures (e.g., vaccination, masks, social distancing, lock‐downs). School children are often swayed by such misinformation (wrong, but not deliberately so) and disinformation (deliberately, knowingly wrong) (Kaden, 2020; Kamenetz, 2022; Moyer, 2022).

After the initial wave of virus infections, the development and spread of variants of the virus complicated the lives of citizens of all nations (e.g., Kônig et al., 2020). The spreading pandemic added uncertainty to all predictions of future conditions. Now, in late 2022, there is still much uncertainty about the learning set‐backs students with and without disabilities have suffered. The long‐term effects of the epidemic, including ‘long COVID’ or ‘post‐COVID’ conditions (Kauffman and Badar, 2023) are largely unknown. The world over, people with long COVID, including those in the business of education, are often forgotten or neglected (Moon et al., 2022).

This article has two purposes: (1) We report our personal observations of teaching and those of our colleagues, including the many practical problems that teachers, special and general, had and have because of the pandemic; (2) we offer suggestions for research regarding the details – the ‘nitty‐gritty’ of instruction and behaviour management, especially studies of how these might be different for in‐person and virtual teaching and how educators might best deal with the aftermath of the pandemic. We hope to encourage research of the problems we describe and help researchers think of other issues or difficulties they might address, especially those of classroom teachers (see Badar et al., 2023).

In spite of the lessons that might have been learned from the COVID‐19 pandemic, preparation for future pandemics is insufficient (Washington Post, 2022). There are, indeed, measures we might take to reduce the trauma of future pandemics (Rock et al., 2023).

The pandemic's primary effects

School policies and practices, such as mask‐wearing, social distancing, vaccination and virtual learning options, have been required in many nations to minimise the illness and death of adults and children (see Lewis, 2021). In 2022, there is a great need for research of how teaching and learning have been affected and what is needed going forward (Kauffman et al., 2023).

Soon after the beginning of the pandemic, many publications provided recommendations for teachers and description of problems and their potential solutions (e.g., American Institute for Research; Bushweller and Lloyd, 2021). However, the literature then mostly involved higher education, notices of the spread of the virus, recommendations regarding public health procedures and school‐related suggestions related to the virus.

Even today, relatively little is known about just how the pandemic and school closures have affected and will affect K‐12 students' learning, especially in the long‐run. Nearly all the research so far has been descriptive, and very few studies have been done in which variables have been manipulated and controlled to assess their effects. The pandemic and its effects on education at every level were relatively sudden and unexpected. It is understandable that several years later there would be relatively few sound descriptive studies about its immediate effects, even fewer regarding its long‐term consequences, and virtually no experimental research.

The long‐term effects are particularly important but obviously cannot be assessed immediately. For example, a 10‐year assessment of effects on the higher education, employment, mental health and social adjustment of students graduating from the high school class of 2020 (or completing any grade) cannot be completed before 2030. Furthermore, large‐scale quantitative studies of even the 1‐year‐later effects on the learning of children who entered Kindergarten (or any other grade) in 2019 are only now emerging.

In most wealthy nations, many adults and many school‐age children have been vaccinated, and many schools in these nations have resumed in‐person education. Nevertheless, vaccination, mask‐wearing, social distancing and other safety measures are appropriate, and may be so in future years. It also appears that some schools will continue to offer a virtual learning option, even if in‐person classes are offered. Thus, there is much to sort out about the immediate and long‐term effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic, and this applies to all nations.

The effects of the pandemic are certainly not over. Schools are not only dealing with problems created by the initial wave of closures, lock‐downs, illness and death of the first years of COVID‐19, but now with new uncertainties. For example, whether and for whom to offer virtual learning as an option, when and how and for whom to require vaccination, what safety protocols to recommend and enforce (e.g., masking, social distancing) are issues for both public and private schools and are frequently in the news (e.g., Lumpkin, 2022). Moreover, matters related to COVID‐19 have become highly politicised, at least in the USA, adding complexity, conflict and uncertainty to an already difficult situation (Kauffman and Badar, 2023).

Change and adaptation always go with the job of teaching, but what teachers seldom seem to be given – and this was definitely the case at the beginning of the pandemic – is the time needed to learn new skills and how to use new technologies. Teacher preparation programmes did not and could not anticipate the pandemic, so they were unprepared to take its effects into account.

