University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Academic, social, and emotional supports for high school students in online schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Academic, social, and emotional supports for high school students in online schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Academic, Social, and Emotional Supports for High School Students in Online Schools
by
Gail Gonzalez Coloyan

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2022

2

© Copyright by Gail Gonzalez Coloyan 2022
All Rights Reserved

3

The Committee for Gail Gonzalez Coloyan certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Monique Datta
Cathy Sloane Krop
David Cash, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
May 2022

iv
Abstract
There was an increase in online, and hybrid K–12 schools, and during the COVID-19 pandemic
many schools transitioned to distance learning (U.S. Department of Education, 2019; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2021). Social learning theorists suggest that active participation and interactions
between individuals is important for learning (Chi et al., 2014; Schunk, 2020; Vgotsky, 1978),
and very little research has been done on how this is accomplished in K–12 distance learning
environments. Students who engage in distance learning need additional academic and social-
emotional support to achieve the learning outcomes (Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997). This study
explored the opportunities for interaction and the types of support structures that students
received during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools. The study
aimed to discover the types of support that students receive during distance learning, the
perceptions of recent alumni regarding the efficacy of these supports, and how these supports
align with research-based, equity-focused practices. Analysis of survey and interview data
identified academic and social-emotional learning (SEL) supports but also found that these
programs are not accessed equally by all students. Optional programs led to varying degrees of
teacher-student and student-student interactions, and alumni perceptions varied based on how
much they accessed the programs and their relationships with teachers and peers. The results of
this study could help inform educators and school leaders about ways to improve support during
distance learning and in online schools.
Keywords: distance learning, online schools, academic supports, SEL supports.

v
Dedication
To my mother, Corazon, my late father, Alfonso, my life partner, Victor, and my daughters
Kaila, Kaya, Karisma, and Kirana, I dedicate this dissertation and degree to you. You are my
“why.” You inspire me, motivate me, and shape me. Mom and dad, thank you for everything you
have done to help me get to where I am today. Victor, Kaila, Kaya, Karisma and Kirana, I could
not have reached this milestone without your love, support, patience, loving gestures, and warm
embrace. Thank you for providing me with the space and motivation to accomplish this work.
Thank you for always believing in my dreams, just as I believe in yours. I can only hope that you
see this work as a testament of the limitless possibilities that you are capable of accomplishing.
To the Gonzalez and Coloyan families, especially my nine siblings, Gene, Gary, Grace, Glenn,
Gina, CJ, Genevieve, Grethel and Geoffrey, it gives me great strength to know that you are
always there to support me, regardless of our physical distance.
To all of my nieces and nephews, I am inspired by your courage to create your own paths for
yourself. I hope you know that Auntie Gail will always be one of your biggest champions.
To the PAMCHONCs, who have been my second family for the past decade, thank you for
helping us build a home away from home.
To my girlfriends, Jeannie, Meg, Odette, Robie and Jeanne, thank you providing me with clarity
and inspiration, helping me to access my deepest thoughts through our reflections and intention
setting sessions. Without our meaningful conversations, I would not have been able to identify
my calling in education.
To my Mochi family, thank you for grounding me and helping me to remember where I came
from and to visualize where I want to go.

vi
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the faculty, colleagues, and friends at University of Southern
California who helped me get to this point in my academic career. To my committee chair, Dr.
David Cash, I could not have completed this dissertation without your consistent guidance and
support. Thank you for always being available to support me and answer my questions
throughout this process. To my dissertation committee members, Dr. Cathy Krop and Dr.
Monique Datta, thank you for your insightful feedback and for challenging me to become a
better researcher and writer. To the professors at the USC Rossier School of Education, thank
you for giving me the space to reflect and grow as an educational leader. I have learned so much
through your courses, not only about educational leadership but also about myself. To the Class
of 2022 cohort, this journey would not have been the same without each of you. I am honored to
have walked alongside you, and I look forward to building the friendships that we created during
the past three years of working together and leaning on each other.
This dissertation would not have been possible without the alumni who participated in
this research study. I appreciate the time you have gifted and your willingness to share your
insight, beliefs and ideas about virtual education. I hope that I have given justice to your stories
and your voice. I would also like to thank the administrators who helped to connect me with the
participants of this study, and my editor, Sarah Kaip, for helping me to finalize this work.
I would also like to thank my current and past colleagues at Pivot Charter, High Tech
High and June Jordan School for Equity. Thank you for helping me to create a vision of what is
possible. Lastly, to my current and former students, thank you for teaching me so much through
the past sixteen years. You are the reason why I continue to do this work and why I strive to be
the best educator and educational leader I could possibly be.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiii
Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 5
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 6
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 7
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 7
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 11
Introduction to Online Education ...................................................................................... 11
History and Development of Online Schools ....................................................... 12
Current State of Virtual Education in the United States ....................................... 14
Effectiveness of Online Schools: Mixed Results .............................................................. 15
Learning Theories ............................................................................................................. 18
Best Practices .................................................................................................................... 19
Policies and Standards Surrounding Online Education ........................................ 20
Interaction and Social Presence ............................................................................ 21
Academic Supports in Online Learning ................................................................ 22

viii
Social and Emotional Learning ............................................................................. 23
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy .............................................................................. 25
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 26
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 29
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 31
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 31
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 32
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 34
Quantitative Instrument ........................................................................................ 34
Qualitative Instruments ......................................................................................... 35
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 36
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 38
Quantitative Data .................................................................................................. 39
Qualitative Data .................................................................................................... 39
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 40
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 41
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 41
Interactions and Supports for Distance Learners .............................................................. 43
Teacher-Student Interactions ................................................................................ 43
Student-Student Interactions ................................................................................. 47
Academic Supports ............................................................................................... 53
Social-Emotional Learning Supports .................................................................... 59
Interactions and Supports for Distance Learners .............................................................. 62
Alumni Perceptions About the Efficacy of Supports ........................................................ 64
Perceptions on Efficacy of Supports ..................................................................... 64

ix
Satisfaction With Support Offered........................................................................ 68
Alumni Perceptions About Efficacy of Supports .............................................................. 71
Equity and Online Learning .............................................................................................. 72
Academic Success ................................................................................................. 73
Cultural Identity .................................................................................................... 75
Critical Consciousness .......................................................................................... 77
Equity and Online Learning .............................................................................................. 80
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 81
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 84
Findings............................................................................................................................. 85
Optional Programs Lead to Varying Degrees of Interactions ............................... 86
Available Support Programs Not Equally Accessed by All Students ................... 87
Less SEL Support in Competencies That Involve Interactions With Others........ 89
Perceptions About Efficacy of Supports Vary Based on Programs
Accessed ............................................................................................................... 89
Lacking Programs to Develop Cultural Competence and Critical
Consciousness ....................................................................................................... 90
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 91
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 92
Incorporate Synchronous Classes Into the Daily Practice to Promote
Interactions ............................................................................................................ 93
Offer Programs and Strategies to Promote Self-Regulated Learning for All
Students ................................................................................................................. 94
Provide Activities That Promote Student-Student Interactions in
Synchronous Classes ............................................................................................. 95
Develop School-Wide Culture to Foster Growth on All SEL Competencies ....... 95
Create Interactions to Foster Cultural Competence and Critical
Consciousness ....................................................................................................... 96

x
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 97
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 98
References ................................................................................................................................... 100
Appendix A: Introduction to Research Letter ............................................................................. 109
Appendix B: Study Invitation Email Cover Letter ..................................................................... 110
Appendix C: Alumni Survey Instrument .................................................................................... 111
Appendix D: Interview Invitation Cover Letter.......................................................................... 116
Appendix E: Informed Consent For Research ............................................................................ 117
Appendix F: Interview Cover Sheet ........................................................................................... 120

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Race and Ethnicity of Survey Participants 42
Table 2: Academic Support Programs and Practices 58
Table 3: Social-Emotional Learning Programs and Practices 61
Table A1: Survey Questions Regarding Programs and Opportunities for Interaction 112
Table A2: Survey Questions Regarding Satisfaction with Supports Received 114

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Framework for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning ......................................... 24
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework for Distance Learning Supports .............................................. 28

xiii
List of Abbreviations
CASEL Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning

CREDO Center for Research on Educational Outcomes

EC Educational Coordinator

ES Educational Specialist

ICAP Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive

IEP Individualized Learning Plan

iNACOL International Association for K–12 Online Learning

NSQOT National Standards for Quality Online Teaching

SEL Social and Emotional Learning

1

Chapter One: Introduction
Technology is being used in education in many different capacities, sometimes as a tool
for classroom instruction and sometimes as the primary component for delivering curriculum and
instruction, as is the case in virtual schools, blended learning environments, or online charter
schools. Through the use of technology, virtual schools held the promise to transform education
and increase equity by offering personalization, flexible scheduling, remote access, and self-
paced learning. Virtual schools are appealing to a wide variety of students, including those who
have difficulty commuting to a school, those who want to catch up or get ahead academically,
those with health issues or special needs, and young professional actors or athletes (Marsh et al.,
2009; Schroeder, 2019). However, further research is needed to examine the effectiveness of
these school environments and how they affect student learning. Vgotzky’s (1978) sociocultural
learning theory emphasizes the importance of interaction with peers, the teacher, and the
environment in the learning process. In addition, the social and emotional learning framework
(CASEL, n.d.) and culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995b) both highlight the
importance of interactions for students’ social and emotional development. Because online and
distance learning environments do not offer the same level of interactions as in-person schooling,
little is known about how these interactions happen in the online learning environment. This
study sought to better understand the types of interactions that occur in online and distance
learning environments, as well as alumni’s perceptions about the academic and social-emotional
learning supports and structures available in distance learning environments.
Background of the Problem
There is a lack of information analyzing the performance of K–12 online learning (Glass
& Welner, 2011; Molnar, 2019). The few studies that have been conducted show disappointing
2

results. Half of all virtual charter high schools in the U.S. had graduation rates below 50% in the
2016–2017 school year (Prothero & Harwin, 2019). A study by the Center for Research on
Educational Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University reported that the majority of online
charter students had weaker academic growth in both math and reading compared to traditional
public schools.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed numerous weaknesses in our educational system.
With many schools being forced to offer distance learning during the pandemic, the digital
divide in the educational system has been brought to the spotlight. This digital divide—the gap
between people who have access to and knowledge of technology and those who do not—
exacerbates the socioeconomic disparities in education (Moore et al., 2018). With the sudden
move to temporarily transition to distance learning due to the pandemic, the digital divide
widened and presented more challenges for already underserved groups (Moore et al., 2018). By
studying the academic supports that are provided for students and by understanding alumni
perceptions about these supports, this study can help find ways to effectively address some of the
barriers to online and distance learning to make it a viable option in which students can
successfully learn and thrive.
Statement of the Problem
While it could be beneficial, the use of technology in education is not enough on its own.
Education courses need to be student-centered, and a collaborative community approach is
necessary because social interaction is critical to learning (McCombs, 2001). It is insufficient to
simply provide a digital curriculum and expect students to learn on their own. Since they do not
have in-person interactions with teachers and peers, students who engage in online and distance
learning need additional academic and social-emotional learning support in addition to
3

appropriate learning processes to achieve the desired learning outcomes from an online
curriculum (Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997).
Using a conceptual framework that integrates social cognitive and constructivist learning
theories (Bandura, 1977; Chi & Wylie, 2014; Schunk, 2020; Vgotsky 1978), social-emotional
learning framework (CASEL n.d.), and culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995b),
this study analyzed how resources and supports provided to the students in online and distance
learning schools aid the learning process and the students’ social-emotional development.
According to sociocultural theory, learning occurs during social interactions between individuals
as they complete the learning tasks (Schunk, 2020). Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory
highlights how environmental and cognitive factors interact to influence human learning and
behavior. Bandura posited that students could learn new behavior through modeling and
observation. Bandura also argued that students’ self-efficacy or beliefs about their own
capabilities have a huge influence on learning and performance and emphasized the importance
of developing self-regulation skills to manage students’ motivation, behavior, and learning.
Bandura posited that there is a bidirectional relationship between the student’s personal factors,
their behavioral factors, and the environmental factors (Schunk, 2020). However, the interactions
between the student, their behavior, and their environment are different in online and distance
learning. There is limited extant literature to understand how these bidirectional relationships
apply in online and distance learning environments.
While the quality of the curriculum is important, the learning processes surrounding the
curriculum are the key factors in determining the learning outcomes (Schunk, 2020). According
to the interactive, constructive, active, passive (ICAP) framework, the mode of learning
determines the knowledge change processes and the resulting cognitive outcome (Chi & Wylie,
4

2014). Passive learning leads to knowledge storing and recalling information; active learning
leads to integration and application of that knowledge; constructive learning leads to integrating
and transferring knowledge; and interactive learning leads to co-inferring and co-creation of
knowledge. To lead students to higher order learning, interaction is necessary, and very little
research has been done on how this is accomplished in online learning environments.
Vgotsky (1978) defined the zone of proximal development as “the distance between the
actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of
potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in
collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86). The zone of proximal development is the range
of tasks a student can perform independently and with the help of a more advanced person such
as a teacher or peer. Learners build their knowledge based on their social and cultural models
and the setting in which they are learning, so educators need to understand students’ prior
knowledge and experiences to bridge the gap between what the students know and their zone of
proximal development (Schunk, 2020). This highlights the importance of human interactions as
students learn through observation, listening, and talking through their tasks. These opportunities
are typically provided by the students’ peers and teachers in a traditional school setting, or by
parents in the traditional homeschool model. However, without these in-person interactions, very
little is known about how students who attend online independent study schools receive the
interactions they need to achieve success in their zone of proximal development.
Furthermore, interactions are essential in students’ social and emotional development.
According to CASEL (n.d.), students’ social and emotional skills are shaped and developed in
classrooms through social and emotional learning (SEL) instruction and classroom climate, in
the schools through schoolwide culture, in practices and policies, at home through authentic
5

partnerships with families and caregivers, and within the communities through aligned learning
opportunities (CASEL, n.d.). In other words, social and emotional learning requires interactions
with adults and other students.
Not all virtual schools are the same. There are virtual schools that offer supplemental
programs online and are taken by students from traditional schools to supplement their course
options. With the COVID-19 pandemic, many traditional schools effectively turned into virtual
schools overnight, as many campuses closed and transitioned to distance learning. This study
focused on a public charter school in San Diego County which integrates online instruction with
face-to-face instruction (i.e., blended learning) and supports, and a traditionally in-person school
that turned to online learning only due to the pandemic.
Purpose of the Study
To understand and effectively influence a learning environment, it is crucial to be aware
of the dynamic cultural models and settings that operate in that context (Kumar et al., 2018;
Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004). As schools move towards distance learning and computer-based
applications that personalize learning experiences, there is a need to evaluate the impact of
environmental factors surrounding this new model and the support structures required for
students to succeed in the rapidly changing educational landscape.
The purpose of this study was to examine the types of support structures that students
receive in online independent study schools and during distance learning at San Diego County
public charter high schools. This study sought to understand the perceptions of recent alumni
regarding the efficacy of these supports and to analyze how these supports align with research-
based, equity-focused practices. The goal of this research was to understand how the support
6

offered can provide opportunities for important interactions needed for learning to occur and for
students to develop as a whole person.
Research Questions
This study sought to answer these research questions:
1. What types of support do students receive at online independent study schools and
during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools?
2. What are alumni perceptions about the efficacy of the academic and social-emotional
learning supports during distance learning?
3. How do the supports that high school students receive align with research-based,
equity-focused practices?
This study investigated the types of support that are provided to students in online and
distance learning schools, using a conceptual framework that integrates social cognitive and
constructivist learning theories, social-emotional learning (SEL), and culturally relevant
pedagogy (CRP). One common thread that connects these theories is the importance of
interactions in the learning process, therefore I closely examined the opportunities for interaction
that are provided in the support programs that were offered. I also investigated the alumni
perceptions about the efficacy of the supports that they received during distance learning. Finally,
this study employed culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) as a lens to identify how the supports
provided for the students are aligned with research-based, equity-focused practices. CRP is based
on three tenets: (a) students must experience academic success, (b) students must develop and/or
maintain cultural competence, and (c) students must develop a critical consciousness through
which they challenge the current status quo of the social order (Ladson-Billings, 1995b, p. 160).
This research sought to identify which supports: (a) provide students with the opportunity to
7

experience academic success, (b) help to develop their cultural competence, and (c) help students
to develop a critical consciousness.
Significance of the Study
Although technology can be useful, it is only a tool, and the processes surrounding the
technology are crucial in determining the success or failure of technology implementations in
education (Liao, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Stone, 2017). This study can contribute to existing
knowledge about learning theories and how it can be transformed to apply to online schooling, so
that policymakers, school districts, schools, and teachers can make appropriate decisions that
will allow distance learning to be as effective or maybe even more effective than face-to-face
learning. Furthermore, this study could inform homeschooling parents about effective supports to
help them improve the support they provide their own children at home.
This research focuses on the types of support that students receive to find out how
technology can be used in education to narrow the achievement gap, or at the very least, not
widen it. By exploring what academic supports recent alumni identify as effective in helping
students to learn in an online environment this study sought to expand the existing literature on
how to achieve higher order learning, so that it can be applied to online learning when teacher
and student interaction is limited. By analyzing how these supports are aligned with equity-based
practices, this study can help to identify any gaps between best practices and the existing
practices in online schools.
Definition of Terms
• Academic supports offered by schools include advising, tutoring, and mentoring
programs, as well as social and emotional learning supports and opportunities to
interact with teachers and peers.
8

• Blended learning, also known as hybrid learning, is an approach to education that
combines online educational materials and opportunities for interaction online with
traditional face-to-face classroom methods.
• Culturally relevant pedagogy is a theory that focuses on multiple aspects of student
achievement and supports students to uphold their cultural identities (Ladson-
Billings, 1995a).
• Distance learning instruction takes place when the student and instructor are in
different locations. This may include interacting through a computer and
communications technology, as well as delivering instruction and check-in time with
the teacher (California Department of Education, 2020).
• Executive functioning has to do with managing oneself and one's resources to achieve
a goal.
• Hybrid schools, also known as blended learning schools, are schools that combine
online curriculum and opportunities for interaction online with traditional face-to-face
classroom instruction.
• Modeling is learning that occurs by observing others and then doing what they do or
say.
• Online independent study schools, also known as online schools, offer online
curriculum that is consistent with the school district’s course of study as an alternative
to classroom instruction.
• Personalized learning is a learning experience that is customized for each student
according to their unique skills, abilities, preferences, background, and experiences.
9

• Self-efficacy is an individual's belief in their capacity to execute behaviors necessary
to produce specific performance attainments (Bandura, 1977).
• Self-regulation is the ability and process in which humans can control their behavior.
• Social and emotional learning is the process through which children and adults
acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to
understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show
empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make
responsible decisions
• Sociocultural theory is a cognitive development theory that states that social
interaction is central to learning (Vgotzky, 1978).
• Student engagement is the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and
passion that students show when they are learning or being taught, which extends to
the level of motivation they have to learn and progress in their education.
• Zone of proximal development is the range of tasks that a student can perform
independently and with the help of a more advanced person such as a teacher or peer
(Vgotzky, 1978).
Organization of the Study
This chapter gave an overview of the background and statement of the problem, the
research questions, and the framework used to analyze the data. It also discussed the purpose and
significance of this research. and defined the key terms used in the study. Chapter Two reviews
existing literature relevant to the study to understand what is known and what is yet unknown.
The literature review provides a background about the history and extant literature on the
efficacy of online schools. Chapter Two also explores empirical research, standards and
10

theoretical frameworks that relate to this study: learning and motivation theories, the framework
for social and emotional learning, and culturally relevant pedagogy. Chapter Two concludes by
describing how these theories work together to create the conceptual framework for this study,
and how they informed the study. Chapter Three explains the research design, sample,
population, methodology, data collection process, and method of data analysis. Chapter Four
presents the findings from the qualitative and quantitative research explained in Chapter Three.
Chapter Five provides a discussion of the recommendations for policymakers, school districts,
schools, teachers, parents, and other stakeholders for how to better support students in online or
distance learning environments.

