Purpose There has been considerable controversy regarding susceptibility of adolescents (10–19 years) and youth (15–24 years) to COVID-19. However, a number of studies have reported that adolescents are significantly less susceptible than older adults. Summer 2020 provided an opportunity to examine data on prevalence since after months of lockdowns, with the easing of restrictions, people were mingling, leading to surges in cases. Methods We examined data from Departments of Health websites in six U.S. states experiencing surges in cases to determine prevalence of COVID-19, and two prevalence-related measures, in adolescents and youth as compared to older adults. The two other measures related to prevalence were: (Percentage of cases observed in a given age group) ÷ (percentage of cases expected based on population demographics); and percentage deviation, or [(% observed—% expected)/ % expected] x 100. Results Prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and for youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p < .00001), as was percentage observed ÷ percentage expected (p < .005). The percentage deviation was significantly greater in adolescents/youth than in older adults (p < 0.00001) when there was an excess of observed cases over what was expected, and significantly less when observed cases were fewer than expected (p< 0.00001). Conclusions Our results are contrary to previous findings that adolescents are less susceptible than older adults. Possible reasons for the findings are suggested, and we note that public health messaging targeting adolescents and youth might be helpful in curbing the pandemic. Also, the findings of the potential for high transmission among adolescents and youth, should be factored into decisions regarding school reopening.

PURPOSE: There has been considerable controversy regarding susceptibility of adolescents (10-19 years) and youth (15-24 years) to COVID-19. A number of studies have reported that adolescents are significantly less susceptible than older adults. Summer 2020 provided an opportunity to examine data on prevalence since after months of lockdowns, with the easing of restrictions, people were mingling, leading to surges in cases. METHODS: We examined data from six U.S. states experiencing surges in the number of cases to determine prevalence of COVID-19, and two other measures, related to prevalence in adolescents and youth as compared to older adults. The two other measures were: Percentage of cases observed in a given age group ÷ by the percentage of cases expected based on population demographics; and percentage deviation, or [(% observed− % expected)÷ % expected] ×100. RESULTS: Prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and for youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p<.00001), as was percentage observed ÷ percentage expected (p<.005). The percentage deviation was significantly greater in adolescents/youth than in older adults (p<0.00001) when there was an excess of observed cases over what was expected, and significantly less when observed cases were fewer than expected (p<0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are contrary to previous findings that adolescents are less susceptible than older adults. The findings have implications for school re-openings. The age groups 10-19 and 15-24 are students in middle school, high school, college, and the first two years of professional/graduate school. The high prevalence in these age groups would argue against school re-openings in the near future.

Key Points Question How do incidence and relative risk of contracting COVID-19 from the original wild-type SARS-CoV-2 strain in adolescents and youth compare with that in older adults in the US? Findings Results of this cross-sectional study using state health department data from the start of the pandemic through fall 2020 indicate that, in 16 of the 19 states examined, the incidence rate and relative risk of COVID-19 infection from wild-type SARS-CoV-2 were significantly greater in adolescents and youth than in older adults. For example, in Florida, the incidence rate in adolescents and youth was 0.055 compared with 0.028 in older adults—adolescents and youth had 1.94 times the risk of contracting COVID-19 compared with older adults. Meaning These results suggest that, contrary to reports from Europe and Asia, infection rates and relative risk among US adolescents and youth exceeded that in older adults from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic through fall 2020, before vaccines were available.

PURPOSEIn a prior study, we examined data from six US states during Summer 2020, and found that prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p<.00001) as was a prevalence-related measure: Number of cases observed ÷ Number of cases expected (p<.005). We now extended our study to more states in Fall 2020 to confirm the prevalence relationships we found previously. Vaccines were still not available as of Fall 2020. Presumably, the SARS-CoV-2 strain circulating at the time was the wild-type lineage since no variants were reported in the US until the end of December 2020.METHODSWe examined data from 19 U.S. states experiencing surges in cases to determine prevalence of COVID-19, and a prevalence-related measure: [Number of cases observed in a given age group] ÷ [Number of cases expected in the age group based on population demographics].RESULTSIn 16 of the 19 states, we found that: (1) prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p-values ranged from p<0.00001 to p = 0.0175; (2) the ratio of cases observed to cases expected was significantly greater in adolescents and youth than in older adults (p-values ranging from p< 0.00001 to p = 0.004).CONCLUSIONSOur results are consistent with our previous study in Summer 2020. The finding of lower prevalence in older adults cannot be attributed to access to vaccination since our data are from Fall 2020 when vaccinations were not yet available. Our findings with the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type strain are consistent with the findings currently being reported in the UK for the delta variant. In both studies, prevalence in adolescents and youth exceeded that in older adults. The UK findings are more pronounced perhaps because that study transpired following months of vaccinations of older adults whereas ours occurred before vaccinations were available.

As part of an NSF-funded project, we employed a process-oriented guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) curriculum for the Experimental Psychology Laboratory at Touro College. The Students' Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) instrument was administered to students who took the Experimental Psychology Laboratory course with and without using POGIL, to assess the impact of the curriculum, and to determine exactly what aspects of the POGIL curriculum students found most helpful. We examined students' assessment of the construct of "Active Learning" and found the POGIL group rated various aspects of the lab course (e.g., the POGIL lab activities; the assessments; the way the lab activities, readings, and assignments fit together) as significantly more helpful in aiding "Active Learning" than the non-POGIL group ( p = .007). Also, the POGIL group was significantly more likely to agree that as a result of the lab course, they made greater gains in the construct "Process Skills" than did the non-POGIL group ( p = .02). In particular, within that construct, they reported higher gains in their ability to think through a problem or argument than the non-POGIL group. Thus, the POGIL group not only thought their curricular activities were more helpful but also that their critical thinking skills improved. Also, following the laboratory course, students using the POGIL materials had a better metacognitive awareness of what "understanding" a concept entails ( p = .009). Further, they reported finding the course more challenging ( p = .016) than students utilizing a traditional curriculum.