COVID Learning Retention and Improved Gifted Identification
A study of more than 10,000 kids in Arkansas provides education policy insights.
Posted April 30, 2026 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk
In many school districts across the country, COVID learning loss is something that many students are still working to recover from. However, learning loss was not a uniform phenomenon across all states, and some areas may have been more insulated relative to others, for various reasons. Additionally, some scholars have argued that test scores were already on the decline before the pandemic, so it’s unclear exactly what the impact of the pandemic is on score changes.
For example, the amount of in-person schooling may have been one of the factors in any score changes. Arkansas was one of the states with relatively shorter closure periods, starting in March of 2020, and opening back up that Fall. This was similar for Northwest Arkansas as it was for the state in general.
Our research team recently published two research papers—led by Al Mansor Helal of the University of Arkansas—that leveraged a unique dataset of 10,508 students in Northwest Arkansas who took both the ACT Aspire test (more of an achievement test) and the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT; more of an ability or reasoning measure) around the COVID-19 pandemic period.
Learning Retention Before and After the Pandemic
We examined anonymized student-level assessment and demographic data from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). Publicly available district-level characteristics were then matched with student-level data. We had data from 15 school districts and examined two cohorts of students assessed during the years 2018 through 2022. Cohort 1 (2018-19 school year) students took the ACT Aspire in 3rd grade and the CogAT in 4th grade in the 2019-20 school year. Cohort 2 students took the ACT Aspire and CogAT in the 2021-22 school year during 4th grade.
The first paper published in the Journal of Intelligence used quantile regression to examine whether the changes in the test scores before and after the pandemic differed at different points in the distribution (e.g., the high or the low end), which allows a better assessment of change across the score distribution. As we conclude:
“Results demonstrate that the cognitive ability and/or achievement gaps did not widen after the pandemic, instead they stayed stable or narrowed moderately across groups. Results also indicate that cognitive ability was a significant and consistent predictor of achievement before COVID-19, but the strength of this relationship attenuated noticeably after the pandemic.”
Therefore, in Northwest Arkansas, in the 15 districts studied, there appeared to be learning retention overall, though there were slight losses among students at the low end of the distribution.
Gifted and Talented Identification
The second paper in press at Journal for the Education of the Gifted sought to examine whether the ACT Aspire and CogAT showed substantial enough correlations to be used somewhat interchangeably in gifted and talented identification procedures to help “universally screen” more students to help more disadvantaged students have a better chance of identification. Here we found that though there was an overall correlation of r = .59 across the two cohorts, this correlation varied from .72 to .46. As we conclude in our paper:
“This variation in correlations and inconsistency in the predictive nature of diversity of both tests across cohorts suggests greater caution in the interchangeable use of ACT Aspire and CogAT as indicators. Instead, this suggests the use of more than one test as part of the package for identification.”
These research projects show, through using multiple measures of student aptitude and achievement, that despite the disruption of COVID-19, in some cases, there may have been learning retention. Additionally, our work shows the importance of using multiple measures for gifted identification procedures.
Helal, A. M., & Wai, J. (2026). Quantile regression of cognitive ability and achievement inequality before and after the pandemic in one state. Journal of Intelligence, 14 (3), 36.
Helal, A. M., Wai, J., McKenzie, S. C., & Seaton, D. (in press). Universal screening in practice: A comparative study of the CogAT and ACT Aspire for gifted identification. Journal for the Education of the Gifted .
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Jonathan Wai, Ph.D. , is Assistant Professor of Education Policy and Psychology and the 21st Century Endowed Chair in Education Policy at the University of Arkansas.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.