11

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
With the continued development of educational technology in the last few decades, there
has been an increasing interest in personalized learning and the use of technology in education
(Barbour, 2019; Gemin & Pape, 2017; Marsh et al., 2009; Schroeder, 2019). In addition, due to
the COVID-19 pandemic, most teachers and students had no choice but to use technology as they
moved to distance learning models (UNESCO, 2020). However, there is mixed empirical
evidence on the effectiveness of online schools and distance education. This literature review
starts with an introduction to distance education, discussing the different meanings and
implementations of online schools, and outlining the history and development of today’s online
schools. I then review extant research on the effectiveness of online schools, examining their
advantages and disadvantages. Next, I review the learning theories that emphasize the
importance of interactions in the learning process. I then review literature associated with the
best practices and support programs currently provided in online K–12 schools, including
existing policies and standards, academic supports, social and emotional learning (SEL)
strategies, and culturally relevant pedagogy. This chapter closes with a discussion of the
conceptual framework used in this study, which incorporates concepts from existing learning
theories, recommended academic supports, social and emotional learning strategies, and
culturally relevant pedagogy.
Introduction to Online Education
This section provides some background information regarding online education by
defining the variations of online schools and discussing the history and development of online
education, including the demand for distance learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Online education is defined as “education being delivered in an online environment through the
12

use of the internet for teaching and learning” (Singh & Thurman, 2019, p. 302). Sometimes
referred to as virtual schools, virtual academies, or cyber schools, K–12 online schools are
difficult to place into specific categories because they differ in many dimensions. These
dimensions include comprehensiveness, reach, type, location, delivery, operational control, type
of instruction, grade level, teacher-student interaction, and student-student interaction (Watson et
al., 2009). Some online schools are bound by a specific district, while some schools are
multidistrict, statewide, multistate, national, and global. The various types of online schools
include district, magnet, public charter, private, and independent study schools. K–12 online
schools are offered at various grade levels, including elementary, middle, and high school.
Schools can be at a brick-and-mortar location, virtual, or a hybrid environment. The delivery of
online education can be asynchronous or synchronous, or a combination of both. Online schools
can also vary in their operational control; they can be managed by a local board, consortium,
regional authority, university, state, or independent vendor. In addition, there are different types
of instruction offered by various schools, including fully online, fully face-to-face, or a blended
learning environment. In addition, the amount of teacher-to-student and student-to-student
interactions in online schools varies from low to high (Watson et al., 2009).
History and Development of Online Schools
The origin of online and digital learning occurred prior to the advent of the Internet,
going back to the “computer-assisted instruction” (CAI) in the 1960s with the development of
the PLATO project at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, which was the first to use
computers to deliver instruction (Gemin & Pape, 2017). Initially used in higher education,
corporate and military training and simulation environments, CAI systems evolved and have
13

been used in tens of thousands of schools across the country, primarily to provide intervention
and remediation for struggling students (Gemin & Pape, 2017).
Unlike CAI, which began with a focus on in-classroom and learning lab use, many online
K–12 schools today had their roots in distance education. The early forms of distance learning
were geared toward homeschooled students and existed prior to the Internet. They use delivery
methods such as printed materials, CD-ROMS, and video conferencing to deliver instruction
(Gemin & Pape, 2017). With the advent of the Internet, distance learning evolved as online
courses were developed for advanced placement students and to provide college preparatory
courses that were not available in rural or urban schools (Gemin & Pape, 2017). Early forms of
online learning initially centered on translating classroom course syllabus to a distance education
environment and then grew to allow for teacher-student interactions, similar to a traditional
classroom.
The key benefits of CAI and online schools complemented each other, and they recently
converged into the online education landscape seen today (Gemin & Pape, 2017). Online
education has evolved and grown at the K–12 level, with 38 states offering some form of online
learning for K–12 students during the 2019–2020 pre-pandemic school year (U.S. Department of
Education, 2019-2020). These online schools adhere to the same state testing, school
accountability, and attendance policies as traditional brick-and-mortar schools (Schroeder, 2019).
They attract students and parents for various reasons, including the benefits of a personalized
education, flexibility, and addressing special needs (Marsh et al., 2009). Other students who opt
for online education come from struggling school districts or believe the current educational
model is outdated or broken and are hopeful about the possibilities of a new model (Marsh et al.,
2009; Schroeder, 2019).
14

While online education has existed and evolved for decades, distance learning was
suddenly put on the spotlight in the year 2020. On March 12, the World Health Organization
(WHO) declared that the outbreak of COVID-19 had reached the level of a global pandemic
(WHO, 2020). Less than one week later, UNESCO reported that an estimated 107 nations had
closed all schools due to the pandemic (UNESCO, 2020). These closures affected over 90% of
school children, or 1.5 billion students worldwide (UNESCO, 2020), and many schools turned, at
least temporarily, to a distance education model.
Current State of Virtual Education in the United States
The National Center for Education Statistics categorizes virtual status on a spectrum
using the following four identifiers:
1. Fully virtual/exclusively virtual: All instruction offered by the school is virtual. This
does not exclude students and teachers meeting in person for field trips, school-
sponsored social events, or assessment purposes. All students receive all instruction
virtually.
2. Primarily virtual: The school’s major purpose is to provide virtual instruction to
students, but some traditional classroom instruction is also provided. Most students
receive all instruction virtually.
3. Supplemental virtual: Instruction is directed by teachers in a traditional classroom
setting; virtual instruction supplements face-to-face instruction by teachers. Students
vary in the extent to which their instruction is virtual.
4. No virtual instruction. The school does not offer any virtual instruction. No students
receive any virtual instruction.
15

The number of exclusively virtual schools has rapidly increased during the six years
leading up to the pandemic. During the 2013–2014 school year (SY), there were a total of 478
exclusively virtual schools reported in Common Core Data (CCD), which constitutes
approximately 0.5% of all operational schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). In the
2019–2020 school year, there were 691 schools, which constitutes approximately 0.7% of all
operational schools that were exclusively virtual (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). The
student enrollment in exclusively virtual schools increased from 199,815 students in the 2013–
2014 school year to 293,717 in the 2019–2020 school year, which is an increase from 0.4% of
the total student enrollment in public schools to 0.6%. In SY 2019–2020, about 21% of public
schools and 13% of private schools offered courses entirely online, with about 200,000 students
enrolled in virtual schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). Of the 691 virtual schools in
SY 2019–2020, 590 were reported as “regular” schools—meaning they offered a general
academic curriculum rather than one focused on special needs or vocational education—218
were charter schools, and 289 were high schools. Of the 8,673 schools that were reported as
either primary virtual or supplemental virtual, 7,727 were regular schools, 624 were charter
schools, and 4,098 were high schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). In March, 2021,
one year after the pandemic reached the U.S., 43,227,539 out of 50,127,928 K–12 students had
classes moved to a distance learning model and out of these, 34,432,721 were using online
resources (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021).
Effectiveness of Online Schools: Mixed Results
This section reviews the literature on the effectiveness of K–12 online schools and the
advantages and disadvantages of online education. Many extant studies were focused on
postsecondary education. For those that were focused on K–12 education, results of the research
16

are mixed. Some studies concluded that online schools are not as effective as their traditional
counterparts, while some studies support equal or greater achievement outcomes in online
schools.
Proponents of online charter schools often cite a report funded by the U.S. Department of
Education (2009), which found that, on average, students in online learning conditions
performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. This meta-analysis of more than
1,000 empirical studies of online learning from January 1996 through July 2008 screened studies
to find those that contrasted online versus face-to-face learning. It measured student learning
outcomes, used a rigorous research design, and provided adequate information to calculate an
effect size (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). This meta-analysis of empirical literature on
the effectiveness of online blended learning found that the effectiveness of online learning has
been equivalent to face-to-face instruction, and blended approaches have been more effective
than purely face-to-face instruction (Means et al., 2013). However, the researchers found only a
small number of studies contrasting online and face-to-face learning for K–12 students, so the
results are mostly derived from studies in other settings such as medical training and higher
education. Furthermore, the authors warned that the findings do not necessarily demonstrate that
online learning is superior as a medium. They noted that the blended learning included in the
studies tended to involve more learning time, additional instructional resources, and course
elements that encourage interactions among learners (Means et al., 2013). Therefore, it is
possible that one or all these confounding variables, rather than the blended or online delivery,
led to positive outcomes for blended learning. Furthermore, other studies comparing university-
level online versus face-to-face courses found that student performance, as measured by grade, is
independent of mode of instruction (Cavanaugh & Jaquemin, 2015; Ni, 2013).
17

However, other studies had contrasting findings. In a study comparing the achievement of
students in non-classroom-based charter schools with their counterparts in traditional schools,
Buddin and Zimmer (2005) discovered that non-classroom-based charter schools in California
had much lower test scores in reading and math than their traditional school counterparts. A few
years later, Zimmer et al. (2009) expanded on Buddin and Zimmer’s study of charter schools to
include seven additional states. One important finding was a significant and substantial
achievement loss in reading and math for kindergarten students who enrolled in Ohio charter
schools, where online charter schools constituted a large part of the population studied.
Similarly, CREDO conducted a study of Pennsylvania charter schools and found that all eight of
the online charter schools included in the study performed significantly worse in reading and
math than their traditional school counterparts (CREDO, 2011). Moreover, several audits of
achievement scores on state exams showed lower scores for online charter students than their
traditional counterparts. A report that investigated reading scores of 2,729 full-time online
charter students in Colorado showed a drop of 6% over a one-year period (Hasler-Waters et al.,
2014). An audit of K–12 online charter schools in Wisconsin reported that online students scored
comparably to their traditional school counterparts in reading but lower in math (Stuiber et al.,
2010). Similar results were reported in a Minnesota audit, where the math scores of online
charter school students were far lower than their traditional school counterparts (Office of the
Legislative Auditor, 2011).
Some critics argue that there is not enough evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of
student learning and achievement in full-time online schools. Molnar (2019) found that a
surprisingly low proportion of virtual and blended schools had overall school performance
ratings available, and of the virtual schools with ratings, many of them continue to show low
18

performance. Furthermore, on-time graduation rate data were available for 290 full-time virtual
schools and 144 blended schools; the graduation rates of 50.1% in virtual schools and 61.5% in
blended schools fell far short of the national average of 84% (Molnar, 2019). Glass and Welner
(2011) reported a severe lack of evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of student learning in
full-time online schools.
Learning Theories
Empirically-based research and theories highlight the importance of human interactions
in the learning process, as students learn through observation, listening, and talking (Schunk,
2020). These opportunities are typically provided by the students’ peers and teachers in a
traditional school setting, or by parents in the traditional homeschooling model, but there is little
extant research on how these interactions occur in the online learning environment.
Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory highlights how environmental and cognitive
factors interact to influence human learning and behavior. Bandura posited that students could
learn new behavior through modeling and observation and that students’ self-efficacy or beliefs
about their own capabilities have a huge influence on learning and performance. Therefore,
Bandura emphasized the importance of developing self-regulation skills to manage students’
motivation, behavior, and learning. Bandura theorized that there is a bidirectional relationship
between the student’s personal factors, their behavioral factors, and the environmental factors.
Currently, there are few extant studies that show how these factors apply in K–12 online learning
environments.
Sociocultural theory claims that learning occurs during social interactions between
individuals, which help facilitate active participation in the learning tasks (Schunk, 2020).
According to this theory, learners build their knowledge based on their social and cultural
19

models and the setting in which they are learning, so educators need to understand students’ prior
knowledge and experiences to bridge the gap between what the students know and their zone of
proximal development (Vgotsky, 1978). Vgotsky defined the zone of proximal development as
“the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem
solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under
adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86). Because adult guidance and
collaboration with peers are typically done in traditional face-to-face settings while learning in
many online schools are primarily asynchronous and done independently, it is unclear how
students in these schools get the support to reach their zone of proximal development.
Another learning theory that emphasizes the importance of student interaction to learning
outcomes is the ICAP framework, developed by Chi and Wylie (2014). This theory defines four
types of modes used in teaching and learning—passive, active, constructive, and interactive—
and these modes determine the resulting cognitive outcome (Chi & Wylie, 2014). Interactive
learning leads to co-inferring and co-creation of knowledge, therefore, interaction is needed to
lead students to higher order learning (Chi & Wylie, 2014). This study sought to investigate if
and how this happens in an online learning environment.
Best Practices
The instructor is the most influential factor for establishing a sense of community in an
online classroom (Delahunty et al., 2013; Liao, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 1999), and teacher
presence plays a vital role in building a sense of belonging in the learning community and
student retention (Stone, 2017). This section reviews research on the best pedagogical practices
for educators in online school environments. As outlined by the California Department of
Education (2020), some of the best practices that instructors can implement to establish a sense
20

of community include the following: (a) developing activities that promote interaction and
socialization, (b) regularly communicating with students, (c) providing a communication
schedule for students, (d) providing feedback and responses in a timely manner, (e) facilitating
learner dialogue, (f) clearly communicating expectations, and (g) monitoring student
interactions. Curriculum and delivery need to be engaging, interactive, supportive, and designed
to strengthen interaction amongst students (Stone, 2017). As I analyzed the data collected in this
study, I looked for evidence of these practices.
Policies and Standards Surrounding Online Education
There are several policies and standards that provide guidelines on how to use technology
in education. This section reviews these policies and standards, as well as the extant research on
distance education pedagogy and best practices.
The U.S. Department of Education released the National Education Technology Plan, a
national educational technology policy document to provide guidelines on how to use technology
in education and to articulate a vision of equity, active use, and collaboration. This document is
regularly updated as the landscape of technology and education changes. In 2000, Congress and
the president ordered The Web-based Education Commission to assess the potential of the
Internet for learning, and they published The Power of the Internet for Learning. The report was
a national call to action for the federal government to remove barriers to innovations in learning
and for recognition of the value of the Internet as a viable delivery method to increase
opportunities for learner-centered, anywhere, anytime, anyplace, educational opportunities (Rice,
2014). In 2015, Title IV of Every Students Succeeds Act established a program to support
activities related to the effective use of technology.
21

The National Standards for Quality Online Teaching (NSQOT) was created in 2007 by
the International Association for K–12 Online Learning (iNACOL) and is regularly updated by a
committee of experts with various backgrounds in the field of K–12 online learning (Virtual
Learning Leadership Alliance, 2019). Used as a benchmark for online instruction, NSQOT
provides a framework for schools, districts, state agencies, statewide online programs, and other
interested educational organizations to improve online teaching and learning. The NSQOT is
broken into three sets of standards that are designed to complement one another: The National
Standards for Quality Online Learning (2007), the National Standards for Quality Online
Programs (2009), and the National Standards for Quality Online Courses (2011). Some of the
standards outlined in these documents related to this study include:
1. The online course design includes activities that guide learners toward promoting
ownership of their learning and self-monitoring (Standard C1).
2. The online course provides regular opportunities for learner-learner and learner-
instructor interaction, including opportunities for regular feedback about learner
progress (Standard C7).
3. The online course content and supporting materials reflect a culturally diverse
perspective that is free of bias (Standard B6).
Interaction and Social Presence
The interaction between the instructors and the students in an online learning
environment is critical to students’ success (Liao, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 1999). Students succeed
in online courses when the course allows them to be active participants (de Verneil & Berge,
2000). Learning should be constructivist and collaborative, as little learning occurs when learners
do not interact with the instructor, each other, or active learning sources (Bourne et al., 1997). It
22

is the responsibility of the educator to create a sense of online community and to promote
interaction (Carr-Chellman & Duchastel, 2001; Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997). The concept of
social presence is very important to distance education (Gunawardena, 1995), and learning
occurs from the interaction of social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence (Swan
et al., 2009). Therefore, distance education courses need to be student-centered, and a
collaborative community approach is necessary because social interaction is critical to learning
(McCombs, 2001). In a study that examined the relationship between online interactions and
learning outcomes for 466 students who were taking high‐school level online language courses
in a Midwestern virtual school showed that learner‐instructor and learner‐content interactions
had significant positive effects on satisfaction (Lin et al., 2017). The quality of teacher-student
relationships is significantly associated with students’ social functioning, behavior, engagement
in learning activities, and academic achievement (Roorda et al., 2011).
Academic Supports in Online Learning
Instructors and schools need to employ strategies to support student success in K–12
online learning environments (Ferdig, 2010). These include but are not limited to the following:
(a) multiple opportunities for feedback throughout the course, (b) online orientation programs for
students so they do not get stuck on how to use the technology, (c) rigorous and challenging
standards coupled with support, (d) tutoring and mentoring, and (e) providing multiple pathways
to access the content. For example, some students need self-pacing while others need group work
or visual resources. In addition, students should be provided mentors and tutors through multiple
means such as online chats and recorded tutorials. Collaborative projects and content that have
real world applications, as well as online career mentoring and courses, including vocational
23

programs and alternative education options, are also useful in creating new opportunities to reach
students and decrease dropout rates (Ferdig, 2010).
Self-regulated learning scaffolds in computer-based learning environments generally
produced a significantly positive effect on academic performance (Zheng, 2016). The main types
of strategies to promote self-regulated learning in online environments include asking students to
consider how they learn online, providing pacing support, monitoring engagement, and
supporting families (Carter et al., 2020). The four kinds of scaffolds that are useful in supporting
online learners include the following: (a) conceptual scaffolds that aim to provide guidance about
what to consider in a given problem, (b) metacognitive scaffolds that help students regulate the
underlying problem-solving process, (c) procedural scaffolds that provide guidance about how to
use resources or perform tasks, and (d) strategic scaffolds that provide different methods and
solution paths for students (Azevedo & Hadwin, 2005; Hannafin et al., 1999).
Social and Emotional Learning
The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) coined the
term “social and emotional learning” (SEL), which is the process of acquiring a set of social and
emotional skills within the context of a safe, supportive environment (Dusenbury et al., 2015).
The ideal learning environment encourages social, emotional, and cognitive development and
provides opportunities for practicing social-emotional skills (Dusenbury et al., 2015). The five
areas of SEL are self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and
responsible decision making (see Figure 1). These competencies are shaped and developed in
classrooms through SEL instruction and classroom climate, in the schools through schoolwide
culture, in practices and policies, at home through authentic partnerships with families and
caregivers, and within the communities through aligned learning opportunities (CASEL, n.d.).
24

Programs, strategies, and practices that promote SEL skills significantly improve social and
emotional skills, attitudes, behavior, and academic achievement (Durlak et al., 2011).

Figure 1 Framework for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
Framework for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning

Note: This figure models the competencies of social and emotional learning, and the settings in
which these competencies are developed. From What is the CASEL Framework, by Collaborative
for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL).