The pandemic highlighted problems already existing in many schools, including these: (1) deteriorating buildings that lacked adequate space, healthful ventilation and clean air, (2) low achievement and lack of academic progress of many students, (3) schedules and school years that are inappropriate or inconsistent with current life, (4) discrimination in funding and the recruitment and retention of teachers. Many students with disabilities were confronted with great uncertainty, even if they were placed in general education. Some were even described as being ‘in limbo’ (e.g., Bamberger et al., 2020). The pandemic had a disproportionately negative influence on the education of students with disabilities (Natanson et al., 2021; UNESCO, 2021).

Discussion of the more specific and ongoing issues for inclusive and special education is organised around five aspects of support for learning: (1) instruction and learning, (2) emotional and behavioural problems, (3) practical difficulties of teachers, (4) students' views of the pandemic and schooling and (5) collaboration in addressing problems.

Instruction and learning

Measurement of losses of academic skills attributable to the COVID‐19 pandemic and effects of virtual teaching have become controversial issues. Undeniable is the fact that many students have lost ground academically, and this is particularly of concern for basic skills such as reading. In USA, at least, these losses have been dramatic and have been greater among students already low in achievement (e.g., Goldstein, 2021, 2022; Mervosh, 2022; Sparks, 2021; St. George, 2022).

However, although the recognition and measurement of such losses are essential to remediating them, some educators are concerned about the stigma that may accompany documentation of them. Students with disabilities placed in general education are not exempt from this problem and may, in fact, be especially likely to suffer disproportionate loss of skills, regardless of their placement during the pandemic.

Needed changes in instruction were obvious to many educators even before the pandemic. The pandemic made these changes more urgent. In the early days of the pandemic, schools either closed or switched to ‘virtual learning’, and if a change to virtual learning was made it was immediate. Many teachers were forced by circumstances to work around‐the‐clock to prepare weeks' worth of lessons and gather materials to send home. Technologies that might have been used to complement teaching suddenly became the primary means of instruction. New teachers who were already overwhelmed with starting a new year for the first time, found that experienced teachers were also nearly clueless about how to proceed. These experienced colleagues were unable to provide advice and guidance because they, too, were doing something for the first time.

Preparing and delivering virtual lessons and assignments requires a different kind of thinking, planning, presenting and evaluating than does in‐person teaching. A teacher can not simply take an in‐person lesson and post it on the Internet, especially teachers of non‐readers (or poor readers) and students who may have little experience using a notebook computer or tablet. In many ways, the pandemic made teachers feel they were buried deep in a hole from the very start – but given neither the time nor the proper tools to dig themselves out.

Research is needed to explain the differences between the skills needed for effective in‐person instruction and those needed for effective virtual instruction. Are almost the same skills required, or does virtual instruction require a completely different set of skills? And, if different skills are required, then how are teachers best prepared? Should these instructional methods become a standard part of teacher preparation? Educators of teachers need to know the answers, not just theoretical or philosophical notions but reality‐based, adequately researched answers that guide their practices.

Some pandemic‐related practices, such as social distancing and virtual instruction, present barriers to effective in‐person teaching. Research is needed to indicate how such barriers can be dealt with most effectively (Cooper et al., 2023; Mathews et al., 2023; Mathur et al., 2023).

Current ‘inclusive’ models of special education service delivery have most students with disabilities receiving all or most of their instruction alongside non‐disabled peers in the general education classroom. Advantages and disadvantages of inclusion in general education have been and continue to be studied and discussed elsewhere (e.g., Hornby and Kauffman, 2021; Kauffman et al., 2021, in press). Regardless of opinion about inclusion under ordinary circumstances, most people concede that providing a ‘free, appropriate public education’ (FAPE, required by U. S. law) to all students with disabilities in any nation virtually is a formidable challenge. This is especially challenging for students with multiple and severe disabilities (Kauffman et al., 2020).

Students with multiple and severe disabilities often require instruction that is not needed by students in general education (Travers, 2022). Such students often need instruction and services that obviously cannot be provided virtually (e.g., instruction in dressing or eating, physical therapy). Parents or others caring for the student with disabilities might be taught how to teach these self‐help skills or provide therapy that requires a person's physical contact. Nevertheless, that is not always feasible.