25

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Online charter schools enroll higher percentages of White and economically advantaged
students compared to national K–12 school enrollment averages (Mann, 2019). However,
because online charter schools still serve many students from traditionally marginalized groups,
their leaders need to apply critical lenses in developing online programming to ensure equity
(Mann, 2019). As public schools in the United States continue to make major investments in
digital learning, the variability in how they are rolled out, accessed, and supported threatens to
exacerbate rather than reduce inequities in learning opportunities (Heinrich et al., 2020).
Therefore, it is critical to ensure that schools effectively support online students to enhance
learning and reduce achievement gaps, especially for students historically underserved in K–12
schools (Heinrich et al., 2020).
This study uses culturally relevant pedagogy as a lens to examine whether the support
students receive in online and distance learning environments aligns with research-based, equity-
focused practices. According to Ladson-Billings (1995a), there are three tenets of CRP: (a) a
focus on student learning and academic success, (b) developing students' cultural competence to
acquire ethnic and social identities, and (c) supporting students' consciousness in a way that
allows them to critique the cultural norms, values and institutions that perpetuate social
inequities.
Culturally relevant teachers believe that their primary responsibility is to help students
become academically successful, while providing a way for them to maintain their cultural
integrity (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). In addition, teachers must help students to recognize,
understand, and critique current social inequities (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). Research has found
that critical consciousness not only fosters students’ commitment to act against systems of
26

injustice (Watts et al., 2011) but also increases academic achievement and engagement (Carter,
2008). School programs designed to foster critical consciousness have been shown to increase
academic engagement and achievement (Dee & Penner, 2017).
According to Ladson-Billings (1995b), there are three broad characteristics that serve as
theoretical underpinnings of culturally relevant pedagogy: the teachers’ conceptions of self and
others, the manners in which teachers structure social relations, and the teachers’ conceptions of
knowledge. In a distance learning environment, structures of social relations and interactions
differ from those in a traditional classroom setting, so I investigated how these equity-focused
practices occur in online schools.
Conceptual Framework
Using a conceptual framework that integrates standards for online learning, social
cognitive and constructivist learning theories, SEL strategies, and culturally relevant pedagogy,
this study investigated the supports provided to students in online and distance learning schools.
One common thread that connects these theories is the importance of interactions in the learning
process. Social learning theory highlights how environmental and cognitive factors interact to
influence human learning and behavior (Bandura, 1977). Therefore, teachers can support
students by modeling behavior and by teaching self-regulation skills to help students manage
their motivation, behavior, and learning, which requires interactions between the student and the
teacher. In addition, SEL strategies, which help students to acquire a set of social and emotional
skills within the context of a safe, supportive environment that provides opportunities for
practicing social-emotional skills (Dusenbury, 2015; Durlak et al., 2011), also require
interactions between the students and their teachers. According to Ladson-Billings (1995b), there
are three broad characteristics that serve as theoretical underpinnings of culturally relevant
27

pedagogy: (a) the teachers’ conceptions of self and others, (b) the manners in which teachers
structure social relations, and (c) the teachers’ conceptions of knowledge. For teachers to
structure social relations, interactions must be present.
As shown in Figure 2, the conceptual framework of this study centers around the student
and their interactions with their teachers, peers, and the curriculum content. In a distance
learning environment, where the types of interactions are different from those in traditional
schools, teachers and educational leaders can support the students by creating opportunities for
meaningful interactions. I examined the types of interactions that were available for students that
aided the learning process, as well as the programs and practices that surround these interactions
to support the students’ academic, social and emotional development. I incorporated the SEL
framework by investigating the available programs and practices that supported students’
development the five SEL competencies, namely self-awareness, self-management, social
awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision making (CASEL, n.d.). Lastly, this
framework employed culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) to identify how the supports provided
for the students are aligned with research-based, equity-focused practices. This research sought
to identify which practices and programs: (a) foster students’ academic success, (b) help to
develop students’ cultural competence, and (c) help students to develop a critical consciousness.
This conceptual framework drove the survey and interview questions, and was used as a lens to
analyze the findings, identify any gaps and create recommendations to fill any existing gaps.
28

Figure 2 Conceptual Framework for Distance Learning Supports
Conceptual Framework for Distance Learning Supports

Note: The conceptual framework of this study centers around the student and their interactions
with their teachers, peers, and the curriculum content. This conceptual framework integrates
culturally relevant pedagogy, social and emotional learning strategies, and social cognitive
learning theories, with a focus on the interactions between the student and their environment. In
online learning environments, the students’ academic, social, and emotional skills can be
developed through meaningful interactions, surrounded by equity-based practices, academic
support and SEL support programs. Adapted from What is the CASEL Framework, by
Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL).
29

Summary
The use of distance learning and online education was already on the rise, and the
COVID-19 pandemic, which caused many brick-and-mortar schools to switch to distance
learning, brought to the surface some questions and concerns about online schools. There are
mixed findings about the effectiveness of online schools, as the use of online technology is not
what determines success; rather, the processes, pedagogy, and support that surround the
technology are what determines the level of student success. Social learning theories highlight
the importance of human interactions in the learning process. These opportunities are typically
provided by the students’ peers and teachers in a traditional school setting, or by parents in the
traditional homeschooling model. It is unclear how students who attend online independent study
or distance learning schools receive the interactions they need to achieve success. Empirical
studies, although mostly focused on higher education, support the use of interactions and
student-centered collaborative learning communities in online learning environments. Other
studies provide recommendations on how to support online learners, through practices such as
scaffolding, tutoring, mentoring, and building self-regulated learning environments. I reviewed
the existing national standards and pedagogical best practices that guide schools and educators in
supporting online students so that I could have a benchmark with which to compare the results.
In addition, I reviewed literature that reinforced the need for support and strategies to help
students succeed academically while developing their own cultural competence and critical
consciousness.
Very few studies have examined the strategies and practices that support students’
academic, social, and emotional learning in K–12 online schools, and no studies have been done
to investigate former students’ perceptions about the effectiveness of the practices and support
30

programs provided in online high schools. This study can contribute to the existing literature by
providing quantitative and qualitative data to help educational leaders in online and distance
learning schools make informed decisions about programs and practices they can implement to
best support students in the online learning environment.
In Chapter Three, I discuss the methodology I used to study the academic, social, and
emotional learning supports provided to K–12 online students and the perceptions of former
students on the efficacy of these supports.

31

Chapter Three: Methodology
While the use of technology in education could be beneficial, it is insufficient on its own.
Students who engage in online and distance learning need academic and social-emotional
learning support to achieve the desired learning outcomes from an online curriculum (Carr-
Chellman & Duchastel, 2001; Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997; Swan et al., 2009). According to
sociocultural theory, learning occurs during social interactions between individuals, which helps
facilitate active participation in the learning tasks (Schunk, 2020). However, there is little extant
literature that covers how the bidirectional relationships between the students, their behavior, and
their environment apply in online and distance learning environments in the K–12 setting.
The purpose of this study was to explore the supports in online or distance learning that
provide the opportunities for these interactions. This study sought to understand the types of
academic and social-emotional learning support that students receive during distance learning.
The research questions were:
1. What types of support do students receive at online independent study schools and
during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools?
2. What are alumni perceptions about the efficacy of the academic and social-emotional
learning supports during distance learning?
3. How do the supports that high school students receive align with research-based,
equity-focused practices?
Methodology
This study utilized a mixed methodological approach because some of the research
questions probe the relationships between variables while others search for meaning, context,
and processes, so it was appropriate to use both quantitative and qualitative methods. For the
32

quantitative portion of the study, a nonexperimental design was appropriate because this study
did not involve the manipulation of variables. Rather, I looked at the quantitative data to make
descriptive and inferential claims about patterns or relationships within the data, which called for
a nonexperimental design (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Sample and Population
The target population for this study was high school alumni in San Diego County who
participated in distance learning during the 2020–2021 school year. Due to the COVID-19
pandemic, many schools transitioned to distance learning, but this research did not encompass all
of them. I chose to study this population because the use of online schools and distance learning
is growing in the K–12 field, and it would be valuable to understand what types of support were
perceived as useful and where there are gaps in support, to better understand how to support
students through their distance learning experience. I chose high schools because there is a lot of
past research that studied online learning in higher education, but there are few extant studies
that investigate the types of support available in the K–12 online learning environment. I chose
alumni as participants because relatively little research has captured the voices of students in K-
12 online charter schools (Waters et al., 2014). Studying recent alumni who are eighteen years or
older will give the participants an opportunity to reflect on their experiences and provide the
student perspective while mitigating the risks involved with studying minors. I wanted to gain a
greater understanding of students’ perspective to provide useful insight in building student
support systems.
To get access to the participants for the quantitative portion of the study, I sent a request
for participation to four administrators at public charter high schools in San Diego County that
offered distance learning during the 2020–2021 school year. Two of the administrators
33

responded and agreed to participate: one from a brick-and-mortar school that is traditionally in-
person but transitioned to distance learning during the pandemic, and one from an online school
that has all their curriculum online and offers in-person and virtual student support. I asked these
two administrators to forward an introductory email to their recent alumni who were at least 18
years old. The introductory email explained the study, requested participation, provided informed
consent information, and included instructions and a link to take the online survey. The
administrator from the traditionally in-person school forwarded the introductory email to
approximately 89 alumni, and the administrator from the online school sent it to 238 alumni. The
survey received a total of 32 responses from both schools.
For the qualitative portion of the study, the sampling technique used was a combination
of purposeful sampling and voluntary response sampling. A purposeful sample is appropriate
when researchers need to select individuals or sites based on specific criteria (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). The study focused on high school alumni in San Diego County who participated in
distance learning during the 2020–2021 school year, so I used purposeful sampling to select
participants who fit the following criteria for selection:
• attended high school during the 2020–2021 school year at a public charter school in
San Diego County
• used distance learning as the primary mode of instruction and curriculum delivery in
the 2021–2022 school year.
• at least 18 years old at the time of the study
At the end of the survey instrument, the participants were asked if they are willing to participate
in the interview portion of this study. If they answered Yes,” they were asked to enter their email
address so that I can send them additional information for the interview. Of the 32 survey
34

respondents, eight alumni volunteered to participate in the interview portion of the study. I
contacted all of the eight volunteers to arrange the interviews and conducted each interview on
Google Meet.
Instrumentation
The methods of data collection used were surveys, interviews, and document review. An
online survey was used to understand alumni perceptions about the types of support provided
during distance learning. Supplementing the exploratory and defining nature of the quantitative
methods with qualitative methods was helpful in better understanding why certain supports are
effective in terms of alumni perceptions. This research utilized interviews to gather context and
meaning behind the former students’ perceptions about the types of support that are available. In
addition, a document review was used to better understand the context of the supports provided
in each of the schools.
Quantitative Instrument
The quantitative instrument used was a 22-question survey developed using Qualtrics,
with four demographic questions, fifteen Likert-scale questions, and three open-ended questions
to allow respondents to provide any additional information about the academic, social, and
emotional learning support they received that were not provided in the closed-ended questions.
The best surveys have a mix of open- and closed-ended items but mostly closed-ended items
because the aim is for a quantitative and standardized instrument (Robinson & Leonard, 2019).
Most of the questions created for this survey were closed-ended with a rating scale, where the
respondent must state whether they agreed, disagreed or were neutral about the options as
presented, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. This instrument helped answer the
research questions. The questions inquired about the academic and social-emotional learning
35

supports provided to students while engaging in distance learning, focusing on how the students
were supported in the five competencies of social and emotional learning: self-awareness, self-
management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision making (CASEL,
n.d.). The purpose of the quantitative instrument was to provide numeric data to represent alumni
perceptions of the types of support provided in distance education. To design the instrument, I
followed the steps similar to those that were outlined in Survey methods for educators:
Collaborative survey development: (a) identify the topics of interest; (b) identify relevant,
existing survey items; (c) draft new survey items and adapt existing items; (d) review draft
survey items; and (e) refine the draft survey with pretesting using cognitive interviewing (Irwin
& Stafford, 2016). The survey items were pretested and reviewed with stakeholders to identify
and correct problems with the survey and to ensure that the survey items elicit the information
intended.
Qualitative Instruments
This study utilized interviews to answer the research questions and better understand the
students’ experiences and beliefs. Qualitative research seeks to understand how people make
sense of their world and the experiences they have in the world (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
purpose of using qualitative, narrative inquiry is to understand the students’ perspectives through
their stories and responses to the questions. The interview protocol started with an introduction
to give the participants an overview of the purpose of the study and to remind them of their rights
as participants. The interview consisted of 12 questions about their experiences, opinions, and
beliefs as alumni who participated in distance learning. The questions investigated alumni
perceptions about the opportunities for interactions with their teachers and peers, and inquired
about the programs and practices that supported their academic, social and emotional
36

development. The interview questions also asked about how the supports helped their academic
achievement, cultural knowledge, and critical consciousness—the three tenets of culturally
relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995b). Similar to the quantitative instrument, the interview
protocol was reviewed using mock interviews to ensure validity and reliability.
Documents from the sample schools were reviewed to better understand the context and
the types of support offered by the schools. Some documents and artifacts that helped answer the
research questions were the schools’ websites and resource lists to see what resources and
programs the schools offer. I also reviewed documents provided by the administration and the
counseling team. I used external documents and artifacts to help provide context for my research
questions, such as “National Standards for Quality Online Teaching and National Standards for
Quality Online Programs” (Virtual Learning Leadership Alliance, 2019). In addition, I reviewed
national and state standards that provide guidelines on how to use technology in education, such
as the “National Educational Technology Plan” (U.S. Department of Education, 2017) and
“Designing a High-Quality Course Online” (California Department of Education, 2020), to
conduct a comparative analysis between the supports provided in the schools and the supports
suggested in the guidelines.
Data Collection
To collect quantitative data, I emailed four administrators from public charter high
schools in San Diego County who participated in distance learning during the 2020–2021 school
year, to request their approval for participation in the study (see Appendix A). Two of the
administrators responded and agreed to participate: one from a brick-and-mortar school that is
traditionally in-person but transitioned to distance learning during the pandemic, and one from an
online school that has all their curriculum online and offers in-person and virtual student support.
37

After thanking them for their time, I sent them an email to forward to all alumni who graduated
in 2021 and were at least 18 years old (see Appendix B). This email to the potential participants
explained the study, requested participation, and provided informed consent information and
instructions on how to take the Qualtrics online survey (see Appendix C). It is imperative to
respect the rights of all human participants in any behavioral study, and researchers need to
ensure that participants understand the research and protect their wellbeing throughout (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, I needed to adhere to informed consent procedures when conducting
both the surveys and interviews to ensure that the participants knew that their participation was
completely voluntary and that they had the right to withdraw at any time, without penalty. The
administrator from the traditionally in-person school sent my introductory email to
approximately 89 alumni, and the administrator from the online school sent it to 238 alumni. The
online survey was available for two months, and reminder emails were sent two weeks after the
initial email request. Online surveys, rather than in-person paper questionnaires, allowed access
to more participants during the pandemic. The survey took approximately five to 10 minutes to
complete and was anonymous so that the responses could not be tied to the identity of the
respondent. At the end of the survey instrument, the participants were asked if they are willing to
participate in the interview portion of this study, to be conducted using Google Meet. If they
answered Yes,” they were asked to enter their email address so that I can send them additional
information for the interview. The survey received a total of 32 responses from both schools, and
eight out of the 32 respondents stated that they were willing to participate in the interviews.
To collect the qualitative data, interviews were conducted remotely using video
conferencing to reduce any potential risks of contracting COVID, for participants and
researchers alike. As described in the previous section, a purposeful sampling was used to select
38

survey participants to ensure that I gathered data from the target population, and a voluntary
response sampling was used to select the eight participants out of the survey participants who
were willing to participate in the interview. The respondents who stated that they were willing to
participate in the interview were contacted via email (see Appendix D), to provide additional
information about the study and a written consent form to fill out (see Appendix E). Once the
written consent forms were signed and returned to me, I contacted the participants to identify a
time that was convenient for them. With the participants’ consent, the interviews were recorded,
so that they could be accurately transcribed to ensure data quality. I used a semi-structured
interview protocol (see Appendix F) to have a standardized format and guidelines while allowing
some flexibility to conduct the interview in a conversational manner. This type of interview
protocol allowed any unexpected findings to emerge (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Each
interview lasted approximately 45 minutes to one hour. Follow-up calls were made only to
clarify any important information.
I maintained a secure and confidential data set and was thoughtful about how the data
were handled. The video interviews were confidential, and I only collected identifiable
information to allow me to keep track of notes and video recordings. All data are stored on a
password protected computer. I created a backup of the interview recordings and will delete the
files three years after the research was completed.
Data Analysis
In this mixed method study, I used a convergent parallel design, where quantitative and
qualitative data were collected simultaneously and the findings were interpreted together. I chose
this design because the quantitative and qualitative data in this study did not rely on each other,
so the data analysis could happen parallel to each other, which was helpful in managing the time
39

constraints of the research. The convergent parallel design was appropriate for research
practitioners like me who are interested in linking and associating findings from the qualitative
and quantitative components of the study so that they result in a coherent narrative (Lochmiller
& Lester, 2017). This allowed me to triangulate the data and findings from the surveys,
interviews, and document review. I used the basic steps in qualitative and quantitative analysis:
prepare the data for analysis, explore the data, analyze the data, represent and interpret the
results, and validate the data and findings (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Quantitative Data
I used the Qualtrics Data and Statistics tool to prepare and analyze the data to answer
specific research questions. To answer RQ1, I compiled the survey results and utilized
descriptive statistics to identify the degree to which the respondents agreed with each statement.
These numeric values helped to summarize the participants’ perceptions on the types of support
provided to them during distance learning.
Qualitative Data
The recorded interviews were transcribed and coded, and I used categories to organize
and assign meanings about the relationships, differences, and similarities in the coded passages.
These categories allowed me to analyze the themes that emerged regarding the nature of the
supports that the former students perceive as effective. As a qualitative researcher, I am the
primary instrument in the interviews and document analysis that I conduct (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Therefore, my positionality and biases could have shaped many aspects of the study,
which could have affected the credibility and trustworthiness of my study. When analyzing and
disseminating the data, I did my best to avoid unintentionally misrepresenting any of the
information. One way I did this was to record the interviews so that I could have accurate
40

transcripts of what was said. Some of the other strategies that I used to enhance the credibility
and trustworthiness of this study include the following: (a) triangulation; (b) copious notes with
rich, thick descriptions; (c) taking verbatim quotes; and (d) member checking. I wanted to give
voice to the participants, so I allowed them to participate in interpreting the data instead of
speaking on behalf of them (Atkins & Duckworth, 2019). In addition, I allowed participants to
check my findings to ensure that my interpretation was aligned with what they said and that any
inconsistencies were noted.
Summary
Using a mixed methodological approach, this study collected data from high school
alumni from public charter schools in San Diego County who participated in distance learning in
the 2020–2021 school year. A survey was administered to collect quantitative data, and
interviews and document analysis were conducted to collect qualitative data. The sampling
methods used to select the participants for the interviews were a combination of purposeful
sampling to ensure that participants met the criteria and volunteer sampling to gather participants
who were willing to participate in the interviews. I prepared the data for analysis; explored and
analyzed the data; and represented, interpreted, and validated the findings to answer the research
questions and to better understand alumni perceptions of the supports provided during distance
learning. The findings of this study are discussed in Chapter Four, and the implications of this
research are discussed in Chapter Five.

41

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to examine the support structures that students receive in
online independent study schools and during distance learning at San Diego County public
charter high schools. The goal of this research was to better understand the teaching practices
and support programs provided to online learners and to investigate the perceptions of former
students about these supports.
This study sought to answer three research questions:
1. What types of support do students receive at online independent study schools and
during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools?
2. What are the perceptions of alumni about the efficacy of the academic and social-
emotional learning support that they received as high school students in online
schools and during distance learning?
3. How do the supports that high school students receive in distance learning schools
align with research-based, equity-focused practices?
Participants
The participants of this study were high school alumni in San Diego County who
participated in distance learning during the 2020–2021 school year. This study focused on two
public charter schools: one blended-learning school that has all of their curriculum online and
offers in-person and virtual student support, and one brick-and-mortar school that is traditionally
in-person but transitioned to distance learning during to the pandemic. Of the participants who
attended the online school, 63% were blended learners who participated in in-person activities,
and 37% were completely virtual. There was a total of 32 participants in the quantitative portion
of the study. Table 1 displays the race and ethnicity with which the participants identified.
42

Table 1 Race and Ethnicity of Survey Participants

Race and Ethnicity of Survey Participants

Race and ethnicity n %
White 13 40
Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Latinx 12 38
Asian or Asian American 2 6
American Indian or Alaska Native 2 6
Black or African American 2 6
Middle Eastern or Northern African 1 3
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1 3
Not listed or prefer not to answer 3 9

Note: Participants were able to select multiple options, therefore percentages do not add up to
100%.

Eight of the survey respondents volunteered to participate in the interview portion of the
study. The students who were interviewed in the study included six alumni who recently
graduated as independent study students in a blended-learning charter school, and two
participants who graduated from a traditionally in-person, brick-and-mortar project-based charter
school. Four of the interview participants identified as Latino American and Hispanic, two
identified as Asian American, one identified as Black or African American and one identified as
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. Three of the interview participants identified as
female, three identified as male, and two identified as non-binary or other. Prior to the pandemic,
two of the participants were attending school in person, three of the participants were completing
the curriculum completely online, and three of the participants were participating in a blended
43

learning program where they attended half-day programs onsite while also completing
assignments in an online curriculum platform.
Interactions and Supports for Distance Learners
RQ1 sought to better understand the types of support that students receive at online
independent study schools and during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high
schools. I examined the results for this research question by looking at three areas: (a) student-to-
teacher and student-to-student interactions, (b) academic support, and (c) social and emotional
support strategies and programs.
Teacher-Student Interactions
The interaction between the instructors and the students in an online learning environment is
critical to students’ success (Liao, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 1999). This type of interaction was
generally occurring in the schools in this study, with 81% of the participants responding that they
had opportunities for teacher-student interactions, and 19% of the respondents saying they did
not have opportunities to interact with their teachers on a regular basis. However, the types of
teacher-student interactions varied among the interview participants. For some students at the
online school, this interaction happened throughout the day through in-person meetings, phone
calls, text messages, and video conferences with their assigned educational coordinator (EC),
who is their main point of contact for the school. As one participant described their daily
interactions with their EC,
When I was interacting my teacher, it was mostly about schoolwork, like how many
assignments I had to do that day, the ones I haven’t done, the ones I was supposed to do.
If I needed any help, they told me about the workshops I could go to.
44

While some interactions centered around academic support, others interactions were more
focused on building relationships.
My EC would be the only teacher I would talk to. It was funny. We would say a lot of
things. It could have been about work or anything that happened during the weekend. We
were just talking to talk. It wouldn’t always be about school. It happened the whole time I
was there.
Students were required to attend video conference calls with their educational coordinator on a
weekly basis, and to check-in with them daily via text, call, or email. For some students in online
schools, these were the only interactions that they had with teachers at the school. As one student
recalled:
I did not have any workshops. Maybe I would message and email my EC about certain
things I had to do and they would answer me back. I think those were the only times. It
was mostly questions about assignments or opening up quizzes and tests.
For some students, the communication with their educational coordinator mainly focused on
logistics and assignment of tasks to complete. The length and depth of the teacher-student
interactions varied because the requirements for the regular check-in communication between the
educational coordinator and the student were not clearly defined.
Some students with individualized learning plans (IEP), were also required to have
regular in-person or virtual meetings with their educational specialist (ES). These meetings
centered around academic and functional goals that are stated on the student’s annual IEP. One
participant who had an individualized learning plan recalled their interactions with the
educational specialist:
45

I would have a different program with a second teacher for one-on-one support and she
assisted me with my assignments for about one to two hours. When I would go into the
one-on-one meetings with the ES, that would be the most time I would interact and be
engaged with a teacher. I would be able to talk to them about anything, basically. It
would be on a daily basis and we would ask about how each other’s day was, what we
had planned for the weekend.
While the meetings with the educational specialist focused on pre-defined goals, relationship
building was also a part of the practice.
The online school also offered optional virtual workshops and office hours with the
teachers, which allowed opportunities for teacher-student interactions. However, the level of
interaction varied in these synchronous classes, ranging from one-way communication, where
the teacher lectured for the majority of the class, to in-depth group discussions about the content.
One participant recalled:
I did a government workshop for a bit. It was a fun experience but it mainly would just
talk about government. It was recorded so it was just him talking and then if we have
questions, we would ask him after he stopped recording.
While some of the workshops were spent on direct instruction, other workshops were more
interactive. One interview participant described one of the workshops in which he participated:
The teacher was really helpful. I really understood it, I’m not gonna’ lie. He explained it
well enough to where I was like, ‘I could do it on my own.’ He was asking us questions
like, ‘What do you think?’ He wasn’t doing the work for us, if that makes sense. He
would read the questions and if we didn’t understand the question, he would explain the
question. Once he explained it, he would ask who has an answer and if any of us didn’t
46

have an answer he would explain what the answer was, and we would say the answer
back in our own words.
The opportunities for teacher-student interaction in the virtual workshops varied, depending on
the teaching style of the instructor of the class. For participants from online schools who did not
take any virtual workshops or have an IEP, teacher-student interactions happened with only their
educational coordinator. The depth, frequency and length of the interactions between the students
and their educational coordinator also varied, based on the teacher, the student, and the
relationship between the two.
For the alumni from a traditionally in-person school that transitioned to distance learning
during the pandemic, there seemed to be a lot more teacher-student interactions throughout the
week, as the schedule consisted mostly of synchronous classes. As one interview participant
described:
On a typical Monday, we would meet in the morning for 30 minutes and the rest of the
day would be ours. There were no classes on Monday; it was solely for working on
whatever work we needed to catch up on. Sometimes we would be given smaller
assignments, specifically made for Mondays, so that we had something to do, or just
catch up on late work or any work we had throughout the week. When it wasn’t
Monday—like Tuesday through Friday—a typical day would usually just be like normal
classes for the whole entire day. We had block schedules, so it would be that we start with
a quick morning meeting which just goes over what we had to do that day because each
day would be different, and then move on with our classes as usual. We would be given
our assignments for what to do. We typically had asynchronous time sometime that day,
so there would usually be an hour, sometime in the middle of the day or towards the end
47

of the day, where we would go offline just to work on the assignment that we were given,
and then we would join back again to meet again and either go over what we worked on
or have another lesson.
The schedule at the traditionally in-person school mirrored what a typical day looked like prior
to the pandemic, but just transitioned to online, using video conferencing technology such as
Zoom. The participant continued to describe the other classes that they had throughout the week,
which were also similar to the classes they had pre-pandemic:
Some days, we had Advisory in the morning where we would meet up with our advisors
and then we would proceed onto our next class. We also had electives at the end of the
day but those were optional at the time. Typically, when we were in-person, they’re not
optional, but during online [schooling], they were optional. So, some students had
electives and some didn’t. I didn’t have an elective; usually the students that didn’t have
an elective would use the time for anything else, like homework or some type of
volunteer work [or] jobs, if they had it outside of school.
Compared to the online school, the traditionally in-person school had significantly more teacher-
student interactions because they required more synchronous classes. The schedule at the
traditionally in-person school consisted of predominantly synchronous classes, with
approximately one hour of asynchronous time per day. In contrast, the schedule at the
traditionally online school consisted of asynchronous learning time throughout the day, with
occasional one-hour workshops and meetings with their educational coordinator.
Student-Student Interactions
According to the survey respondents, student-student interactions were not as common, as 50%
of the respondents agreed, 25% disagreed, and 25% neither agreed nor disagreed when asked
48

whether they had opportunities to interact with their peers during distance learning. In the
interviews, the exclusively online students stated that the social interaction through school was
almost nonexistent and that they needed a social life outside of school in order to interact with
their peers. One student recalled attending occasional field trips as one of the few opportunities
for interaction that they had:
I do remember the field trips; those were really fun. We lived 30 minutes from the town
with a Walmart, so interaction level was really low. I was very social when I was in
elementary and middle school, but going into high school, because I was in an isolated
area, my social skills got rusty. My dad is a worship pastor so were very involved in the
church. Almost every day in elementary and middle school, I was in the church, so I had
the youth and the kids with me, so I wasn’t lonely. I just didn’t have any friends at
school, per se. So the field trips—even though I was a teenager and didn’t feel like I
needed the interactions—were good for me. I’m glad I was informed on that, so I could at
least go to some of them. I did make a friend, and one is better than none.
As this participant described, the opportunities for interaction with other students were rare, but
they were beneficial.
Before the pandemic, some students attended an optional on-site program at the school’s
resource center. One participant described a typical morning during this program:
I would get there at eight o’clock and wait until they start at nine. I get on my laptop and
log in. We would have a discussion about a warm-up topic, and move on to assignments
while the teacher would walk around to assist you with anything that is needed. The best
opportunities to engage with other students would probably be during the morning time
when you just got into class or there would be a break time when you have fifteen
49

minutes to socialize. Me, personally, I’m not too much of a social person but I did make a
couple of friends there.
While the on-site program allowed students to socialize with other students during their free
time, the program itself did not seem to center around student-student interactions, as the
students worked independently, with assistance given by the teachers on an as-needed basis.
After the pandemic, student-student interactions at the online school occurred during the
optional virtual workshops or synchronous classes to supplement the online asynchronous
curriculum. One of the interview participants noted, “Some students choose to stay after the end
of the class to work with other students on the assignments, which led to student-student
interactions.” However, one of the other participants commented that, “There was a lot less
interactions and engagement when I was in Zoom classes and distance learning because there
was no physical teacher there to force us to talk to each other.” Some students chose to interact
with other students in the virtual classes, while some students felt less engaged in a virtual
environment.
In addition to the virtual workshops that focused on academic classes, student-student
interactions occurred during Advisory, also known as Homeroom classes, where a group of
students and a teacher met weekly to discuss various topics ranging from current events to time
management. One interview participant, who did not participate in the virtual workshop classes
and was new to the online school when the pandemic hit, recalled meeting other students only
through the Advisory class:
Advisory was the only time I engaged with other students from the school because I
hadn’t met them previously since I was new. It was the only time I got to meet them and
50

talk to them. The group check-in questions during Advisory made me feel included and
helped me to learn more about other students.
For some students, especially those who did not participate in virtual workshops or other
activities, the Advisory class was their only opportunity to meet and interact with other students
at their school.
For the alumni who graduated from the traditionally in-person school that transitioned to
distance learning, the student-student interactions happened during the breakout rooms for their
synchronous classes. However, as one interview participant described, the attempts to promote
student-student interactions in the breakout rooms were not always successful:
The breakout rooms were the only opportunities I really had to engage with other
students. They really tried to make breakout rooms as prominent as possible. They
wanted to incorporate it a lot into almost every assignment we did, because they
understood that our engagement was dropping and because we weren’t talking anymore.
They wanted us to have some interaction with people so they tried to make the breakout
rooms as frequent as possible. Everyone’s engagement was down, so no one was
engaging in the breakout rooms. We would be put in breakout rooms, but there would be
times where no one would talk at all, for like the whole entire session when we were
supposed to be working on something together. Typically, we would be put in there and
everyone would just fill out the document and everyone would do the work. Everyone
would do the assignment that we needed to do, but there would just be no voice
interactions at all.
Allowing students to have small group discussions in breakout rooms could provide some
opportunities for student-student interactions. However, in order for teachers to successfully
51

encourage meaningful discussions between the students, they need to structure the activities in a
way such that collaboration and discussions are necessary. As one interview participant
commented:
For a lot of the activities, they wanted us to engage with each other, but we didn’t
necessarily have to. It could have been done without us talking at all. If we had
something, where it was on the low that we did have to communicate, and it was shown
that we had to communicate in order to get this done, that would be the only way that
would have been helpful. But for a lot of the assignments we were given, they were able
to be done without talking at all, so that’s the route we took instead of having to talk.
The tasks provided to the students can drive the level of interactions that occur in the breakout
rooms. Therefore, the tasks and activities need to be designed intentionally to promote
discussions.
Other teachers were able to promote student-student discussions my making it mandatory
to participate. As one interview participant from the traditionally in-person school described, this
method worked for many students:
I think I was the most engaged I was during distance learning was when we had
discussions. Discussions, especially mandatory discussions, were usually the only time
where there was a good amount of active participation from the students. Throughout the
whole year of online [schooling], there wasn’t much participation. Nobody really had
their cameras on; nobody really wanted to talk as a whole; no one really wanted to have
their voice out there or anything. But during the mandatory discussions, everyone was
trying to get participation points, so obviously everyone was engaged, but there was still
a genuine engagement. People did really like the topics we were talking about. They
52

wanted to share their thoughts on everything and then also feed off of others’ thoughts.
That’s when I felt the most engaged, especially since we didn’t have that—mostly
throughout the year–that type of engagement with other people. So, during those times,
being able to talk to people again made me feel like I was back in person for once.
Throughout the whole year, after not being in person, it made me feel like I was finally
back there with people, surrounded by people. Being able to hear their thoughts and share
my thoughts, and getting a feel for what everyone thinks about what we’re learning.
To motivate students to participate in the discussion, the teachers assigned participation points
and monitored the number of times that the students engaged in the conversation. Students were
instructed to speak a minimum number of times to earn the participation points for the class. The
interview participant from the traditionally in-person school described these discussions:
There were no camera requirements; we were just required to speak. [The teacher] would
usually give us a random number of times, but typically it would be around three times.
Some people would even speak more. There was a sense of genuine engagement. I think
everyone feels the same way–that when we had those discussions, they really did feel like
we were back in person. It was the only time you were hearing your other classmates’
voices.
Although the students were initially given extrinsic motivation to participate in the discussions,
they eventually engaged genuinely in the conversations. These opportunities for student-student
interactions proved to be instrumental not only in the students’ academic experience, but also for
their social-emotional learning.
53

Academic Supports
There are recommended strategies that instructors and schools could utilize to support
student success in K–12 online learning environments. These include the following: (a) multiple
opportunities for feedback throughout the course, (b) online orientation programs for students so
they do not get stuck on how to use the technology, (c) rigorous and challenging standards
coupled with support, (d) tutoring and mentoring, and (e) providing multiple pathways to access
the content (Ferdig, 2010). According to the study participants, some of these recommended
supports were provided in their schools. Eighty-one percent of the survey respondents agreed
that the school provided programs and practices that supported their academic success, while
19% disagreed with the statement. Some examples of academic support identified by the
respondents include writing workshops or virtual synchronous classes to supplement the core
courses such as math, English, history and science. For example, one participant from the online
school asserted, “the workshops would always help me for sure. If it wasn’t for the workshops,
honestly, I would probably still be stuck on assignments.”
Multiple interview participants from the online school described self-regulated learning
scaffolds they received, such as providing pacing support, monitoring engagement, and
supporting families, which have been found to have positive effects on academic performance in
online learning environments (Carter et al., 2020). All interview participants mentioned that their
educational coordinator provided supports such as assignment lists to help with pacing,
monitoring their engagements through the online reports, and working with the them and their
families to help them stay on track. When asked about the types of academic support they
received, one interview participant claimed:
54

My EC was my main academic support because every time I needed a test opened, my
EC would answer 99% of the time, even if it was after school hours. And if I asked for
help, the teachers would help me find ways so I can understand.
The educational coordinator is the student’s primary point of contact in receiving academic
support. The participant continued to describe a typical conversation with their EC that focused
on monitoring their engagement and providing pacing support:
My EC would be on it. They would be like, ‘Hey, remember you have to do five
assignments each day.’ When I don’t complete five in a day, they would tell me, ‘Hey,
you didn’t do your five assignments yesterday; you only did three, so you have do two
extra assignments today.’
The support provided through the relationships built with teachers helped the students to self-
regulate and manage their workload. These examples demonstrate some of the best practices that
instructors can implement to support students, such as regularly communicating with students
and clearly communicating expectations. One interview participant mentioned that their
educational coordinator had them “complete weekly progress checkers to monitor [their] own
progress towards completing [their] courses and helped [them] to create a plan to complete
classes on schedule.” This type of pacing support helps to improve the students’ academic
performance.
The traditionally in-person school provided similar academic support programs and
practices. They also provided office hours to allow students to ask clarifying questions about the
curriculum. Although students at this school had more teacher-student interactions than the
students at the online school, the alumni participants of this study found this academic support
helpful. As one interview participant commented:
55

I attended [office hours] sometimes because there are times when I needed more
clarification on the work. Especially when all the students were on one Zoom call, it was
kind of hard to ask some clarifying questions. You were wondering, ‘Oh, did they already
answer this? Did I miss this?’ So going to office hours helps me a lot to be able to ask
them the question, and it’s better to have the one-on-one interaction with them because I
don’t have that social anxiety of asking this in front of 60 kids on Zoom, when they’re all
listening to me … I know there were times where I would have questions and I would
actually just wait for office hours because I wanted to just ask them by myself, and I ask
them a few more follow up questions that I wanted to ask them as well. Those office
hours helped.
Besides the office hours, another type of support that the traditionally in-person school had in
common with the online school were the regular check-ins with a teacher who was their primary
point of contact. Similar to the educational coordinator role at the online school, advisors at the
traditionally in-person school provided students with academic and social-emotional support,
through regular check-in meetings:
Our advisor would always do grade checks, and this was something that was always a
thing before online [schooling]; they just implemented it into the Zoom classes. This is
what every advisor does; I know all advisors usually do grade checks. They do it on their
own and based on what they see, they would have a talk with you. Even if your grades
are good, they would still talk to you, and be like, ‘Your grades are good, but how are you
still managing your social life, your mental health? Is it still good?’ Then if your grades
are poor, they would ask you, ‘What’s going on? What do you need help with? What
could be fixed?’ So, no matter what your grades looked, they would still ask you because
56

on both aspects, good grades could also mean that you’re not prioritizing your mental
health, and poor grades could still be the same thing. Maybe you’re not prioritizing your
mental health, and maybe there’s other aspects going wrong that’s hindering you from
having good grades.
Both the traditionally in-person school and the online school provided a teacher for each student,
to support their academic and social-emotional success.
Participants in the study also identified practices and supports that provided conceptual,
metacognitive, procedural, and strategic scaffolds for student learning. At the online school,
virtual workshops provided guidance about what to consider in a given problem and provided
different methods and solution paths. As one of the interview participants explained, the virtual
workshops “helped us with the processes to break down and solve the problems.” They were also
offered optional office hours where the teacher provided strategic scaffolds that guided them
through different methods to solve the problems. As one interview participant described their
interaction with the teacher when they attended office hours, “I was able to come in with
questions and the teacher would guide me through possible ways to answer it, until I could figure
out a way that works for me.” In addition, interviewees described how teachers and their advisor
offered guidance about how to use the resources provided in the online curriculum. For example,
one participant stated, “The teacher would ask me what the question is asking, what I already
know and how I can use that to answer the problem.” This type of metacognitive scaffolding can
help virtual learners access the resources available to them to improve learning.
At the traditionally in-person school, teachers also used methods to scaffold the group
discussions, such as giving the students the topic and questions ahead of time, and allowing them
to write their thoughts prior to the oral discussion:
57