It is a given that, some students with mild learning difficulties can adjust to online instruction relatively easily (e.g., Manning et al., 2022). However, the population of students with disabilities ranges from individuals with mild impairments to those with multiple, profound, life‐threatening conditions that affect every aspect of their lives. Schools are frequently the central agency for providing a wide range of services (e.g., speech/language therapy, physical and occupational therapy, services for non‐native‐English speakers, behavioural therapies and interventions)., and the feasibility of making these available virtually varies greatly.

Many students in low‐income areas of even wealthy nations still do not have access to a reliable electronic device or access to the Internet and are not able to participate in virtual learning alongside their peers (see Felder et al., 2023). Instead, paper packets including worksheets and readings are given to students to complete every few weeks. These already disadvantaged students continue to fall further behind as schools and districts lack adequate funding and resources to provide them with a reliable Internet connection and a usable device. This applies especially to students with disabilities who are placed in general education classes. They not only have the disadvantages experienced by students without disabilities but are additionally disadvantaged by teachers' difficulties in managing individualised provisions remotely.

As more schools moved to hybrid learning during the early months of the pandemic, with only a certain percentage of students allowed in the school building per day, many secondary students chose to stay home permanently rather than switch between at‐home virtual learning and in‐person learning in school. Because there are fewer freedoms afforded to students in hybrid learning than normally exist in a secondary school environment, students often chose to stay home. Teachers then faced the challenge of providing a productive in‐person learning environment to only a few students in the building and a virtual lesson simultaneously. Although having only a few students in the classroom at a time can be beneficial to providing additional instruction to struggling students, many of the students who would most benefit from this additional help were not returning to in‐person learning. Secondary students thrive on the social interaction they receive while at school during class changes and lunchtime, but COVID‐19 restrictions took most of these social opportunities away, leaving students feeling isolated at school.

Research is needed to determine the special instructional strategies required for meeting the needs of students with disabilities that can be used online and those that simply cannot be. Furthermore, when persons other than teachers must provide instruction, how are those persons best taught or coached to provide the needed instruction to students with disabilities? Special educators especially need to know how services that can be delivered only in person to students with more severe disabilities can be delivered safely in person.

Emotional and behavioural problems

Any teacher will attest to the fact that good instruction and good behaviour management go hand‐in‐hand (Kauffman et al., 2011; Cooper et al., 2023). Without the former, the likelihood that students will engage in inappropriate and disruptive behaviours increases dramatically. Without the latter, well‐intentioned instruction is likely to be ignored because students are too distracted, inattentive, unmotivated or disorganised to benefit from it. Good teachers will admit that a huge part of their job is finding ways to create a safe, orderly, focused, appealing and supportive classroom environment. Doing this in a virtual setting appears to require very different skills from what is required in‐person. It may even be safe to say that teachers who are best at exuding warmth, encouragement, sensitivity and caring in the classroom might have the hardest time creating the same affect on a screen. Research is needed to find out whether this is the case. If it is, then a key question is, how are teachers best taught to encourage students and show warmth, sensitivity and caring online?

Although some secondary students thrive in a virtual environment and enjoy the ability to create their own schedule and manage their own time, many students experience substantially increased stress levels with the use of remote and hybrid learning. It seems that most students will have experienced elevated stress about school and learning during the pandemic and female students and students of colour will have been impacted more substantially than their male and white counterparts. Schools have been working fervently to increase students' social/emotional well‐being, but students are still left with high levels of stress and anxiety, negatively affecting their success in school. Therefore, research is needed to determine how stress and anxiety can best be reduced during virtual instruction.

Students who receive special education services for social, emotional or behavioural needs present an enormous challenge when they cannot attend school in‐person (Hirsch et al., 2021). As mentioned, numerous behavioural supports and related therapies are in place for them in schools. Many of these cannot be replicated online or delivered by family members. Children who thrive on consistent schedules and predictable routines may experience increased anxiety when these are disrupted. Increased anxiety may lead to more frequent and/or intense acting‐out behaviours or exacerbate the tendency to disengage and withdraw. All of the problems associated with such social, emotional and behavioural problems are accentuated by incarceration (Ochoa et al., 2023). Teachers who may have devoted years to building respectful, trusting relationships with students find themselves struggling to explain why everything has changed when students are in trouble with the law or if they are in jail.