We would also have a Google Classroom assignment to write our responses to the
questions before our discussions and we would usually use those responses as a way to
get us started on the discussions. So, we would read other people’s discussions–well
usually [the teacher] would read it–and then they would be like, ‘Okay what comments
do you have about this? Agree or disagree? What do you think?’ So, in writing those
answers—and everyone was able to see the Google Classroom responses—everyone
knew what everyone said, but she used those to get everyone kickstarted a little bit to
start the discussion. The assignment would be given to us, usually in the morning or
sometimes even the day before. We would have the whole day to think about what we
wanted to say.
By giving the students time and space to prepare their thoughts, the teachers were able to
facilitate meaningful discourse, both written using an online platform, and orally during the class
discussions. This scaffolding allowed the students to better organize their ideas and become more
comfortable with engaging in the discussions.
When asked about examples of academic support that they received, other participants
mentioned teacher feedback on writing assignments and teachers’ office hours, where they were
able to meet with the teachers who grade their writing assignments. They also mentioned in-
person study groups to work with other students who are taking the same course; orientation
courses to train them on how to use the technology and executive skills required to become
successful in independent study; and academy paths that guided them to take classes that are
aligned with the college admissions requirements. Table 2 lists the examples of the academic
support programs and practices described by the survey and interview participants which align
with the recommended best practices.
58

Table 2 Academic Support Programs and Practices
Academic Support Programs and Practices
Best practices Examples of programs and practices
Opportunities for feedback Written feedback from graders for all writing
assignments; regular check-in with educational
coordinator; office hours available for teacher/grader
of every class offered to discuss written feedback
Orientation programs to help
students learn how to use the
technology

Mandatory orientation meeting and course for all
students; technology lessons and troubleshooting help
from their educational coordinator; available videos to
help all students learn and review how to use the
technology
Tutoring

Office hours available to access every teacher; study
groups and supervised study hall with credentialed
teachers; specialized academic instruction for special
education students
Mentoring

Weekly Advisory class and weekly one on one meetings
with educational coordinator; school counselor
available to all students
College and career mentoring

College and career counselor available to all students;
educational coordinators provide informal and formal
guidance, career and technical education courses are
part of graduation requirements; students are given a
choice of academies to take classes that are aligned
with the college admissions requirements
Providing multiple pathways to
access the content

Online asynchronous courses; synchronous virtual
workshops; optional in-person support at the resource
center
Self-regulated learning
scaffolds
Assignment lists to help with pacing; regular meetings
with teachers to plan and manage the workload;
independent study skills courses
Monitoring engagement Daily check-in communication to monitor and discuss
student engagement in the curriculum
59

Best practices Examples of programs and practices
Supporting families

Regular meetings with parent, student, and educational
coordinator to review progress and online reports to
monitor engagement
Conceptual scaffolds

Study guides are available for every lesson to help
students to organize the concepts and important
information; teachers offer virtual and onsite
workshops to help students develop conceptual
understanding
Metacognitive scaffolds

Educational coordinators offer guidance about how to
use the resources provided in the online curriculum;
Procedural scaffolds

Virtual workshops to help students with processes to
break down and solve the problems
Strategic Scaffolds Office hours where the teacher provides strategic
scaffolds that guide students through different methods
to solve the problems; virtual workshops provide
guidance about what to consider in a given problem,
and provided different solution paths

Social-Emotional Learning Supports
Social-emotional learning supports were offered to some extent, but the types of support
were not equally available. According to CASEL (n.d.), the five competencies of social and
emotional learning are self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills,
and responsible decision making. Some of the alumni surveyed recalled programs or practices
that supported their self-awareness, as 68% of respondents agreed that they were offered support
that helped their knowledge of their own character, feelings, and desires, while 23% disagreed,
and 9% neither agreed nor disagreed. However, when asked about practices and programs that
help to develop self-management, 78% of respondents agreed that the school offered programs
60

and practices that helped them take responsibility for their own behavior and wellbeing, 17%
disagreed, and 6% neither agreed nor disagreed. When surveyed about social awareness, 47%
responded that the school offered programs and practices to support their ability to empathize
with others from diverse backgrounds and cultures, while 29% disagreed with the statement, and
24% neither agreed nor disagreed. The results were similar in the competency of relationship
skills, as 47% of the respondents believed that the school offered programs and practices that
helped them to establish and maintain healthy and rewarding relationships, while 24% disagreed
with the statement, and 29% neither agreed nor disagreed. The results were stronger in the
competency of responsible decision making, with 78% of the respondents agreeing that the
school offered programs and practices that helped them to make responsible decisions, while
25% disagreed that such practices and programs were available.
During the interviews, the participants cited Advisory class, clubs, the onsite program,
and field trips as some of the programs provided to support their social and emotional learning.
One participant said, “Art therapy club opened me up a lot more to people to different people
that I didn’t really associate myself with before or plan on talking to before that.” This is one
example of how clubs and other opportunities for interaction with peers helped to support the
students’ social and emotional development. Other students cited interactions with teachers and
staff that helped them to grow in the SEL competencies. One interview participant recalled,
“There was Advisory, where we were asked how we were doing.” Another participant described
a combination of programs that helped him to grow socially and emotionally:
The counselor that I had, she made me think about mental health and everything. I also
had this time management class that really helped me improve how to spread my time
61

wisely. There was another online class that taught me coping skills—with stress, anxiety
and self-esteem—and that really improved for me.
Opportunities for social and emotional learning development were available. However, as most
of these programs and classes were optional at the online school, some students accessed these
supports more than others. Table 3 summarizes the programs and practices that the survey and
interview participants from the online school believed supported their social and emotional
learning.

Table 3 Social-Emotional Learning Programs and Practices
Social-Emotional Learning Programs and Practices
SEL competency Examples of programs and practices
Self-awareness Reflections and discussions during Advisory class, college
exploration program
Self-management Advisory class, progress trackers and planners, talking to
teachers and educational coordinator, counselor available to
all students, Study Skills course
Social awareness Clubs, discussions during Advisory class, field trips, peer
support group with counselor
Relationship skills Advisory lessons about SEL development, onsite program with
breaks for interactions, field trips
Responsible decision
making
Regular one on one meetings and check-in with educational
coordinator

62

At the traditionally in-person school, some of the social-emotional learning supports were
incorporated into the synchronous classes, therefore it was accessible to all students. One survey
participant described how spending time outdoors was incorporated into their class assignments
and projects, which was helpful for their social-emotional wellbeing:
Because we were on the computer all the time, they didn’t want us to always have our
face glued to the screen. What they did with our projects, is that during the asynchronous
time I was telling you about—when we would get an hour, two hours maybe—that time
would be used for us to go outside. It was an assignment like, ‘Go explore your
neighborhood. Go find this type of plant, learn the history, learn the indigenous native’s
history towards it, or learn about this area that you’re living on and go find out about it.’
So, they incorporated that, as we would have to go outside and we wouldn’t have to have
our face on a screen for a long time. So, it helped in a way that we weren’t always on the
computer. We would be able to go outside and finally be able to see nature, not have to
be stuck inside all day, so that was helpful.
By helping students to manage their screen time, the teachers supported the students’ social-
emotional health. Furthermore, by incorporating activities into the curriculum that allowed
students to explore their environment and practice self-care, rather than simply having stand-
alone optional programs, the teachers were able to provide all students access to this social-
emotional learning support.
Interactions and Supports for Distance Learners
It is the responsibility of the educator to create a sense of online community and to
promote interaction (Carr-Chellman & Duchastel, 2001; Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997). The
participants from the online school generally reported that teacher-student interactions were
63

occurring, but the depth, frequency, and purpose of these interactions varied. Student-student
interactions were not as common as teacher-student interactions, with only about half of the
respondents reporting having had interactions with other students. These student-student
interactions occurred during the optional field trips, club meetings or activities, or synchronous
classes to supplement the online asynchronous curriculum, but these programs were not attended
by all students. Therefore, there were some students who did not have any interactions with their
peers in the online learning environment.
Previous studies have identified strategies that instructors and schools could utilize to
support student success in K–12 online learning environments. The participants from the online
school identified academic supports that align with these recommended strategies, such as
feedback throughout the course and supplemental synchronous workshops, but there was no
evidence of other recommended supports such as collaborative projects with real world
applications of the content. Some level of tutoring and mentoring occurred, but not all the
students accessed it. Self-regulated learning scaffolds, which produce positive effects on
academic performance (Carter et al., 2020; Zheng, 2016), were available to all students through
their educational coordinator and Advisory class. Conceptual, metacognitive, procedural, and
strategic scaffolds were also available through the virtual workshops, but again, these workshops
were optional and not accessed by all students.
Furthermore, there was some evidence of practices and programs to develop the students’
social-emotional skills at the online school, but the level varied within the five competencies.
The strongest areas of support were in the competencies of self-management and responsible
decision making, and the weakest areas were in the competencies that involve others, which are
64

social awareness and relationship skills. This makes sense, given that the student-student
interactions were not available to or accessed by all students.
At the traditionally in-person school, there were a lot more teacher-student and student-
student interactions because the schedule consisted of mostly synchronous classes, similar to
their pre-pandemic schedule, but transferred to online video conferencing tools such as Zoom.
While they offered some similar academic supports as the online school, such as office hours and
advisory check-ins, some of the social-emotional learning supports at the traditionally in-person
school were incorporated into the core curriculum classes, and therefore were accessible to all
students.
Alumni Perceptions About the Efficacy of Supports
RQ2 sought to better understand the perceptions of high school alumni about the efficacy
of the academic and social emotional learning support that they received as students in online
schools and during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools. I
examined the results for this research question by looking at two themes: the perception of
former students about the efficacy of the support they received, and their level of satisfaction
with the support that they received.
Perceptions on Efficacy of Supports
When asked about whether the supports offered at their school were effective in
improving their academic outcomes, 88% of the survey respondents agreed that they were
effective, while 6% disagreed and another 6% neither agreed nor disagreed. Some of the
interview participants cited that their interactions with their teachers and educational
coordinators helped them to become more engaged with schoolwork and to focus on what
needed to be accomplished. One former student from the online school stated that “distance
65

learning was different but not less effective,” and another interview participant believed that the
academic support in the online school was “more effective than in the traditional school.” One
interview participant commented:
My educational specialist and educational coordinator really helped motivate me to finish
my homework and do what I have to do, and it really helped. I had trouble with time
management, so my educational coordinator checking in and helping me set reminders on
my calendar helped me to graduate.
In cases such as these, the personalized learning and support that were provided in online schools
were perceived as effective by the former students who participated in this study.
The perceptions on the efficacy of the social and emotional learning supports were less
positive, as 36% of the respondents stated that the supports offered at their school were effective
in improving their social and emotional wellbeing, while almost an equal amount believed that
they were not effective. Some interview participants from the online school believed that
working with teachers and other students in virtual workshops, field trips, clubs, and community
service taught them how to collaborate and develop their self-management, social awareness, and
relationship skills. One student commented:
I really appreciated it when my teachers texted to ask how I was doing. It was a reminder
that I was not alone in schooling, that there was someone else on the other side too. I had
support. It motivated me to do good because I knew that there was someone on the other
side that I wanted to make proud; I wanted to give quality work.
The relationship skills that were modeled by the teachers were effective for some students. On
the other hand, other interview participants from the online school believed that the school was
not effective in providing opportunities to develop their social and emotional skills and that they
66

mainly developed these skills outside of the school setting—for example, with their family,
church groups, existing network of friends, and extracurricular activities. As one student
commented, “Interaction through school is not really existent. That’s why you need a social life
outside of school.” Having fewer opportunities for interaction than traditional schools, online
schools may not be as effective in supporting students’ social and emotional development.
A common theme that arose with the survey participants’ perceptions is that the efficacy
of the support greatly depends on the student and the teachers. The interview participants
believed that the efficacy of the support depends on what kind of learner the student is and what
their expectations are for themselves and for the school. For example, one participant from the
online school commented:
For some people, student-student interactions work. It’s a lot better for them to work in
groups, even online. It was a big challenge for me. I didn’t have motivation to work in
groups virtually. Keeping in contact with teachers was also more difficult. It was difficult
to keep up with everyone. I had to drop a class because teacher-student contact was not
working. There was no communication. I did not have any help outside of the assigned
teacher. If it was in person, I could have gotten help, but since it was online it was more
difficult.
While the virtual classes were effective for some students, other students believed that it was not
as effective for them. Another interview participant from the online school perceived that the
efficacy of the supports “depends on what the students prioritize at school—whether it is
learning, social interaction, or both.” A similar response was given by one interview participant
from the traditionally in-person school:
67

When it comes to education and everyone’s learning styles, it’s such a broad topic and it’s
so different that you can’t really put a “this one is better and this one is not” because
everyone has different learning styles. For me, personally, I wouldn’t say that online
learning would be my style. That’s not something I would’ve wanted to do, like start that
in high school and do that until senior year. I’m definitely an in-person learner; I’m a
visual learner; I need to be there; I need to be with people; I need to see what I’m
learning; I need to be interacting with people, to be able to just get the full scope of what
I’m learning. But I know for some people, and I have talked about this in my class a lot,
some people like online learning; they love the seclusion. They were able to have some
time. They love not always having to be there, to be in front of people, having to have
face-to-face interaction with people. So, there’s different things on both sides, so that’s
why I feel like it’s not right to just put a label on one, like this one’s good, this one is not.
Because each student has a different preferred learning style, the efficacy of the supports
provided vary between individuals.
The efficacy of the supports at the online school also varied based on the students’
relationship with their teachers and whether they accessed the supports provided. One former
student from the online school who did not attend virtual workshops commented, “Because there
was no face-to-face [interactions], I felt the need to contact teachers when I needed assignments
opened or any other guidance about it. I didn’t feel like I had the constant support that I had in-
person.” On the other hand, another participant who consistently attended workshops and
Homeroom meetings commented:
Sometimes we talked about work or anything that happened during the weekend.
Sometimes I would ask for help with assignments or college applications. I started
68

noticing that schoolwork started getting easier and I could understand it better and got
through it faster. The writing assignments became easier because of the workshops.
When the students accessed the supports that were offered, and they had a good relationship with
their teachers, they generally believed that the programs were effective.
Satisfaction With Support Offered
I also sought to understand the participants’ level of satisfaction with the supports that
were offered in their online school. Of the 32 survey respondents, 87% stated that they were
extremely or somewhat satisfied with the academic support they received, while 6% responded
that they were not satisfied with the academic support they received. The satisfaction ratings
were slightly lower for social and emotional learning supports, with 75% responding that they
were extremely or somewhat satisfied with the SEL support they received during distance
learning, while 25% responded that they were extremely or somewhat dissatisfied. One
participant from the online school commented about the importance of the connections they have
with their teachers:
It's different here because the teachers are involved here. But if you went, let’s say, to
another school that was all virtual learning and you had no connection to the teachers or
other students whatsoever, you’d have to learn to be accountable for your work. If you
want to get through high school, that is all up to you. There’s not going to be a teacher
who is going to be understanding of your situation if they don’t know your situation.
Because the learning is always going to be about connection.
Some of the former online students who participated in the interviews recognized the importance
of the connections that they made with the teachers and with other students. The quality of these
connections affected their level of satisfaction with the supports they received.
69

When asked about what they would change about their online school experience, some of
the interview participants suggested that their school should offer more virtual and in-person
workshops, concentrated study groups, field trips, clubs, and other opportunities to meet other
students, so that they could have a support system and not feel as if they are “alone in the
process.” In addition, one survey participant believed that the school “could have offered more
college and career guidance.” Other participants believed that the school should offered tools and
training on how to succeed in an online environment.
Some participants from the online school believed that the synchronous workshops
should have been mandatory, and available for all of the asynchronous classes offered. As one
participant explained:
I think that the virtual classes are a good idea for all classes. I was only required to take
one workshop, and I can see how that helped me. Having done college chemistry now, I
can see how it was so helpful. I honestly don’t think I could have gotten through high
school chemistry if I didn’t have that experience, interacting with other students in that
virtual environment. That would be a great addition.
The students believed that the synchronous classes were helpful when they were offered,
therefore they should have been available to supplement all online asynchronous classes.
The alumni from the traditionally in-person school had different experiences, so their
perceptions about the structures and supports provided when they transitioned to distance
learning also differed. One interview participant from the traditionally in-person school reflected
on their experience:
When it first started, we didn’t have as many check-ins. My engagement definitely
lowered a lot. I was online, I wasn’t really speaking to anyone. All the students' cameras
70

were off, mics were on mute, so I wasn’t engaging with anyone. I only interacted with
my family, who I was with in the house, and had no interactions with anyone else. Even
when we did group work, and we were put into breakout rooms to work on stuff together,
no one really talks at all and the teachers would have to come to the breakout rooms to
get us to engage.
So, just the lack of interaction, and not being able to talk with people, it didn’t
make me feel engaged at all. I felt like I was just going through the motions–doing the
work and clicking submit, and then signing off. Then I’d be done for the day. [My
engagement] definitely dropped. It came back towards the middle of the year when we
had a little more engagement. People started to get more comfortable with the fact that
we were probably going to be online for the whole year. People did get a little more
comfortable, so it boosted up a little bit, but I would definitely say that my engagement
for the whole year had definitely dropped from what it was when I was in person. When
they were asking questions and we were able to talk to people, and also when the teachers
started doing the one-on-one check-ins, it just made me feel more engaged. I was able to
finally converse with someone, talk to someone about the work I was doing, so that
brought up my level of engagement.
As described by the alumni from the traditionally in-person school, the interactions between the
student and their teachers and their peers affected their level of engagement. The initial transition
to distance learning was challenging because it was very different from what they were used to.
The check-ins with the teachers and the discussions with their peers helped to increase their level
of engagement. When the same participant from the traditionally in-person school was asked to
elaborate on their thoughts about interactions in distance learning, they commented:
71

It’s really important to interact with your peers. I think not interacting with your peers, it
really brings down your engagement a lot. Like I said before, that’s what brought down
my engagement. I think [schools] could make it mandatory. I know, of course, that some
students have problems with being able to engage with students, being able to start a
conversation with them, so that’s totally understandable, but I think emphasizing to
students to at least try to make an effort to do that—it’ll positively impact their whole
entire school experience if they talk. So, just making an effort, and having activities
where students are subtly forced to participate in activities, I think that would help them a
lot, especially for the students who can’t, or just don’t want to. I think they themselves
will see later on that it’s helping them be more engaged in the online school experience.
When it comes to students and teachers, I think that having one-on-one
interactions is really important … just having a forum where we can give our feedback,
they let us know that we were being heard. Also seeing the feedback that we gave
incorporated into the next lessons, that was really meaningful to us because it showed
that we were really being listened to. That helped with our engagement too because we
had things that we wanted in the lessons, so it helped us be more engaged.
Participants from both schools seemed to agree on one thing: that the interactions between the
students and their teachers and peers are instrumental during distance learning, even if it can be
inconvenient or difficult at times. If schools can incorporate interactions into all students’
learning experience, it could be beneficial academically, socially and emotionally.
Alumni Perceptions About Efficacy of Supports
Although most participants believed that the supports offered were effective and were
satisfied with the support they received, the alumni satisfaction and perceptions of the efficacy of
72

the supports offered in online school generally depended on the students’ needs, expectations,
and experiences. Their perceptions varied based on how much they accessed the resources
offered by the school and their relationships with the teachers and peers with whom they
interacted. This aligns with existing empirical literature that noted positive findings about the
effectiveness of online learning do not necessarily demonstrate that online learning is superior as
a medium. The confounding variables, such as more learning time, additional instructional
resources, and course elements that encourage interactions among learners, are what lead to
positive outcomes for blended learning (Means et al., 2013). It makes sense that the interview
participants who believed that the supports were effective were those who had more instructional
resources, because they accessed more supports that were offered. The interview participants’
suggestions on what their school can improve centered around having more programs and
opportunities for interactions. They believed that these supports should be fully integrated into
the program, so that all students can access them.
Equity and Online Learning
RQ3 sought to understand how the support students receive in online and distance
learning public charter schools in San Diego County align with research-based, equity-focused
practices. I examined the results for RQ3 by looking at the three tenets of culturally relevant
pedagogy: (a) a focus on student learning and academic success; (b) developing students' cultural
competence to assist students in developing positive ethnic and social identities; and (c)
supporting students' consciousness in a way that allows them to critique the cultural norms,
values, and institutions that perpetuate social inequities (Ladson-Billings, 1995b).
73

Academic Success
Culturally relevant teachers believe that one of their primary responsibilities is helping
students become academically successful (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). As I examined how the
support that students receive in online schools aligns with research-based, equity-focused
practices, I asked the survey and interview participants about the programs and practices that
support student learning and academic success. When asked whether the school provided
programs and practices that supported their academic success, 82% of the survey respondents
agreed that such programs and practices existed, while 19% disagreed with the statement.
The academic supports identified by most respondents from the online school were the writing
workshops and academic workshops to supplement the core courses such as math, English,
history, and science. These workshops seemed to be the core of the academic support provided to
students. Before the pandemic, these workshops and study groups were done in person. One
interview participant explained the process before the pandemic, “The teacher would separate the
classroom in groups, so whoever was working on a specific assignment would work together.”
After the pandemic, the workshops evolved into virtual classes. One participant described the
virtual workshops:
We would usually work on a specific assignment from our online class, like a written
assignment. The written assignments are usually harder than the tests. The teacher would
introduce the problems and ask us what we think. Then they would give a lesson on that
topic and we would all try to figure out how to answer the problems together.
For blended learning students, the onsite and virtual workshops provided them the tools they
needed to complete the assignments in the online curriculum. This helped to support their
academic success as it provided scaffolding for the more difficult assignments. Other examples
74

of academic supports that the participants mentioned included the one-on-one meetings with
their educational coordinator, academy paths that guided students to take classes aligned with
college admissions requirements, and teacher feedback on writing assignments. As one student
commented, “teachers that were grading assignments were helpful in getting back to me with
critique to make my work better.” According to the participants, the online school in this study
offered various programs and practices to support student learning and academic success.
At the traditionally in-person school, students met in synchronous classes with their
academic teachers four days a week, and had one day per week of asynchronous time to work on
their assignments. The teachers supported the students’ academic success by explaining the
concepts through direct instruction and facilitated discussions. They also provided the students
with a schedule to follow, to manage their time:
Our teachers always had Google Slides made out for us for the day. They would always
have a lesson and a schedule of what we were doing—when we’re going synchronous,
when we were asynchronous, and when we’re coming back to class.
In addition to the daily instruction and discussions, the academic teachers also had regular one-
on-one check-ins with each student:
I had check-ins with my actual teachers, like my English and math teachers. I wouldn’t
say it would happen as often as our advisor, but they would make an effort to make sure
we had check-ins, just to see where everyone was and how we were feeling. We also had
check-ins through Google forms.
Similar to the online school, the traditionally in-person school also offered academic support
through teachers’ office hours. This support program allowed students to ask clarifying questions
and get a better understanding of the content in the curriculum. In addition, students at the
75

traditionally in-person school also had advisors, with whom they met on a regular basis. Like
their educational coordinator counterparts at the online school, the advisors at the traditionally
in-person school supported the students’ academic success by monitoring their grades and
helping to identify any barriers to their success.
Cultural Identity
While ensuring students’ academic success is important, culturally relevant pedagogy
must also provide a way for students to maintain their cultural integrity while succeeding
academically (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). Teachers and schools could develop students' cultural
competence by assisting them in developing positive ethnic and social identities. When asked
about the programs that the school offered to develop students' cultural competence, 50% of the
survey respondents believed that the school offered programs and practices that helped to
develop an awareness of their own or others’ cultural identity, 25% disagreed, and 25% neither
agreed nor disagreed with the statement.
When asked about the programs that the school offered to develop students' cultural
competence, three out of the six students interviewed from the online school did not recall any
programs or practices that developed their cultural competence. Two of these participants said
that they learned about their own and others’ culture from home and from their experiences
outside of the school. One of the interview participants from the online school said that the
school developed their cultural competence through the in-person program at the resource center,
where they had discussions about different topics, watched and discussed TED talks, and had
guest speakers to share their stories, careers, and experiences. As one participant recalled:
When people would come in to talk to us about their jobs and give their life story, it
opened my eyes to a lot of people’s backgrounds and where they came from. I remember
76

I would have conversations with classmates about the person that came to talk to us and
how we would relate, and that would open me up to other discussions about where other
people came from.
Opportunities to interact with other students through meaningful discussions helped to develop
some students’ cultural competence. Two participants from the online school mentioned an art
therapy group led by a school counselor, which gave them the space to regularly discuss and
share stories about their own experiences. As one participant stated, “We would talk about the
topics but we would also talk about ourselves. We would share stories about ourselves and our
experiences.” Sharing stories is one important way for students to learn about their own and
others’ cultural identities.
At the traditionally in-person school, one of the interview participants recalled a few
instances during distance learning that helped them to develop an awareness of their own and
others’ cultural identity:
I was in online school when the George Floyd situation happened and all the BLM
protests were going on. My teachers, they really addressed that. They really addressed
what was going on and we learned about that. We even had a discussion one time when
all of that was going on … to talk about the situation, our thoughts and feelings. We had
that pretty much the whole duration while it was going on, and that was really helpful. It
was really appreciated, to hear about my community being talked about, and just hearing
people’s thoughts on it, but also just the teachers addressing it and not just ignoring it,
because it’s something that happens every day. It was finally being addressed, and them
understanding how impactful it is to students when stuff like that is going on in the
media, and then we're all still going to school. It still does really impact students of color
77

when we see our community on TV and them going through hardships and perils. So, to
have it addressed at school, it really felt like I was being seen, and that was really helpful.
By addressing and discussing current events as they occurred, the teachers were able to help
students to not only process the issues that surround them, but also to develop their cultural
competence, and develop positive social identities.
Furthermore, the traditionally in-person school was able to help students to develop their
cultural awareness by incorporating it into the curriculum. As one of the interview participants
recalled:
We are a project-based school, so we still had that. We had a project that was based on
learning about people’s land—especially since we’re in California, which is majority
indigenous people’s land. We were learning about the resources they used, the types of
plants and how that’s all over where we live.
This is a good example of how teachers can help develop students’ cultural competence through
their everyday curriculum, regardless of the virtual or face-to-face mode of instruction.
Critical Consciousness
To further examine whether the supports offered in online schools align with research-
based, equity-focused practices, I also asked the participants about programs that helped to
develop their critical consciousness. School programs designed to foster critical consciousness
by helping students to recognize, understand, and critique current social inequities have been
shown to increase academic engagement and achievement (Dee & Penner, 2017; Ladson-
Billings, 1995a). In the survey of alumni of online and distance learning schools, 56% of the
survey respondents believed that the school offered programs and practices that helped them to
78

develop an in-depth understanding of the world and its inequities, 22% disagreed, and 22%
neither agreed nor disagreed.
Four out of the six interview participants from the online school could not think of
examples of ways in which the school helped them to develop their critical consciousness, or
their ability to recognize and analyze systems of inequities. One participant mentioned:
There were a few classes that gave a different perspective on how things were back then
and how we can change what we’re doing today, such as racism, slavery, and how that
affected people back then and how people were discriminated against. The classes do
give you a good view on what was going wrong.
However, this was learned through the online curriculum content such as readings and videos,
rather than programs or practices provided by the school or their teachers. This student also
mentioned elective courses such as Ethnic Studies that allowed students to better understand
inequities that exist, but they never really had opportunities to discuss these topics with teachers
or other students, outside of the assignments that entailed message-board type discussions.
Another participant from the online school responded that the only time they had a chance to
discuss social inequities was during the check-in discussions in the Advisory class, when they
discussed their thoughts on recent events such as the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests that
occurred during the pandemic. The other four interview participants from the online school said
that they could not recall any times when inequities were discussed so they did not believe that
they had any opportunities to develop their critical consciousness.
In contrast, the alumni from the traditionally in-person school were able to provide some
examples of how their curriculum helped to develop their critical consciousness:
79

During distance learning, this was prominent in my English class. We had a lot of
assignments that were focused on America itself as a country, what it has done, and the
past that it’s had with people of color. One example that I can think of, it really focused a
lot on the idea of the American Dream–what that really means. We learned about how the
American Dream started and who it was intended to be created for. I believed the notion
for the American dream is to be for all–any and all men–but then we realized that
obviously, it was not created to be for everyone. So, we started from there, we learned the
history of how it was not created for everyone, how they set up the American Dream,
with that notion, with the impression that it was for everyone, but just completely
disregarded that in the end. We focused a lot on that and we used videos and lessons to
help us understand the meaning behind it.
The other participant from the traditionally in-person school described the same project and used
it as an example of how the school helped to develop their critical consciousness:
We used Childish Gambino’s song “This is America.” There’s a lot of hidden meanings
within that song and we analyzed that song for a good two weeks. We spent a lot of time
analyzing it and finding out the hidden clues that he was putting in there, and how his
song really reflects the entire American Dream, and how it does not stand for what it was
supposed to stand for at all. That was the big project we had and it lasted for a good
month or two. We had other assignments as well.
By helping students to recognize, understand, and critique current social inequities through the
curriculum that they teach, the teachers at this school have helped to increase the students’
academic engagement. This is another good example of how equity-based practices can be
implemented, even in distance learning environments.
80

Equity and Online Learning
There seems to be room for improvement for the online school that participated in this
study in terms of providing supports that align with research-based, equity-focused practices—
specifically, culturally relevant pedagogy. While there generally seems to be a focus on student
learning and academic success, the online school in this study did not have many programs and
practices that advance students' cultural competence to assist them in developing positive ethnic
and social identities. The biggest gap seems to be in supporting students' critical consciousness in
a way that allows them to critique the cultural norms, values, and institutions that perpetuate
social inequities, as there seems to be no evidence of this occurring outside of the curriculum
content. As schools and teachers learn to navigate the online school environment, they could
place more emphasis on developing students’ cultural competence and critical consciousness, in
addition to the current focus on students’ academic success.
The traditionally in-person school that participated in this study was able to successfully
develop students’ cultural identity and critical consciousness by incorporating them into the core
curriculum lessons. This is evidence that even in a distance learning environment, it is possible
to offer equity-based practices that help students to develop as a whole child. Because this school
continued with their pre-pandemic schedule, which offered mostly synchronous classes, they
were able to have interactions with the students that allowed them to discuss cultural identities
and critique social inequities.
According to Ladson-Billings (1995b), there are three broad characteristics that serve as
theoretical underpinnings of culturally relevant pedagogy: (a) the teachers’ conceptions of self
and others, (b) the manners in which teachers structure social relations, and (c) the teachers’
conceptions of knowledge. Because social relations are different in an online environment,
81

teachers and school leaders must intentionally create opportunities for social interaction to
support students’ academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness. To create
these healthy social interactions, teachers must maintain fluid teacher-student relationships,
demonstrate a connectedness with all students, develop a community of learners, and encourage
students to learn collaboratively (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). With the limited amounts of
interactions available in independent-study online schools, teachers and leaders must find ways
to incorporate these practices into their programs, to develop a community of academically
successful learners who are committed to addressing social inequities.
Summary
In this study, I found that teacher-student interactions generally occur in online and
distance learning environments, but the depth, frequency, and purpose of these interactions vary.
At the online school, student-student interactions were not as common as teacher-student
interactions, and the student-student interactions occurred during the optional programs;
therefore, there were some students who did not have any interactions with their peers in the
online learning environment. In contrast, at the traditionally in-person school, teacher-student
interactions occurred often for all students, as they held synchronous classes almost daily.
The participants from the online school identified academic supports that align with
recommended strategies, standards, and best practices to support students’ academic success in
K–12 online learning environments, such as feedback throughout the course and supplemental
asynchronous workshops. However, there is no evidence at the online school of other
recommended supports such as collaborative projects with real world applications of the content.
Furthermore, because many of the supports were optional, not all students accessed them. In
contrast, because the traditionally in-person school that participated in this study is a project-
82

based learning school, the daily lessons centered around collaborative projects with real world
applications, which is a recommended practice to support students’ academic success.
There was some evidence of practices and programs to develop the students’ social-
emotional skills at the online school, but the level varied within the five competencies. The
strongest areas of support were in the competencies of self-awareness, self-management, and
responsible decision making, which are generally individually focused. The areas of
improvement are in SEL competencies that involve interactions with others, such as social
awareness and relationship skills. The traditionally in-person school also offered support to
develop the students’ social-emotional skills, including those that were incorporated into the core
curriculum.
The alumni satisfaction and perceptions of the efficacy of the support they received at the
online and distance learning school generally depended on the students’ needs, expectations, and
experiences. Their perceptions varied based on how much they accessed the resources offered by
the school and their relationships with the teachers and peers with whom they interacted. Alumni
from the online school who accessed the resources more frequently believed that the supports
were effective, while students who did not access these programs did not believe that the
available supports were effective. At both the traditionally in-person and online schools, the
alumni satisfaction and their perceptions about the supports also varied based on their preferred
learning style.
Based on the results of this study, there seems to be room for improvement at the online
school in terms of providing supports that align with research-based, equity-focused practices.
While the alumni participants were able to identify programs and practices to support student
learning and academic success, the online school that participated in this study did not have
83

many programs and practices that developed students' cultural competence and critical
consciousness. With the limited nature of interactions available in independent study online
schools, teachers and leaders must find ways to create social interactions to not only foster the
students’ academic success, but also their cultural competence and critical consciousness. In
contrast, the traditionally in-person school was able to foster the students' cultural competence
and critical consciousness by incorporating these lessons into their core curriculum. Through the
interactions that they had in the synchronous classes, the teachers at this project-based school
were able to implement equity-based practices, even in a distance learning environment.
In Chapter Five, I further discuss the findings that resulted from the data analysis of this
study. I discuss what can be learned from online and distance learning schools that participated in
this study. I also discuss the implications for practice, and suggest future research that can
possibly expand what was found in this study.

84

Chapter Five: Discussion
Students who engage in online and distance learning need academic and social-emotional
learning support to achieve the desired learning outcomes from an online curriculum (Carr-
Chellman & Duchastel, 2001; Hiltz & Benbunan-Fich, 1997; Swan et al., 2009). However, there
is little extant literature to understand how the bidirectional relationships between the students,
their behavior, and their environment apply in online and distance learning environments in the
K–12 setting.
The purpose of this study was to explore the support programs in online and distance
learning schools that provide opportunities for teacher-student and student-student interactions.
This study sought to investigate the types of academic and social-emotional learning support
students receive during distance learning. The goal was to understand alumni perceptions about
these supports, so educational leaders can be better informed to effectively address some of the
barriers to online and distance learning and make it a viable option in which students can
successfully learn and thrive.
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What types of support do students receive at online independent study schools and
during distance learning at San Diego County public charter high schools?
2. What are the perceptions of alumni about the efficacy of the academic and social
emotional learning support that they received as high school students in online
schools and during distance learning?
3. How do the supports that high school students receive in distance learning schools
align with research-based, equity-focused practices?
85

This research utilized a mixed methodological approach. A survey was used to collect
quantitative data to make descriptive and inferential claims about patterns within the data, and
interviews were used to collect qualitative data about former students’ perceptions about the
academic, social, and emotional supports they received during distance learning. To analyze the
data, I utilized a conceptual framework that integrated standards for online learning, social
cognitive learning theories, SEL strategies, and culturally relevant pedagogy, to identify and
categorize the resources and supports provided to students in online and distance learning
schools. I compared the support programs and practices against best practices, to identify any
existing gaps, and to develop recommendations for addressing these gaps.
Findings
After analyzing the results of the surveys and interviews with alumni who graduated from
online schools, I discovered the following five findings.
1. Optional programs at online schools led to varying degrees of teacher-student and
student-student interactions while mandatory synchronous classes made the
interactions available to all students at the traditionally in-person school.
2. Academic, social, and emotional learning supports were offered at the online school
but not equally accessed by all students.
3. Online schools offered programs that foster social and emotional development, but
the level of support varied within the five competencies and was generally less in
SEL competencies that involve interactions with others.
4. Former students’ perceptions about the efficacy of the support they receive varied,
based on their preferred learning style, how much they accessed the programs and
their relationships with teachers and peers.
86

5. Former online school students in this study could not recall programs and practices
that developed their cultural competence and critical consciousness, while the
participants from the traditionally in-person school described how this was
accomplished in their core curriculum classes.
This chapter provide a discussion of each finding and links it to existing literature reviewed in
Chapter Two.
Optional Programs Lead to Varying Degrees of Interactions
This research found that most students in online and distance learning environments had
some type of interaction with teachers, such as in Advisory, virtual workshops, or onsite learning
activities. However, at the online school, the depth, frequency, and purpose of these interactions
varied, depending on the students’ relationship with their teachers and their participation in the
optional programs offered. Some students did not have any interactions with teachers other than
checking in about deadlines and administrative tasks. Because the interaction between instructors
and students in an online learning environment is critical to its success (Liao, 2006; Palloff &
Pratt, 1999), online and distance learning schools need to ensure that teacher-student interactions
occur during the learning process. Students who succeed in online courses when the course
allows them to be active participants (de Verneil & Berge, 2000), but this is not necessarily
happening with students in the online school environment who do not participate in the optional
support programs.
Although not as common as teacher-student interactions, some student-student
interactions also occur at the online school, during the programs offered such as virtual
workshops and in-person study halls. However, because these programs are optional, there are
some students who do not have any interactions with their peers throughout their online
87

schooling experience. Sociocultural theory claims that interactions help facilitate active
participation that is critical to learning (Schunk, 2020). Therefore, the students who did not have
any interactions with other students may not have had opportunities to bridge the gap between
what they know and their zone of proximal development. For students who did not access the
optional support programs, such as virtual workshops and in-person study halls, the program did
not meet Standard C7 of the National Standards for Quality Online Courses (Virtual Learning
Leadership Alliance, 2019), which calls for regular opportunities for learner-learner interaction
and opportunities for learner-instructor interaction, including opportunities for regular feedback
about learner progress.
In contrast, the traditionally in-person school continued to hold mandatory synchronous
classes, even after they transitioned to distance learning. This made both teacher-student and
student-student interactions available to all students, rather than just a few. By incorporating
synchronous classes into the daily practices and setting the expectation that these were
mandatory, the traditionally in-person school was able to provide opportunities for interactions
for all students, even when they transitioned to a distance learning environment.
Available Support Programs Not Equally Accessed by All Students
Some academic support practices and programs that were offered to the alumni who
participated in this study included opportunities for feedback throughout the course; online
orientation programs for students so they do not get stuck on how to use the technology; rigorous
and challenging standards coupled with support, tutoring, and mentoring; and providing multiple
pathways to access the content. These academic support practices align with recommended
strategies, standards, and best practices to support students’ academic success in K–12 online
learning environments (Ferdig, 2010). According to the alumni participants, the online school in
88

this study also use strategies to promote self-regulated learning such as providing pacing support,
monitoring engagement, and supporting families to help them navigate the computer-based
learning environment. Supports that provide conceptual, metacognitive, procedural, and strategic
scaffolds generally produce a significantly positive effect on academic performance (Carter et
al., 2020; Zheng, 2016), and the schools in this study offered programs and practices to help
students to scaffold the curriculum. In addition, there was some evidence of the schools meeting
some of the standards outlined in the National Standards for Quality Online Courses (Virtual
Learning Leadership Alliance, 2019), such activities during Advisory class that guide learners
toward promoting ownership of their learning and self-monitoring (Standard C1). Students were
also offered mentors and tutors through multiple means such as direct contact with their
educational coordinators or advisors, teachers’ office hours, recorded tutorials, and supplemental
asynchronous workshops, which are aligned with recommended strategies to support student
success in K–12 online learning environments (Ferdig, 2010).
However, because many of the support programs offered were optional at the online
school, not all students accessed them. This means that some students did not experience the
important interactions that are central to the learning process. Furthermore, there was no
evidence of other recommended supports such as opportunities for collaborative projects or
content that has real world applications. Other recommended programs that were not available in
the online school that participated in this study include online career mentoring and courses, such
as vocational programs and alternative education options. These are missed opportunities
because these programs help schools to reach students and decrease dropout rates (Ferdig,
2010).
89