Many of the best practices used to prevent problem behaviour – for example, physical proximity, non‐verbal cues, contingent attention and immediate reinforcement – are often not available in virtual environments and may not be feasible, even with in‐person teaching, during a pandemic because of social distancing, mask‐wearing and other safety protocols. Social distancing is exactly the opposite of what many students with emotional and behavioural disorders need. Many such children need a close‐knit, strong community of people who support their complex needs. Case‐by‐case analyses are required, but especially during times of crisis it is important not to impose blanket policies that do not accommodate individual differences.

The extent to which special relationship‐building and behaviour management techniques can be adapted to online learning is not known. Research of such adaptations and their limitations is needed, as is research on the most effective ways of preparing teachers to use them.

We do know that the negative effects of the pandemic on the mental health of children and youths have been dramatic (e.g., Hawes et al., 2021; Benton et al., 2022). Children's mental health was scandalously neglected before the pandemic (e.g., Kauffman and Badar, 2018), but COVID‐19 worsened an already bad situation (Bernstein, 2022).

Practical difficulties of teachers

Virtual instruction presents an obvious set of practical, logistical issues for teachers. One such practical problem is connection to the Internet at home (this can be a problem for students and teachers), access to a functional electronic device (notebook or computer), creation of appropriate teaching and learning spaces in the home, and supervision of student's online activities. Not to be ignored is the almost impossible situation faced by parents who must go to work outside the home. Or, parents may need to juggle working from home with their new roles as teachers of their own children. In‐person teaching during a pandemic also has its peculiar challenges. The logistical and practical challenges of in‐person schooling in the midst of a pandemic are poorly understood, and these problems are much too easily discounted by the general public. Educators have to think carefully about the seemingly mundane factors that actually play a vital role in creating an orderly environment that is conducive to learning.

Teachers, especially those of younger students, must think about their students' personal effects (things like coats, hats, backpacks, lunches, etc.) and school supplies (books, pencils, erasers, crayons, notebooks, scissors, glue, etc.). Lockers or ‘cubbies’ were typically not allowed for children during the pandemic for fear of cross‐contamination; many elementary classrooms use desks or tables without storage spaces because supplies were normally shared by small groups of students; and movement around the classroom had to be restricted for safety. The result was an overflowing crate or bin next to each student's chair. Imagine trying to teach a class of 5‐year‐olds to focus on a reading or math lesson rather than explore the exceedingly interesting ‘fidgets’ (including snacks) sitting right beside them!

Other seemingly simple routines were complicated by COVID‐19 restrictions. Enforcing a no‐jacket rule in the classroom is difficult or impossible when jackets are routinely hung on the backs of chairs. Older students, in particular, were known to disappear into their hooded jackets for hours. Some used large coats to conceal phones or other devices. Schools are notoriously poorly ventilated, many with ancient heating/cooling systems and windows that either do not open or have no screens to keep insects out. One ‘silver lining’ of the pandemic has been improvement of clean air circulation in some schools.

Another problem of in‐person teaching with COVID‐19 restrictions involves restroom breaks. Most classrooms do not have bathrooms and, with or without a pandemic, students typically use a common restroom in the hallway. With no adult assigned to supervise bathroom activity during a pandemic, students need to be trusted to maintain things like social distancing and mask‐wearing on their own.

At one of our schools, during the pandemic teachers devised a system whereby every student had a bathroom pass that he/she would hang on the bathroom door before entering. Spots on the floor were designated for waiting outside the bathroom. In essence, this system ensured that only one student at a time would be in the bathroom (where he/she cannot be seen), thereby maintaining proper physical distancing. The result with in‐person teaching during COVID‐19 was long lines of students waiting in the hallway because the four‐person capacity restrooms can only accommodate one at a time. Whole‐class bathroom breaks are also problematic because of difficulties scheduling all 10 classrooms on a given wing or area of the building for evenly spaced breaks throughout the day.

Many more examples of logistical nightmares created by COVID‐19 are possible, from frequent hand‐washing to proper mask‐wearing to eating safely in classrooms to ensuring teachers have bathroom breaks and a chance to eat lunch. The point is, however, to draw attention to the complexities of the school day and all the ways in which school buildings, materials and staffing policies need to be altered in order for schools to be open safely.

The tasks of cleaning classrooms and equipment have typically fallen on teachers. For example, teachers may be required to sanitise all desks and all equipment used during the class and to do this between class changes. This allows only a few minutes to sanitise desks, chairs, and computers, resulting in students standing in a crowded hallway waiting for teachers to finish sanitising and taking away valuable minutes of instructional time.

Research is needed to tell us just how a pandemic is likely to alter classroom and school routines and the effects of such alterations. What changes are necessary and predictable, and how are they best explained to students, parents and teachers?

Without belabouring this point, we do want to add that all of the above challenges are made far more significant when dealing with children whose physical, emotional or cognitive issues require special attention and/or increased guidance and supervision. Students of all ages can need assistance with toileting, washing hands, eating, even walking down the hallway safely – this was pre‐COVID‐19 and has been complicated by the pandemic. Most schools' structures are not currently well‐equipped to handle these activities while following COVID‐19 health guidelines. Research has to address these and related logistical and practical issues for students with disabilities and their teachers.

Many teachers were reluctant to begin in‐person classes during the pandemic, and for good reasons. Teachers' unions are often blamed for encouraging teachers to refuse to teach until their demands are met. Nevertheless, it is reasonable for teachers not to work until they have been fully vaccinated and/or to teach only vaccinated students in‐person. It is reasonable for teachers to demand structural changes to buildings, special cleaning protocols, necessary technological equipment, altered schedules and staffing that reflects current health and safety guidelines. Older teachers and those with pre‐existing conditions (or who go home to family members whose risk of getting COVID‐19 is elevated) understandably feel especially concerned about contracting or transmitting the virus. To some, these concerns seem unwarranted, and some accuse teachers of being selfish.

Teachers have myriad reasons for being sceptical of administrative promises. Most teachers are accustomed to having decisions made for and about them without their meaningful participation in the decisions. Often teachers are vilified for expressing their own needs, even when they have spent most of their lives thinking only of their students and giving of themselves to the point of feeling depleted. Unless there are fundamental changes in the ways teachers are viewed, respected, valued and consulted about their profession, many will understandably harbour resentment and anger.

The COVID‐19 pandemic's influences on the lives of teachers should be the topic of research. We need to know not only how COVID‐19 affected their feelings about students, families, instruction and school administration but also the role of the pandemic in their aspirations and attitudes towards the teaching profession.

Students' views of the pandemic and schooling

The views of students with disabilities, especially if their disabilities are relatively mild and they are included in general education most or all of the time, are relatively seldom solicited. For example, in one set of interviews involving 17 students from kindergarten through high school, only one third‐grader mentioned a disability – her ADHD (Cogan, 2021). However, this might be a reasonable expectations because students with disabilities are a minority of those affected by COVID‐19. The third‐grader with ADHD spoke of technology problems – such as some pupils not having computers – but saw some advantages of virtual teaching for herself. Because of her ADHD, she said, she sometimes needed to do something else and could do that and then go back to the screen and the task. And when the virtual session ended, she could dance, which she probably couldn't do or would find awkward in school. We know that students with ADHD need frequent changes of activity, and some students with disabilities have thrived with virtual instruction (Manning et al., 2022).

Nearly all of the students interviewed by Cogan (2021) described how much they missed personal, in‐person relationships with peers. The social isolation and restriction that students in both general and special education experience as part of the pandemic is pervasive in students' commentary on the effects of the disease. Boredom, feelings of restriction and depression are common themes in students' reports. Research will be needed for years to come to address the lingering effects of these feelings and how students are best helped to deal with them.

Collaboration in addressing problems

Collaboration among professionals has been complicated by COVID‐19. The social distancing and virtual environment often require multiple phone calls to coordinate services that formerly involved person‐to‐person communication in a non‐virtual environment. Many suggestions have been made about how to involve parents and families in education during COVID‐19. However, involvement of parents may be seen as adding more duties or expectations to their roles as well as interfering with their employment or job‐seeking. Nevertheless, agencies working together, including schools, is essential in meeting children's needs during any difficult time (see Mathur et al., 2023; Rock et al., 2023).