Less SEL Support in Competencies That Involve Interactions With Others
The schools that participated in this study offered SEL programs such as Advisory
classes, onsite counseling groups, and regular check-in meetings with a teacher. These programs
encourage social, emotional, and cognitive development and provide opportunities for practicing
skills in the five SEL competencies as defined by CASEL. However, the level of support varied
within the five competencies. The strongest areas of support were in the competencies of self-
awareness, self-management, and responsible decision making, which are generally individually
focused. The areas that had little evidence lie in SEL competencies that generally involve
interactions with others, such as social awareness and relationship skills. Because these social
and emotional skills are typically developed in classrooms through SEL instruction and
classroom and school climate, in addition to the students’ home and communities, many online
learners who do not physically attend schools may not have as many opportunities to practice the
social and emotional competencies in the school environment, especially the social and
emotional skills that involve interactions. Therefore, it is important for schools to focus on
developing schoolwide culture, practices, and policies that help students to foster their growth in
these SEL competencies. Furthermore, there is an opportunity to develop these SEL
competencies by incorporating them into the curriculum lessons, but the tasks and activities need
to be designed intentionally to promote collaboration and student-student interactions.
Perceptions About Efficacy of Supports Vary Based on Programs Accessed
The alumni satisfaction and perceptions of the efficacy of the support they received when
they were students in distance learning schools generally depended on the students’ needs,
expectations, and experiences. The students who sought and accessed the academic, social, and
emotional support programs offered generally believed that the support they received in the
90

online learning environment was effective. The participants’ perceptions varied based on how
much they accessed the resources offered by the school and their relationships with the teachers
and peers with whom they interacted. This supports findings from extant studies that learner‐
instructor and learner‐content interactions have significantly positive effects on satisfaction (Lin
et al., 2017). The quality of teacher-student relationships is significantly associated with students’
social functioning, behavior, engagement in learning activities, and academic achievement
(Roorda et al., 2011), so it is important for online schools to focus on the quantity and quality of
teacher-student interactions, not only to improve student satisfaction but also to improve their
achievement. The conceptual framework of this study centers around the student and their
interactions with their teachers, peers, and the curriculum content, so if these interactions are
missing, then the learning environment would not be as effective for the students who do not
access the supports.
Lacking Programs to Develop Cultural Competence and Critical Consciousness
Culturally relevant teachers believe that although their primary responsibility is to help
students become academically successful, it is also important for them to provide a way for
students to maintain their cultural integrity, while helping students to recognize, understand, and
critique current social inequities (Ladson-Billings, 1995a). While the former online school
students in this study were able to identify programs and practices to support student learning
and academic success, they could not recall programs and practices that developed their cultural
competence and critical consciousness. This is an area of improvement in these schools because
critical consciousness not only fosters students’ commitment to act against systems of injustice
but also increases academic achievement and engagement (Carter, 2008; Watts et al., 2011). With
the limited interactions available in independent-study online schools, teachers and leaders must
91

find ways to create social interactions to foster not only their students’ academic success, but also
to improve their cultural competence and critical consciousness. As demonstrated by the
traditionally in-person school in this study, this can be accomplished by providing more
opportunities for social interactions, and by incorporating practices and content into the
curriculum to intentionally help students develop their cultural competence and critical
consciousness.
Limitations and Delimitations
Due to the voluntary nature of this study, the sample used in this research may not be
representative of the general population, and this volunteer bias could be a challenge to the
external validity of this research. The findings in this study may not be generalizable to the
population of all students in online and distance learning schools. Furthermore, this study
focused on the academic and social-emotional learning support offered in online and distance
learning high schools in San Diego County. While some of the supports can be applicable in
other settings, further research is needed to identify and evaluate supports in elementary, middle,
and postsecondary schools, and in schools outside of this region.
Another limitation of this research is that it did not distinguish between the amount of
time spent on synchronous activities versus time spent on asynchronous activities, and how the
balance of these activities can vary from school to school. There could be differences in the
supports alumni believe are effective in online schools (with primarily asynchronous activities)
versus those alumni believe are effective in distance learning schools (which provide a blend of
synchronous and asynchronous activities). Lastly, because this research is not an experiment, I
cannot make any causal claims about the support provided and student outcomes.
92

Implications for Practice
This research can help teachers and leaders at online schools in designing and
implementing programs and practices to support students academically, socially, and
emotionally. This section discusses the implications for practice based on the findings of this
study. I will discuss the following six recommendations that online school leaders and educators
should consider to better support students in online learning environments.
1. Synchronous classes or workshops could be incorporated into the daily practice,
rather than as optional stand-alone support options, to ensure that interactions are part
of all students’ learning experiences.
2. Improvements to academic support include offering more programs and strategies to
promote self-regulated learning, and reexamining which programs should be optional
and which ones are required.
3. Teachers of synchronous classes should intentionally plan activities and tasks that
promote student-student interactions, and schools should provide training and support
for teachers to implement practices that promote interactions in online and distance
learning environments.
4. Online schools should develop classroom and school-wide culture, practices, and
policies that help foster students’ development in all SEL competencies.
5. Online schools must find ways to create social interactions to foster students’
academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness, both inside and
outside of the classroom.
93

Incorporate Synchronous Classes Into the Daily Practice to Promote Interactions
This research found that most students in online the online school had interactions with
teachers, but the depth, frequency, and purpose of these interactions varied, depending on the
students’ relationship with their teachers and their participation in the optional programs offered.
In contrast, the traditionally in-person school continued to offer synchronous classes to all
students, even after they transitioned to a distance learning environment. Online school leaders
should consider supplementing all online asynchronous curriculum with synchronous classes or
workshops that allow students to be active participants, to ensure that the important teacher-
student interactions occur during the learning process. The quality of teacher-student
relationships is positively associated with students’ social functioning, behavior, engagement in
learning activities, and academic achievement (Roorda et al., 2011), so it is important for online
schools to focus on the quantity and quality of teacher-student interactions, not only to improve
student satisfaction but also to improve their achievement. Attending synchronous classes should
be a required part of the curriculum because the interactions that occur in these classes are an
important component of the learning process. In addition, online schools should have standards
on the level of interactions that occur in these classes. Educational leaders in online schools must
provide training and support for teachers in implementing these practices. In order to
successfully implement practices that promote interactions, teachers must have the knowledge,
motivation and support in place. By incorporating quality synchronous classes into daily
practices, online schools can strengthen the interactions between the student and their
environment, which is central to learning.
94

Offer Programs and Strategies to Promote Self-Regulated Learning for All Students
This study found that students who sought and accessed the academic, social, and
emotional support programs offered at the online school generally were more satisfied with the
level of support that they received. Therefore, online school leaders should reexamine which
programs should be optional versus required, so that they can ensure that all students are
properly supported. As described in the conceptual framework used in this study, the academic
supports that surround the learning processes are an important part of the online school
environment, therefore they should be available to all students, not just some.
In addition, students should have opportunities for feedback throughout the course, and
schools should maintain rigorous and challenging standards while providing students with
support, tutoring, mentoring, and tools to help them become successful in the online learning
environment. A thorough orientation program is also important to provide the student with an
opportunity to become comfortable with the online learning environment and pedagogy, while
also helping the student assess their willingness to work within the online environment (Rose,
2014). New and returning students should be offered in-depth and ongoing training on the
curriculum platform that is being used, as well as executive functioning skills to succeed as an
online learner.
Online schools should also use strategies to promote self-regulated learning that were
found in this study, such as providing pacing support, monitoring engagement, supporting
students and families to work in computer-based learning environments, and other activities that
guide learners toward promoting ownership of their learning and self-monitoring. Furthermore,
online schools should ensure that students have access to some evidence-based supports, such as
opportunities for collaborative projects and content that has real world applications.
95

Provide Activities That Promote Student-Student Interactions in Synchronous Classes
Teachers in online schools should utilize practices that promote student-student
interactions, such as group work for projects or problem-solving tasks, to allow students to use
active, constructive, and interactive modes of learning. In contrast to passive modes of learning,
which leads only to knowledge storing and recalling information, these modes of learning lead to
deeper learning through the integration, application, co-inferring and co-creation of knowledge
(Chi, 2014). Rather than solely relying on direct instruction for the synchronous classes, online
teachers should use strategies and tools to allow students to interact with each other. For
example, teachers can utilize breakout rooms to allow students to have small-group discussions,
prior to joining the whole-class discussions. Breakout rooms can also be utilized to allow
students to work in small groups for projects and problem-solving tasks, so that they can apply
and integrate their knowledge, which leads to higher-order learning. In order for these
discussions to be effective, teachers need to intentionally plan activities and tasks that require
discourse, rather than having them work together on tasks that can be competed independently.
Peer interactions and social presence are central to the learning process, so these collaborative
learning experiences should be available in the online learning environment. Schools should
provide training and support for teachers to successfully plan and implement online lessons that
promote these interactions.
Develop School-Wide Culture to Foster Growth on All SEL Competencies
In addition to academic supports, it is important for schools to also provide social-
emotional learning supports to their students. The ideal learning environment encourages social,
emotional, and cognitive development and provides opportunities for practicing social-emotional
skills (CASEL, n.d.). Online schools should offer programs that the participants in this study
96

perceived as effective in promoting their social and emotional development, such as Advisory
classes, onsite counseling groups, clubs, and regular check-in meetings with a teacher. Online
schools should also consider offering in-person study groups, field trips, and opportunities to
meet other students and to build community so that they do not feel isolated as independent
learners. In addition, SEL should be incorporated into the core curriculum activities, so that all
students have an opportunity to develop their skills in all five SEL competencies.
According to CASEL (n.d.), students’ social and emotional skills are developed not only
in classrooms, but also through schoolwide culture, at home and within the communities. Online
students who do not physically attend schools do not have as many classroom opportunities to
interact with other students, therefore schools should intentionally develop school-wide culture,
practices, and policies that help students to foster their social and emotional growth. In particular,
online schools should focus on supporting students in developing SEL competencies that
generally involve interactions with others, namely, social awareness and relationship
skills. Online schools should create authentic partnerships with families and caregivers, so that
they are able to better support students’ social-emotional development at home. Online schools
should also partner with community organizations through internships and service-learning
programs, to create more opportunities for students to develop in all five competencies of social-
emotional learning.
Create Interactions to Foster Cultural Competence and Critical Consciousness
The learning process must also be supported by equity-based practices that focus not only
on students’ academic success but also develop their cultural competence and support their
consciousness in a way that allows them to critique systems that perpetuate social inequities
(Ladson-Billings, 1995b). Although the alumni from the online school in this study were able to
97

identify programs and practices to support student learning and academic success, they could not
recall programs and practices that developed students' cultural competence and critical
consciousness. Therefore, it is important for online school leaders to incorporate ways to help
students develop their cultural competence and critical consciousness, not only to foster students’
commitment to act against systems of injustice but also to increase their academic achievement
and engagement. This can be done not only in special classes, workshops, and support classes,
but also in the curriculum and through the necessary interactions and social relations with other
students.
Future Research
Given this study’s focus on high schools, future research could further the findings of this
study by examining academic, social, and emotional learning support programs and practices
within the elementary and middle school contexts. Furthermore, future research might seek to
evaluate the relationships between specific programs and practices and their outcomes. This
research did not measure the impact of the practices or strategies identified; therefore, I cannot
attribute any student outcomes to these practices or strategies. Future studies could be designed
to find the correlations between the types of support provided and student outcome such as GPA
and graduation rates, to identify programs and strategies that lead to positive outcomes and to
help narrow any existing gaps.
Furthermore, the population studied in this research were all recent graduates of online or
distance learning schools, so the results could be biased. There was also a possible voluntary bias
because the sample was taken from former students who volunteered to participate in the study.
Future research could investigate perceptions of students who attended but did not graduate from
online schools, or those who transferred out of these programs. In addition, future studies can
98

examine what deters students from accessing the optional resources to better understand what
online schools can do to improve access and utilization of programs they offer.
This study was conducted in two public charter schools in San Diego County, so future
studies could include more schools in the district, other districts, or states to create a more
comprehensive list of effective supports offered by schools in various regions. Future studies can
closely examine the difference in supports that are offered in different types of schools—for
example, comparing between fully online schools and blended learning schools.
Conclusions
While there is a growing need for and availability of online schools, educational leaders
lack a clear understanding about how to best support students in this unique environment. By
understanding the perceptions of former students who graduated from this learning environment,
this research sought to shed light on practices and support programs that could best support
students in online schools through student interactions, academic support programs, SEL support
programs, and culturally relevant pedagogy. In doing so, I aimed to contribute to a broader
conversation about how to advance equity and student success in online and distance learning
environments.
By hearing the voices of alumni who graduated from an online school and a traditionally
in-person school that transitioned to distance learning during the pandemic, I was able to identify
best practices as well as gaps and areas of improvement. I found that the optional support
programs led to varying degrees of teacher-student and student-student interactions, and that
while academic, social, and emotional learning supports were offered at the online school, they
were not equally accessed by all students. As a result, not all students had opportunities to
develop in SEL competencies that involve interactions with others. Similarly, the limited
99

interactions did not provide enough opportunities for students to fully develop their cultural
competence and critical consciousness. In contrast, the traditionally in-person school required
more synchronous classes and provided more opportunities for important interactions that
allowed all students to develop in the SEL competencies. The traditionally in-person school was
also able to provide opportunities for students to develop their cultural competence and critical
consciousness by incorporating these lessons and practices into the core curriculum.
School leaders can help to better support students in online and distance learning
environments by ensuring that interactions are part of all students’ learning experiences. By
doing so, they can create a community of learners who feel supported and connected. Distance
learning does not have to happen in isolation.
100

References
Atkins, L., & Duckworth, V. (2019). Research methods for social justice and equity in
education. (Vol. 1). Bloomsbury Academic.
Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition:
Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5/6),
367–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1272-9
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Prentice Hall.
Barbour, M. K. (2019). Handbook of distance education (Vol. 4). Routledge
Bourne, J. R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J. O. (1997). Paradigms for on-line
learning: A case study in the design and implementation of an asynchronous learning
networks (ALN) course. Teaching and Learning in an Era of Change, 1(1), 245–255.
https://doi.org/ 10.1109/FIE.1997.644851
Buddin, R., & Zimmer, R. (2005). Student achievement in charter schools: A complex
picture. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management: The Journal of the Association for
Public Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 351–371.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20093
California Department of Education. (2020). Designing a high quality course online.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/dl/hqonlinecourse.asp
Carr-Chellman, A., & Duchastel, P. (2001). The ideal online course. Library Trends, 50(1),
145–158.
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/8379/librarytrendsv50i1k_opt.pdf?
sequence=1
Carter, D. J. (2008). Cultivating a critical race consciousness for African American school
101

success. Educational Foundations, 22(1), 11–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ839495
Carter, R. A., Jr., Rice, M., Yang, S., & Jackson, H. A. (2020). Self-regulated learning in online
learning environments: Strategies for remote learning. Information and Learning
Sciences, 121(5/6), 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0114
Cavanaugh, J. K., & Jacquemin, S. J. (2015). A large sample comparison of grade based student
learning outcomes in online vs. face-to-face courses. Online Learning, 19(2).
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1062940
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to
active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (n.d.). What is the CASEL
framework? https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/what-is-the-casel-framework/
Dee, T. S., & Penner, E. K. (2017). The causal effects of cultural relevance: Evidence from an
ethnic studies curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 127–166.
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w21865/w21865.pdf
De Verneil, M., & Berge, Z. L. (2000). Going online: Guidelines for faculty in higher
education. AACE Review, 1(13), 13–32. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8057/
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐
based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Dusenbury, L., Calin, S., Domitrovich, C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2015). What does evidence-
102

based instruction in social and emotional learning actually look like in practice?
Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574862
Ferdig, R. E. (2010). Understanding the role and applicability of K-12 online learning to support
student dropout recovery efforts. Michigan Virtual University.
https://mvlri.org/research/publications/understanding-the-role-and-applicability-of-k-12-
online-learning-to-support-student-dropout-recovery-efforts/
Gemin, B., & Pape, L. (2017). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning, 2016. Evergreen
Education Group. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED576762
Glass, G. V., & Welner, K. G. (2011). Online K-12 Schooling in the US: Uncertain Private
Ventures in Need of Public Regulation. National Education Policy Center.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED526345.pdf
Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and
collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, 1(2), 147–166. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/15156
Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (2013). Open learning environments: Foundations,
methods, and models. Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of
Instructional Theory, 2(1), 115–140. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410603784-12
Hasler-Waters, L., Barbour, M.K., & Menchaca, M.P. (2014). The nature of online
charter schools: Evolution and emerging concerns. Educational Technology & Society,
17(4), 379–389. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266386992
Heinrich, C. J., Darling-Aduana, J., & Good, A. G. (2020). Equity and quality in digital
103

learning: Realizing the promise in K-12 education. Harvard Education Press.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED608238
Hiltz, S. R., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (1997). Evaluating the importance of collaborative learning
in ALN's. In Proceedings Frontiers in Education 1997 27th Annual Conference.
Teaching and Learning in an Era of Change, 1(1), 432–436.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1253525.1253920
International Association for K-12 Online Learning. (2007). National standards for quality
online teaching. http://www.aurora-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/national-standards-
for-quality-online-teaching-v2.pdf
International Association for K-12 Online Learning. (2009). National standards for quality
online teaching. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509638.pdf
International Association for K-12 Online Learning. (2011). National standards for quality
online teaching. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537339.pdf
Irwin, C. W., & Stafford E. T. (2016). Survey methods for educators: Collaborative survey
development (part 1 of 3) (REL 2016-163). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of
Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs
Kumar, R., Zusho, A., & Bondie, R. (2018). Weaving cultural relevance and achievement
motivation into inclusive classroom cultures. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 78–96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1432361
Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995a). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
104

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465
Liao, L. F. (2006). A flow theory perspective on learner motivation and behavior in distance
education. Distance Education, 27(1), 45–62.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600653215
Lin, C. H., Zheng, B., & Zhang, Y. (2017). Interactions and learning outcomes in online
language courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 730–748.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12457
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research. Connecting
methods to practice. Sage.
Mann, B. (2019). Whiteness and economic advantage in digital schooling: Diversity patterns and
equity considerations for K-12 online charter schools. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 27(9), 105–133, https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4532
Marsh, R. M., Carr-Chellman, A. A., & Sockman, B. R. (2009). Why parents choose cyber
charter schools. TechTrends, 53(4), 32–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-009-0303-9
McCombs, B. L. (2001). What do we know about learners and learning? The learner-centered
framework: Bringing the educational system into balance. Educational Horizons, 79(4),
182–193. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42927064
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2013). Evaluation of
evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online
learning studies. U.S. Department of Education.
https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
105