In short, working with a variety of service providers is often more complicated when multiple services are provided virtually. Furthermore, parents and families may feel resentful about being pressed into roles and duties for which they have not been trained, adding to their stress in dealing with the pandemic. This is especially likely to be a problem for students with multiple and severe disabilities, regardless of their placement in general or special education environments (Kauffman et al., 2020; Travers, 2022).

Research of how collaboration succeeded and failed during the COVID‐19 pandemic will be important. Such research could be useful in discovering factors that heighten or lower success in collaboration and help agencies and individuals become better prepared for future disruptive events.

Lessons learned and hope for the future

In spite of the changes that schools have been and are being forced to make, there is hope that some of the new practices may actually be better than older ways of doing things. For example, the increased levels of cleanliness and proper ventilation in school buildings are long overdue (as long as the bulk of responsibility for extra cleaning does not fall on teachers themselves, as is often the case). Most teachers can attest to the fact that viruses and other ills spread very quickly in schools, and most schools receive very superficial daily cleaning. Cleaner environments will benefit both special and general education students.

Besides having a cleaner environment, a lesson we hope has been learned is that virtual learning has its advantages and disadvantages. The advantages include freedom from some of the most highly questionable teachers' meetings and administratively imposed duties. Disadvantages include lack of human in‐person contact, which is especially important in the case of students with emotional and behavioural disorders as well as students with many other disabilities.

Another ‘silver lining’ from the pandemic may be the benefits of smaller class sizes and less crowded classrooms. Coauthor Badar taught in a private school that had to cut class size in half during the pandemic to allow for social distancing. Although this change required a great deal more classroom space and more staff, the advantages of a smaller class were remarkable. Three benefits of smaller class size are that students with and without disabilities all feel seen and heard, students have more opportunities to respond and participate in activities, and teachers are better able to discern subtle differences in students' learning and target instruction more specifically to individuals.

Technology can simplify and shorten meetings, in‐service training and parent conferences, which is encouraging. The ability to do more from home or other remote locations has the potential to relax teachers' jam‐packed schedules a bit, cut down on daily commutes and allow spaces to be used on a rotating basis. These are all welcome changes for most teachers and may prove more effective than current practices. Of course, teachers must be adequately trained and given time to practice using the most helpful technologies.

COVID‐19 has created many special challenges for inclusive and special education, and many of these challenges apply whether teaching is in‐person or virtual. Although both students and teachers have been traumatised by the changes required by the pandemic, some of the changes will likely result in the improvement of both virtual and in‐person teaching and the educational environment.

Within the next few years, one might expect to see far more quantitative studies involving the safety of students and teachers during and after the pandemic as in‐person teaching resumes. Future quantitative and qualitative studies are also needed of effects on academic achievement and mental health problems of children and adults, such as depression and suicide.

The longer‐term effects of COVID‐19 should be measured, with comparisons being made for students placed in general education and other, alternative environments such as special classes and schools. The varied effects of placement on academic and social skills should be assessed, and both immediate and long‐term effects should be measured.

Also needed is research on the best ways of responding to lapses in learning attributed to COVID‐19. Tutoring, summer school and extended school days or school years are among the alternative ways of addressing learning losses. Among the controversies spawned by learning losses is the matter of identifying or ‘separating out’ students who need some sort of remedial education from those who do not. However, requiring participation of all students in such services suggests other problems. Stigma is likely to accompany any designation of need for remediation, but objection of students and parents to forced inclusion in remedial work for those who do not need it is both predictable and understandable.

Particularly important for students with disabilities is determination of the services that can be delivered remotely but effectively by a special educator. Also needed is research identifying special education services that can be delivered effectively by a general educator using virtual teaching, special services that can be delivered effectively by family members with consultation and guidance provided by a special educator or other service provider (perhaps with remote consultation), and those services that can be delivered effectively only in‐person by a trained professional.

Hope for the future depends on descriptions and personal observations of those involved in education, but more objective, quantitative, scientific evidence is needed as well (Kauffman et al., 2023; Mathews et al., 2023). We need rigorous scientific evidence of best practices in both special and inclusive education to guide the most effective instruction of all students during traumatic events, such as future pandemics, violence or other public health crises (see Rock et al., 2023). In these ways, research could contribute to children with disabilities suffering fewer negative effects from future pandemics, than they did from COVID‐19.