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Molnar, A., Miron, G., Elgeberi, N., Barbour, M. K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S. R., & Rice, J. K.
(2019). Virtual schools in the US 2019. National Education Policy Center.
http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2019
Moore, R., Vitale, D., & Stawinoga, N. (2018). The digital divide and educational equity. ACT
Center for Equity in Learning. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED593163.pdf
Ni, A. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of classroom and online learning: Teaching
research methods. Journal of Public Affairs Education , 19(2), 199–215.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2013.12001730
Office of the Legislative Auditor. (2011). Evaluation report summary: K-12 online learning.
State of Minnesota. https://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/k12oll.pdf
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace:
Effective strategies for the online classroom. Jossey-Bass.
Patrick, S., & Powell, A. (2009). A summary of research on the effectiveness of K-12 online
learning. International Association for K-12 Online Learning.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509626.pdf
Prothero, A., & Harwin, A. (2019, April 18). Many online charter schools fail to graduate even
half of their students on time. Education Week.
https://www.edweek.org/teachinglearning/many-online-charter-schools-fail-to-graduate-
even-half-of-their-students-on-time/2019/04
Rice, K. L. (2014). Research and history of policies in K-12 online and blended learning. In
106

R. E. Ferdig & K. Kennedy (Eds.), Handbook of research on K-12 online and blended
learning (pp. 51–81). ETC Press.
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2019) Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective
Teacher-student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-
analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793
Rose, R. (2014). Access and equity for all learners in blended and online education.
International Association For K-12 Online Learning.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED561307.pdf
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers
College Press.
Schroeder, B. 2019. Disrupting education. The rise of K-12 online and the entrepreneurial
opportunities. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernhardschroeder/2019/08/14/disrupting-
education-the-rise-of-k-12-online-and-the-entrepreneurial-
opportunities/?sh=6d5c9b6648a2
Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson.
Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic
literature review of definitions of online learning (1988–2018). American Journal of
Distance Education, 33(4), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082
Stone, C. (2017). Opportunity through online learning: Improving student access, participation
107

and success in higher education. The National Centre for student equity in higher
education, Curtin University. https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/CathyStone_EQUITY-FELLOWSHIP-FINAL-REPORT-1.pdf
Stuiber, P., Strom-Hiorns, K., Kleidon, B., LaTarte, A., & Martin, J. (2010). An evaluation:
Virtual charter schools. Department of Public Instruction.
https://legis.wisconsin.gov/lab/reports/10-3full.pdf
Swan, K., Garrison, D. R., & Richardson, J. C. (2009). A constructivist approach to online
learning: The community of inquiry framework. In C. R. Payne (Ed.), Information
technology and constructivism in higher education: Progressive learning frameworks
(pp. 43–57). IGI global.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). Household pulse survey: February 17 – March 1.
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2021/demo/hhp/hhp25.html#tables
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online
learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies.
https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017.
National education technology plan update.
https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2019). Public elementary/secondary school universe survey,
1990–91 through 2016–17. https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubschuniv.asp
U.S. Department of Education. (2021). Identifying virtual schools using the common core of
data. https://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/identifying-virtual-schools-using-the-common-
core-of-data-ccd
108

Virtual Learning Leadership Alliance. (2019). National standards for quality online programs.
https://www.nsqol.org/the-standards/quality-online-programs/
Watson, J. F., Gemin, B., Ryan, J., & Wicks, M. (2009). Keeping pace with K–12 online
learning: A review of state level policy and practice [Policy brief]. Evergreen Education
Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535909.pdf
Watson, J. F., & Pape, L. (2015). School accountability in the digital age. Keeping pace with
K-12 digital learning [Policy brief]. Evergreen Education Group.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED558164.pdf
Watts, R. J., Diemer, M. A., & Voight, A. M. (2011). Critical consciousness: Current status and
future directions. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2011(134), 43–
57. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.310
Zheng, L. (2016). The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic
performance in computer-based learning environments: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific
Education Review, 17(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9426-9

109

Appendix A: Introduction to Research Letter
Dear (Name of Administrator),
My name is Gail Gonzalez Coloyan, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School
of Education at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as part of
my dissertation, which examines the types of support that high school students received during
distance learning. I would like to request your permission to conduct this study at your
organization. If you agree, I would send you a letter to be sent to your alumni who graduated
during the 2019–2020 or 2020–2021 school years, which contains the invitation and a link to an
online survey that contains multiple choice questions.
Participation in this study is completely voluntary. The participants’ and your school’s
identity will remain strictly confidential during and after the study.
If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me via phone or email:
Cell Phone: 650.346.9484
Email: coloyan@usc.edu
Thank you for your participation,
Gail Gonzalez Coloyan
University of Southern California

110

Appendix B: Study Invitation Email Cover Letter
Dear (School Name) Alumni,
My name is Gail Gonzalez Coloyan, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School
of Education at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as part of
my dissertation, which examines the academic, social and emotional support that high school
students receive during distance learning. I hope that the results of this study could help inform
school leaders about the types of support to provide students during distance learning and in
online schools.
You are cordially invited to participate in the study. If you agree, you are invited to
complete an online survey that contains multiple choice questions. The online survey is
anticipated to take no more than 10 minutes to complete.
Depending on your responses to the survey and your availability, you may be asked to be
interviewed via Zoom or Google Meet. The interview is anticipated to last approximately 45
minutes and may be audio-taped.
Participation in this study is completely voluntary. Your and your school’s identity will
remain strictly confidential during and after the study.
If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me via phone or email:
Cell Phone: 650.346.9484
Email: coloyan@usc.edu
Thank you for your participation,
Gail Gonzalez Coloyan
University of Southern California
You may access the survey at the following link:
https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5haIvcWVPI6DVdA
111

Appendix C: Alumni Survey Instrument
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. The purpose of this survey is to
help us gather more information about programs that provide academic and social-emotional
learning support during distance learning. All responses will remain confidential, anonymous
and you can opt out of this survey at any time. This survey will take approximately ten minutes
or less.
Part I: Demographic Information
Please select the most appropriate answer.
1) What ethnicities do you identify as? (Check
all that apply.)
❏ Asian
❏ Black/African
❏ Caucasian
❏ Hispanic/Latinx
❏ Native American
❏ Pacific Islander
- None of the above?
❏ Prefer not to answer
2) What year did you graduate
❏ 2019 or earlier
❏ 2020
❏ 2021
❏ 2022 or later
3) Before the COVID19 pandemic, what mode
of curriculum delivery did your school
primarily use?
❏ Online/distance learning
❏ Blended learning
❏ In-person learning
4) Before the COVID19 pandemic,
what mode of instruction did your
school primarily use?
❏ Asynchronous (I was able to access
online instruction at any time.)
❏ Synchronous (I met with the teacher
and/or other students at a specific time.)
❏ Equal amount of asynchronous and
synchronous
112

Table A1 includes the Likert-style questions asked in the Part II of the online survey, in
which participants were asked about their level of agreement with the statements.

Table A1 Survey Questions Regarding Programs and Opportunities for Interaction

Survey Questions Regarding Programs and Opportunities for Interaction

Statement Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
I had opportunities to interact with
my peers on a regular basis.
1 2 3 4 5
I had opportunities to interact with
my teachers on a regular basis.
1 2 3 4 5
The school provided programs and
practices that supported my
academic success.
1 2 3 4 5
The school provided programs and
practices that helped me become
more aware of my own identity
and culture.
1 2 3 4 5
The school provided programs and
practices that helped me
develop an in-depth
understanding of the world.
1 2 3 4 5
The school offered programs and
practices that helped me take
responsibility for my own
behavior and wellbeing.
1 2 3 4 5
113

Statement Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
The school offered programs and
practices to support my
knowledge of my own
character, feelings, and desires.
1 2 3 4 5
The school offered programs and
practices to support my ability
to empathize with others from
diverse backgrounds and
cultures.
1 2 3 4 5
The school offered programs and
practices that helped me
establish and maintain healthy
and rewarding relationships.
1 2 3 4 5
The school offered programs and
practices that helped me to
make responsible decisions.
1 2 3 4 5
The academic supports that were
offered at our school were
effective in improving my
academic outcomes during my
last year of high school.
1 2 3 4 5
The social and emotional learning
support that were offered at our
school were effective in
improving my social and
emotional wellbeing during my
last year of high school.
1 2 3 4 5
Attending my school helped me to
develop and grow as a whole
person.
1 2 3 4 5

114

Table A2 includes the questions asked in the Part III of the online survey, in which
participants were asked about their level of satisfaction with the supports they received during
distance learning.

Table A2 Survey Questions Regarding Satisfaction with Supports Received

Survey Questions Regarding Satisfaction with Supports Received

Statement Extremely
dissatisfied
Somewhat
dissatisfied
Neutral Somewhat
satisfied
Extremely
satisfied
How satisfied are you with the
academic support that you
received during the 2019–
2020 and/or 2020–2021
school year?

1 2 3 4 5
How satisfied are you with the
social and emotional
learning support that you
received during the 2019–
2020 and/or 2020–2021
school year?

1 2 3 4 5
How satisfied are you with the
overall education you
received during the 2019–
2020 and/or 2020–2021
school year?
1 2 3 4 5

115

Part IV
17) Please list the types of programs and practices that your school had in place, if any, to
support students academically.
_____________________________________________________________________________
18) List the types of programs and practices that your school had in place, if any, to support
students’ social and emotional growth.
_____________________________________________________________________________
19) If support programs were offered at your school but you did not receive them (either by
choice or other reasons), please explain why.
______________________________________________________________________________
20) Are you willing to participate in the interview portion of this study? This interview will be
conducted using Google Meet.
● Yes
● No

20a) If your answer to the question above is “Yes,” please enter your email address
below:
__________________________________________________________________

116

Appendix D: Interview Invitation Cover Letter
Dear (School Name) Alumni,
My name is Gail Gonzalez Coloyan, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of
Education at University of Southern California. First, I would like to thank you for taking the
time to complete the survey to help us gather more information about programs that provide
social emotional learning and academic support during distance learning.
You have been selected to participate in the interview portion of the study, so I would like to
schedule our meeting on Google Hangout. Please let me know your availability next week.

Attached are copies of the study proposal, Consent to Participate Letter, and the Interview
Protocol which I will review prior to conducting the interview. The interview will last between
30-45 minutes and will be conducted via Google Hangout. Your name and school will remain
confidential, and I will take measures to protect your privacy and confidentiality.

I look forward to speaking with you and I truly appreciate your participation! I hope that the
results of this study could help inform school leaders about the types of support to provide
students during distance learning and in online schools. If you have any questions, please feel
free to email me or call me at 650.346.9484.

Best regards,
Gail Gonzalez Coloyan

117

Appendix E: Informed Consent For Research
Study Title: Academic, Social and Emotional Learning Supports for Students in
Distance Learning High Schools
Principal Investigator: Gail Gonzalez Coloyan
Department: Rossier School of Education
INTRODUCTION
We invite you to take part in a research study. Please take as much time as you need to read the
consent form. You may want to discuss it with your family or friends. If you find any of the
language difficult to understand, please ask questions. If you decide to participate, you will be
asked to sign this form. A copy of the signed form will be provided to you for your records.
DETAILED INFORMATION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to understand alumni’s perceptions about the types of support and
opportunities for interactions that students received during distance learning. We hope to
understand your experiences, opinions and beliefs about the types of supports you received
while distance learning during the 2020-2021 school year. We hope to learn about the effective
supports to provide distance learners and students in online schools. You are invited as a
possible participant because you are a high school alumni who attended a school that offered
distance learning during the 2020-2021 school year. About 10 participants will take part in the
interview portion of this study.
PROCEDURES
If you decide to take part, this is what will happen:
● We will schedule a time that is convenient for you to conduct an interview that will last
approximately 45 minutes. I will send a reminder email two days prior to our scheduled
interview date.
● Before beginning the interview, I will read a script that briefly reviews the purpose of the
study, why you were selected, and the length of the interview. I will also remind you about
the recording of the interview, ask for verbal permission for the recording, and ask if you
have any questions.
● I will conduct the interview by asking the twelve questions about your experiences, opinions
and beliefs about the types of support you received during distance learning.
118

● After the interview process has concluded, I will transcribe the interview and analyze the
data to answer the research questions. Your name and school will remain confidential.
● I will schedule a follow up meeting to review the data I collected. You will be given the
opportunity to confirm your narratives or request to omit any responses you do not want to
be included.
● I will email a thank you letter and final copy of my findings and results. ● The
interview transcript data will be placed on labeled and password-protected flash drives,
and that the data will be deleted from the flash drives in 3 years.
RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
Surveys and Interviews: Possible risks and discomforts you could experience during this study
include discussing topics that you are uncomfortable talking about or you may share some
personal information or opinion by chance. Some of the questions may make you feel uneasy or
embarrassed. However, we do not wish for this to happen. You can choose to skip or stop
answering any questions you don’t want to.
Breach of Confidentiality There is a small risk that people who are not connected with this
study will learn your identity or your personal information.
Unforeseen Risks: There may be other risks that are not known at this time.
BENEFITS
There are no direct benefits to you from taking part in this study. However, your
participation in this study may help us learn about the effective types of support to
provide to students in distance learning or online schools.
PRIVACY/CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. Efforts will
be made to limit the use and disclosure of your personal information, including research study
records, to people who are required to review this information.
The University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Human
Subject’s Protections Program (HSPP) may review your records.
Your data and/or specimens collected as part of this research will not be used or
distributed for future research studies, even if all your identifiers are removed.

ALTERNATIVES
An alternative would be to not participate in this study.
119

PAYMENTS / COMPENSATION
You will not be compensated for your participation in this research.
COST
There are no costs related to participation.
VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION
It is your choice whether to participate. If you choose to participate, you may change your mind
and leave the study at any time. If you decide not to participate, or choose to end your
participation in this study, you will not be penalized or lose any benefits that you are otherwise
entitled to.
CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, complaints, or think the research has hurt you, talk to the
study principal investigator, Gail Gonzalez Coloyan at 650.346.9484 or by email at
coloyan@usc.edu.
This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
research participant or you have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at
(323) 442-0114 or by email at irb@usc.edu.
Signature of Participant
___________________________________
Date
___________________________________

120

Appendix F: Interview Cover Sheet

Name of Researcher:
Date of Interview:
Name of Interviewee:
Position of Interviewee:
Type of School:
City:
Authorizer’s Phone Number:
Authorizer’s Email Address:
Interview start time:
Interview end time:

Good afternoon! My name is Gail Gonzalez Coloyan and I am a researcher at the
University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. I am conducting a study about
the academic, social and emotional learning support that students receive during distance
learning. You were chosen to participate in this study because you are a high school alumni who
attended a school that offered distance learning during the 2020–2021 school year. I will focus
on the opportunities for interactions with your peers and teachers, as well as the types of support
that you received during distance learning. The information that you provide will hopefully serve
to inform school leaders about effective types of support to offer students during distance
learning and in online schools.
This interview will last about 30-45 minutes and I will be asking you twelve questions
about your experiences and opinion as a teacher/administrator in a distance learning
environment. I want to assure you that your comments will be strictly confidential. I will not
identify you, or your school, by name. You can skip any questions or stop at any time
If you don’t mind, I would like to record the interview so I can focus on our conversation
and to ensure that my notes are accurate. The recording will only be used for the purpose of
helping me to transcribe and all of your responses will remain confidential. If at any point during
the interview you would like to stop the recording, you can let me know or simply press this red
button right here and it will stop the recording. Do you give permission for this recording?
Thank you for your time and for agreeing to participate in this study. Do you have any
questions before I start?
Interview Protocol
1. Please describe what a typical school day may look like during distance learning.
121

What are you doing and what is the teacher doing?

2. Describe a time when you felt that you were the most engaged during distance
learning, if any?

3. Now we’re going to move on to questions about the opportunities for interaction that
you had during distance learning.

4. Describe, if any, the interactions that you had with the teacher, outside of direct
instruction. Do you notice any changes in your level of engagement during this time?

5. Describe, if any, the opportunities that you had to interact with other students during
distance learning. Do you notice any changes in your level of engagement
during/after their interactions with other students?

6. Describe the practices and programs that your teachers or school provided to support
your social and emotional learning?

7. Describe the practices and programs that your teachers or school provided to support
your academic success?

8. Describe the experiences, if any, that you had during distance learning that you feel
helped to develop an awareness of your own or others’ cultural identity?

9. Describe the experiences, if any, that you had during distance learning that you feel
helped to develop your critical consciousness.

10. We’ve been talking about your perceptions about your experiences as a student. Now
I’d like to ask about your opinions and beliefs about distance learning.

11. Describe what you believe is the role of student interactions in distance learning.

12. Some people would say that online education/distance learning is not as effective as
in-person schooling. What would you say to them?

13. Thank you! You've given me a lot of information about your experiences and opinion
about distance learning. Now I’d like to ask you about your recommendations for the
school.

14. If you had the power to change or recreate the online education/distance learning
experience in a way that best supports students, what would you do differently, if
any?

15. In an ideal school, what types of programs, practices or support, if any, would they
offer to help students’ academic, social and emotional growth?

122

Closing
● That concludes the questions I wanted to ask. Are there any related issues or topics
that you would like to discuss that I haven’t asked about yet?

● If I have some clarifying questions, can I check back with you at a later time?

● Thank you so much for your time.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Teacher as nurturer: perceptions of elementary teachers integrating social and emotional learning practices

PDF

How urban high school principals implement social and emotional learning (SEL)

PDF

Optimal applications of social and emotional learning paradigms for improvements in academic performance

PDF

Leveraging social-emotional learning to improve school climate, mental health, and student achievement in K-12 student populations

PDF

TikToking and Instagramming: following high school teacher influencers' roles in supporting and informing teacher practices

PDF

Teachers' experiences implementing social and emotional learning in the elementary classroom

PDF

The impact of cultural wealth and role models on the transformation of an individual’s future self

PDF

The academic implications of providing social emotional learning in K-12: an evaluation study

PDF

An analysis of online engagement of secondary teachers at high need schools during COVID-19 shutdowns

PDF

Transformative social-emotional learning: an action research study on supporting parents in a predominantly White community…

PDF

Teachers' voices: SEL perceptions in a grade 9-12 school

PDF

Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study

PDF

Nourish to flourish: strengthening social emotional wellness of teachers to mitigate stress, enrich engagement, and increase efficacy: an evaluation study

PDF

Line staff and their influence on youth in expanded learning programs: an evaluation model

PDF

School disciplined reimagined: centering Black students in discipline policies

PDF

Reforming student discipline policies in elementary schools: an improvement study

PDF

A culture of care in elementary schools to impact Black student academic achievement: a case study

PDF

Analyzing the implementation of a learning management system into a post-merger & acquisition organization and its effects on sales performance (improvement model)

PDF

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals

PDF

What are teacher beliefs about social emotional learning in a synchronous webcam-enabled online higher education learning environment?

Asset Metadata

Creator Coloyan, Gail Gonzalez (author)

Core Title Academic, social, and emotional supports for high school students in online schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/19/2022

Defense Date 04/20/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag academic support,cyber school,distance learning,hybrid school,independent study,K-12,OAI-PMH Harvest,online school,programs,SEL supports,social emotional learning,support

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Cash, David (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member), Krop, Cathy (committee member)

Creator Email coloyan@usc.edu,gailcoloyan@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111333303

Unique identifier UC111333303

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Coloyan, Gail Gonzalez

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20220523-usctheses-batch-943 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu