University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…

(USC Thesis Other)

Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Analyzing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic On K–12 Southern California Public
School Districts and Understanding What District and Site Administrators, Specifically
Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, and Principals, Have Learned From Their
Experiences and Their Decision Making Responsibilities in Managing the Crisis
by
Christian Yosseline Mora

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

© Copyright by Christian Yosseline Mora 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Christian Yosseline Mora certifies the approval of this Dissertation

David Cash
Greg Franklin
Rudy Castruita, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern
California K–12 school districts and understand what district and site administrators have learned
from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing the crisis. This
study brings to light the impact of the pandemic on students, families, leaders, schools, and
districts and examines how district and school leadership influences administrative practices,
student achievement, financial responsibility, union leadership, and community/parent support as
they responded to the COVID-19 crisis. More specifically, this study set out to determine: (a)
financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on K–12 public school districts in
Southern California and how have district superintendents, assistant superintendents and
principals addressed these implications, (b) the impact of federal, state and local health agencies
on K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and what strategies district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to address the suggested
guidelines, (c) how union negotiations played a role in K–12 Southern California public school
districts’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and (d) how K–12 Southern California public
school districts leadership teams comprised of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals addressed the concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition, distance
learning, lack of technology, academic standing, and how and when to re-open schools due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. This study implemented a mixed-methods approach in which 9 Southern
California K–12 district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals completed a
survey and participated in a structured interview. Through this process of mixed-methods data
collection, the study’s findings indicate that district and site administration relied on the power of
nourishing relationships, both new and on-going, to ground their decision making in their values

in prioritizing safety and needs for their staff, students, and parents. In addition, K–12
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals acknowledged that collaboration and
the sharing of resources played a critical component in moving forward during the COVID-19
pandemic crisis. These practices will not only help improve the school system and student
learning experiences during the pandemic, but also in future attempts to provide a more equitable
landscape for students and staff. Ultimately, this study provides guidance for district and site
administrators decision-making responsibilities in managing future crises.

vi

Dedication
To my powerhouse of a Mother Margarita Mora, this dissertation is first and foremost dedicated
to you. Ama, siempre me das crédito por mis logros. Nunca te atribuyes el mérito de mis logros,
pero la base que creaste para mi hermana y para mí en casa ha sido fundamental para nuestro
éxito. Mantuviste tus expectativas altas, nunca dejaste de hacerme sentir amada y me apoyaste en
todos mis esfuerzos. Siempre has sido mi lugar seguro cuando las cosas se ponen difíciles, mi
mayor animadora cuando me siento desanimada. Gracias por recordarme siempre quién soy. Eres
la razón por la que he llegado tan lejos. Siempre has sido mi mayor apoyo y sé que no sería la
persona que soy hoy sin tu amor. Te quiero mucho.

To my beautiful MMV and Mora family, thank you for always encouraging me to keep going. It
really does take a village. I am so honored to be able to share my journey with you all. Your love
and belief in me have always grounded me in my educational journey. Thank you for
understanding my journey and for never making me feel guilty for missing events or time with
you. Thank you for never making me feel like an outsider as I ventured out of Chicago to pursue
my dreams. No matter where I go, I always carry club Acapulco with me. I am so fortunate.

To my siblings, I love you all. Frankie, thank you for being the best role model I could have ever
asked for. Your love for learning, family, and community has inspired me to become a woman
with purpose. I hope you are looking down on me and proud of the legacy you have left for us to
continue. To my manito Victor, thank you for always supporting my path, whether it was looking
for apartments in Cincinnati or driving across the country to New York. Thank you for
reminding me to make intentional time with loved ones. I miss you. To Nani, as you venture out

vii
and create your own path, remember that you are a force to be reconned with. I am so grateful to
have you in California with me. Your confidence, positivity, and humor have truly lifted my
spirits and pushed me forward. You live your life with joy, and it inspires me to live my life to
the fullest.

To all of my students, past, and present, thank you for allowing me to be your teacher. Thank
you for reminding me every day why being a leader in education is where I belong. Remember
that you are brilliant, you belong, and capable.

viii
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and thank my USC dissertation cohort for their ongoing
support and guidance thorough out the dissertation journey. I feel so fortunate to have gone
through this doctoral journey alongside a cohort of 22 phenomenal educators. To my research
partners and Amigas, Valerie Granados and Erica Vallin, si se pudo Doctoras! I am so grateful
for your comradery and support through our dissertation process.
It is with utmost respect and appreciation to acknowledge my Dissertation Chair, Dr.
Rudy Castruita, and my Dissertation Committee Members, Dr. David Cash and Dr. Gregory
Franklin. The writing and completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without
their tireless assistance, support, guidance, and encouragement. I am grateful for your
mentorship.
To my sister Nani, first and foremost, thank you for your patience, humor, and
encouragement through this process. Your help in tidying up our home and cooking meals so that
I could focus on writing was such a tremendous support. Thank you for reminding me that I am
capable and always being there to lend a hug when I needed it.
For my love Ivan Flores, thank you for being such an amazing partner through this
process. You have really outdone yourself. I appreciate your patience, sacrifice, and your
solution-oriented nature, which always made some of my most challenging days bearable. Thank
you for giving me the space and opportunity to focus on my doctoral studies by handling
anything we needed to keep our home running and tackling tasks that would allow my week to
run smoothly. I appreciate you and could not have done this without you!
Lastly, I am most privileged and grateful for the anonymous superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals who graciously shared their time, knowledge, and experience

ix
vital for this research. I am inspired by their leadership in managing the Covid-19 crisis in the
communities that they serve.

x
Preface
Some of the chapters of this dissertation were co-authored and have been identified as
such, while jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort is reflective of real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School and the USC
Rossier School of Education have permitted our inquiry team to carry out this shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project between three doctoral candidates: Valerie
Granados, Christian Mora, and Erica Vallin. We three doctoral students met with
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in Southern California K–12 districts.
The three dissertations produced by our inquiry team collectively analyzed the impact of the
Covid-19 pandemic on K–12 Southern California public school districts and understanding what
district and site administrators, specifically superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals, have learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in
managing the crisis.

xi
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... viii
Preface ............................................................................................................................................. x
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... xiv
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xv
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 2
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 2
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 3
Limitation and Delimitations .............................................................................................. 4
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 4
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 10
Preparation, Training and Implementation of Schools Facing the Pandemic ................... 11
Leadership in Crisis Situations Facing Schools ................................................................ 18
Financial Support and Guidance From Outside Agencies ................................................ 21
Unions ............................................................................................................................... 23
Curriculum and Instruction Transition .............................................................................. 24
The Impact on Children in Schools During a Pandemic ................................................... 28
Potential Impact of COVID-19 on Student Achievement ................................................ 31
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 34

xii
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 35
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................. 35
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 35
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 36
Research Team .................................................................................................................. 36
Research Design ................................................................................................................ 37
Qualitative Methods .......................................................................................................... 37
Quantitative Methods ........................................................................................................ 38
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 39
Researcher 1 School District Information ......................................................................... 41
Researcher 2 School District Information ......................................................................... 41
Researcher 3 School District Information ......................................................................... 42
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 42
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 44
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 45
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 46
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 47
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 49
Demographic Data ............................................................................................................ 49
Results for Research Question 1 ....................................................................................... 55
Results for Research Question 2 ....................................................................................... 61
Results for Research Question 3 ....................................................................................... 68
Results for Research Question 4 ....................................................................................... 75
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 85
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 90

xiii
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 91
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 91
Findings ............................................................................................................................ 91
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 97
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 99
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 101
References ................................................................................................................................... 102
Appendix A: Superintendent Survey .......................................................................................... 118
Appendix B: Assistant Superintendent Survey ........................................................................... 123
Appendix C: Principal Survey .................................................................................................... 128
Appendix D: Research Participants Invitation Email ................................................................. 133
Appendix E: Superintendent Interview Protocol ........................................................................ 134
Appendix F: Assistant Superintendent Interview Protocol ......................................................... 136
Appendix G: Principal Interview Protocol ................................................................................. 138
Appendix H: Alignment of the Survey Protocol to the Research Questions and
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................... 140

xiv

List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Selection Criteria 40
Table 2: School District Participants: Demographic Information 50
Table 3: Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information 51
Table 4: Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information 52
Table 5: Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information 53
Table 6: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents of the Nine School Districts’
Perceptions of the Impact of Financial Implications of COVID-19
55
Table 7: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents of the Nine School Districts’
Perceptions of the Impact of Health and Safety Guidelines
61
Table 8: Quantitative Survey: District and Site Leaders’ Perceptions of the
Impact of Union Negotiation
67
Table 9: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents of the Nine School Districts’
Perceptions of Parent Concerns
76
Appendix H: Alignment of the Survey Protocol to the Research Questions and
Conceptual Framework
141

xv

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 44
1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The COVID-19 pandemic has been both rapidly evolving and lingering. This is
unusual for the types of crises schools typically face, which tend to be either immediate, like
an active shooter, or persistent, like underachievement (Gainey, 2009). The pandemic
prompted schools to close on very short notice under “hold harmless” guidelines from state
agencies overseeing education, except for school closures that lasted several weeks
(Fensterwald, 2020a). However, whether full or partial, the school closures caused by COVID-
19 have continued to impact school districts for over a year. As the pandemic lasted, the issues
facing school leaders and their school communities became more complex (Mayer et al.,
2008).
Background of the Problem
Federal and state governments assisted school districts financially to help address the
challenges of distance learning and safety. Governmental agencies also provided rules, guidance,
and protocols to help schools operate in these new circumstances. While these were sometimes
very helpful, they could also be contradictory and difficult to enforce, which caused problems
for school districts. As these rules and regulations evolved, so too did the roles and expectations
of district employees. Unions renegotiated fundamental aspects of working conditions during
this time to keep members safe and to express how the pandemic impacted their work. Parents
were also heavily impacted by the pandemic as students stayed home to learn. Parents rely on
schools not just for education but also for childcare, food, and social, emotional, and medical
care for their children. These stakeholder concerns drastically changed the role of school
leadership, both at the district and site levels. School leaders became crisis managers to see their
organizations through this tumultuous time of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2

Statement of the Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted Southern California K–12 school districts,
causing unforeseen consequences within the education system and highlighting financial
implications, the impact of agencies, negotiations with unions, and the impact on students and
the community. COVID-19 shifted schools and school leaders’ roles and scope beyond
instructional leaders and transformed them into “crisis managers.”
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
Southern California K–12 school districts and understand what district and site administrators
have learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing
the crisis. This study brings to light the impact of the pandemic on students, families, leaders,
schools, and districts. Most importantly, this study examines how district and school
leadership influences administrative practices, student achievement, financial responsibility,
union leadership, and community/parent support as they responded to the COVID-19 crisis.
Research Questions
Four research questions guided the study:
1. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had
on K–12 public school districts in Southern California and how have district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these
implications?
2. What, if any, have been the impact of federal, state and local health agencies on
K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and what strategies have
district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to
address the suggested guidelines?
3

3. How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12 Southern California
public school districts' response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
4. How, if at all, have K–12 Southern California public school districts leadership
teams comprised of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals
addressed the concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition, distance
learning, lack of technology, academic standing, and how and when to re-open
schools due to the COVID 19 pandemic?
Significance of the Study
This study is significant as it will add to the body of knowledge about the evolving
roles and responses of California public K–12 school superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 shifted schools
and school leaders’ roles and scope beyond instructional leaders by transforming them into
“crisis managers”. This unprecedented event in history forced educational leadership to quickly
make changes in a strategic way to support students and families. Educational leadership was
on display in California, from the Governor’s office to K–12 school educators and classified
staff members who prioritized student safety at the expense of academic excellence. Difficult
decisions had to be made to support many student needs throughout school closures. By
analyzing this crisis’s effective practices and shortcomings from the leaders on the frontlines,
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals, we hope to gain insight about
prevention and implementation as future crises occur in education. If a pandemic ever occurs
again, this study will support how the crises could be addressed school leaders, educators,
boards of education, and community stakeholders through existing systems. The results of this
study are meant to reimagine and revolutionize a new educational landscape that is committed
to building a culture of equity in order to repay the educational debt.
4

Limitation and Delimitations
There are some boundaries of the study beyond the control of the research team that
may affect internal validity. Limitations of this study include the following:
1. The ongoing disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on public education.
2. The participants are only from Southern California public schools.
3. Self-reporting surveys are included; interview questions may contain researcher bias.
4. Interviews conducted virtually.
5. The sample may not accurately represent all schools districts in California.
Recommendations include using a similar process to include a larger representation from
different districts throughout California or the United States.
In addition, the delimitations of the study relate to the generalizability of the findings
and are associated with availability of time and resources. To narrow the focus of this study, the
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals selected are current leaders in large
urban public-school districts in Southern California who were willing to participate in the study.
Definition of Terms
The following is a list of key terms and definitions used throughout this research study:
Assembly and Senate Bill 86: this bill provided $2 billion as an incentive for schools
that have not already done so to offer in-person instruction beginning April 1, 2021 starting
with the earliest grades. The legislation also allocated $4.6 billion for all school districts
regardless of whether they meet the timetable Gov. Gavin Newsom called for in his “Safe
Schools for All” plan (Jones & Freedberg, 2021).
Assembly and Senate Bill 129: a landmark state budget agreement that added a year of
school for all 4-year-olds, significantly expands Cal Grants and middle-class scholarships for
5

college students and provides record funding for pre-K–12 schools anxious to use billions in
one-time money to bounce back from a 15-month pandemic (Fensterwald et al., 2021).
Asynchronous learning: Asynchronous learning occurs without direct, simultaneous
interaction of participants such as videos featuring direct instruction of new content students
watch on their own time (CDE, 2020).
California Department of Education (CDE): Governmental body that oversees the state's
diverse public school system, which is responsible for the education of more than six million
children and young adults in more than 10,000 schools with 300,000 teachers. Specifically, they
are in charge of enforcing education law and regulations and continuing to reform and improve
public school programs (CDE, 2020).
California Department of Public Health (CDPH): a public agency that focuses on
infectious disease control and prevention, food safety, environmental health, laboratory services,
patient safety, emergency preparedness, chronic disease prevention and health promotion,
family health, health equity and vital records and statistics (CDPH, 2021).
California School Employees Association (CSEA): The California School Employees
Association is the largest classified school employee union in the United States, representing
more than 250,000 school support staff throughout California. CSEA members perform a wide
range of essential work in our public schools and community colleges, including security, food
services, office and clerical work, school maintenance and operations, transportation,
academic assistance and paraeducator services, library and media assistance, computer
services and more (CSEA, 2021).
CARES Act: The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act)
was passed by Congress on March 27th, 2020. This bill allotted $2.2 trillion to provide fast and
direct economic aid to the American people negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
6

Of that money, approximately $14 billion was given to the Office of Postsecondary Education
as the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (CSEA, 2021).
Center for Disease Control (CDC): National health agency that “conducts critical
science and provides health information” and responds to health crises (CDC, 2021)
Cohort: "refers to a group of individuals who have something in common" such as
same grade level, or specific student groups such as English Learners. (EdGlossary, 2013).
Collective bargaining agreement (CBA): The primary activity of a union is to represent
the teachers in negotiating the terms of employment contracts, called collective bargaining.
Under the Rodda Act, passed in 1975, the school board and the union must review the terms of
the existing agreement at least once every three years. The result of this negotiation determines
the salaries and benefits, hours, calendar, and most aspects of teachers’ working conditions.
Negotiators can also discuss problems and address new issues that have arisen during the period
of the contract. This can be especially significant when the legislature and governor have passed
new laws—for example, about COVID-19 safety measures, school finance or teacher training
and evaluation. A district can implement these laws only after the impact has been collectively
bargained (EdData, 2021).
COVID-19: A novel strain of coronaviruses that shares 79% genetic similarity with
SARS-CoV from the 2003 SARS outbreak, declared in March 2020 by the World Health
Organization (WHO) as a global pandemic (World Health Organization Coronavirus
Dashboard, 2021; Xiong et al., 2020).
Distance learning: Instruction in which the pupil and instructor are in different
locations and pupils are under the general supervision of a certificated employee of the local
educational agency (CDE, 2020).
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER): ESSER, established in
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, and further funded under
7

the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act and the
American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act, the U.S. Department of Education awarded emergency relief
funds to address the impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had, and continues to have, on
elementary and secondary schools across the Nation (U.S. Department of Education, 2021).
Essential workers: Essential workers are those who conduct a range of operations and
services that are typically essential to continue critical infrastructure operations (National
Conference for State Legislatures, 2021).
Free and appropriate public education (FAPE): All students ages 3 to 22 receive a free
public education that meets their educational needs. They have a right to fully take part in
school life, including after-school activities. What is “appropriate” for each child will be
different because each has unique needs (Exceptional Lives, 2019).
Hybrid (blended) learning: Combination of in-person and distance learning (CDE, 2020).
In-person: Students are receiving in-person instruction for at least part of the
instructional day for the full instructional week (CA Safe Schools for All, 2021).
Learning loss: “refers to any specific or general loss of knowledge and skills or to
reversals in academic progress, most commonly due to extended gaps or discontinuities in a
student’s education” (edglossary.org, 2021).
Pandemic: The International Epidemiology Association's Dictionary of Epidemiology
defines a pandemic as “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing
international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people (Singer et al., 2021).
Personal protective equipment (PPE): Personal protective equipment, commonly
referred to as "PPE", is equipment worn to minimize exposure to hazards that cause serious
workplace injuries and illnesses. These injuries and illnesses may result from contact with
chemical, radiological, physical, electrical, mechanical, or other workplace hazards. Personal
8

protective equipment may include items such as gloves, safety glasses and shoes, earplugs or
muffs, hard hats, respirators, or coveralls, vests and full body suits (United States Department
of Labor, 2021).
Social emotional learning (SEL): reflects the critical role of positive relationships and
emotional connections in the learning process and helps students develop a range of skills
they need for school and life (CDE, 2020).
Stakeholders: Refers to anyone who is invested in the welfare and success of a school
and its students, including administrators, teachers, staff members, students, parents, families,
community members, local business leaders, and elected officials such as school board
members, city councilors, and state representatives. Stakeholders may also be collective entities,
such as local businesses, organizations, advocacy groups, committees, media outlets, and
cultural institutions, in addition to organizations that represent specific groups, such as teachers
unions, parent-teacher organizations, and associations representing superintendents, principals,
school boards, or teachers in specific academic disciplines (e.g., the National Council of
Teachers of English or the Vermont Council of Teachers of Mathematics). In a word,
stakeholders have a “stake” in the school and its students, meaning that they have personal,
professional, civic, or financial interest or concern (edglossary.org, 2021).
Synchronous learning: Synchronous learning takes place in real-time, with
delivery of instruction and/or interaction with participants such as a live whole-class,
small group, or individual meeting via an online platform or in-person when possible
(CDE, 2020).
Williams Compliance act: The 2000 Eliezer Williams, et al., vs. State of
California, et al. (Williams) case was a class action suit against the State of California
and state education agencies. The plaintiffs included nearly 100 San Francisco County
students who claimed that these agencies failed to provide public school students with
9

equal access to instructional materials, safe and decent school facilities, and qualified
teachers. The case was settled in 2004, resulting in the state allocating $138 million in
additional funding for standards-aligned instructional materials for schools and another
$50 million for implementation costs. Now known as the Williams Compliance Act, the
settlement was implemented through legislation adopted in August 2004: Senate Bill
(SB) 6, SB 550, Assembly Bill (AB) 1550, AB 2727, AB 3001. Up to 2.3 million
California public school students may benefit from funding from the Williams case
settlement (CDE, 2020).
World Health Organization (WHO): a team of more than 8000 professionals that
includes the world’s leading public health experts, including doctors, epidemiologists,
scientists and managers. Together, WHO coordinates the world’s response to health
emergencies, promotes well-being, prevents disease, and expands access to health care
(World Health Organization, 2021).
Organization of the Study
This research study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One introduced to the study,
statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the significance of the study, four research
questions, limitations, delimitations, and the definitions of key terms. Chapter Two includes a
discussion of the existing literature relevant to the problem. Chapter Three presents the
methodology of the research design, sampling and data collection procedures, instruments
designed for data collection, and data analysis procedures. Chapter Four details the findings and
major themes of the research along with an analysis of the data. Chapter Five provides a
summary of the study’s findings, a conclusion, and an examination of possible implications for
further research as well as recommendations for future research.
10

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
In the spring of 2009, a new strain of cases of influenza (A/H1N1) surfaced. This crisis
caused individual schools and school districts to respond with school closures that affected
368,282 students in the United States (Klaiman et al., 2011). The U.S. historical record shows
that, when faced with a pandemic that affects children, school closures are a common response.
Historically, school closures have been used as a reactive response to contain the spread of a
contagious disease among communities instead of adopting a preventative public health measure
(Stern, 2009). In December of 2019, a contagious disease, COVID-19, caused by a severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had begun spreading globally. On March 11,
2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. Governors and
state health officials enacted policies in hopes of reducing infections through nonpharmaceutical
interventions, with one of those measures being school closures. The lockdowns were an
unprecedented challenge for governments in ensuring that learning would still take place (Chang
&Yano, 2020). Ohio was the first state to issue a statewide school closure on March 12, 2020
and by March 25th all public-school buildings across the United States followed suit. These
school closures affected more than 50.8 million children and school systems scrambled to
transition learning remotely (Bailey,2021). The decisions to close schools were difficult and the
debate over when and how to reopen school safely became very complex (Bailey, 2021).
During a pandemic, the decision to close schools can be very difficult to make. On the
one hand, closing schools sends a powerful message to the community about the severity of the
pandemic, but closures also mean that the needs of the communities will not be met (Braunack-
Mayer et al., 2013). In order for school closures to be effective they need to be invoked early
before transmission occurs. The decision to close schools must be made under uncertainty due to
11

the lack of information pertaining to the virus (Braunack-Mayer et al., 2013). Research strongly
suggests that closing schools as a preventative measure would not only protect children but also
reduce the virus transmission (Tönshoff et al., 2021). Closing schools impacts many social
structures in the community; therefore, public health benefits from school closures are to be
weighed against life altering costs such as the educational., economic, and social emotional
turmoil that is imposed on students and their families (Bailey, 2021). Many students will require
support to transition back to their life prior to the pandemic, especially students who have
experienced trauma or the loss of a loved one. Schools need to recognize and validate the
importance of students' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important for
educators to listen to the needs of students and create solutions for coping and connecting (The
Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2020).
Preparation, Training and Implementation of Schools Facing the Pandemic
Preparation
COVID-19 forced most U.S. schools to transition rapidly to remote learning (Diliberti et
al., 2020). Schools that already had a solid foundation established with online learning platforms
were well equipped to transition to online learning in comparison to schools that did not
(Diliberti et al., 2020). School districts with fewer resources had as many as 100% of their
students relying on school breakfast and lunch. As such, those districts were concerned more
with student food security which made it harder for them to address student learning (Walters,
2020). According to the RAND corporation's nationally representative surveys of K–12 grade,
“public school teachers and principals highlight the disparities in school’s curriculum coverage,
access to technology and teacher training on remote learning topics” (Diliberti et al., 2020, page
number). A majority of our nation's schools had a plan in place for certain crisis situations such
12

as natural disasters, active shooters, and bomb threats, but less than half had a plan in place for a
global pandemic. Only 46 % of public schools had a plan established for dealing with a
pandemic in 2017–2018 (Kemp, 2020). Diliberti et al. (2020) shared the five indicators of
preparedness that can help districts and schools successfully transition to online learning during
the pandemic. Districts that established a combination of these indicators: providing devices to at
least those students who need them, training teachers on delivering online instruction, using a
learning management system (LMS), providing online or blended courses, and establishing plans
to deliver instruction during prolonged school closure were better equipped to transition
successfully into distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic (Diliberti et al., 2020).
Schools that had implemented little to no preparedness indicators pre-pandemic found
themselves having to reimagine how they deliver instruction and provide other services (Diliberti
et al., 2020). This rapid change caused thousands of educators to work overtime in order to
reinvent how to serve students as quickly as possible (Malkus et al., 2020a).
Meal distribution was one of the most immediate challenges districts faced due to school
closures. Students that qualified and relied on free or reduced school lunches were the most
affected by school closings (Malkus et al., 2020a). The food insecurity affecting students
nationwide quickly mobilized districts and schools to find a solution (Kinsey et al., 2020). By
March 27
th
, 82 % of schools had a plan in place to provide food to students during closures.
Social distancing guidelines required districts and schools to create safe ways to distribute meals
while also eliminating barriers to access (Kinsey et al., 2020; Malkus et al., 2020b; McLoughlin
et al., 2020). Schools’ meal distribution plans included grab and go meals that provided
breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Schools offered drop off options where they would deliver multiple
days or even a week of meals at once to student homes or meal distribution at school bus stops
13

(Malkus et al., 2020b). Many district schools’ meal access expanded beyond school aged
children. Schools fed children from the age of 0–18 and students with disabilities ranging from
18 to 26 years of age. Food service was expanded due to the rising rates of hunger among adults
(Kinsey et al., 2020). Districts provided meals to adults at low or no cost (Kinsey et al., 2020).
Ensuring that all students had access to the appropriate technology to transition into
online learning was another challenge that districts faced (Malkus et al., 2020a). A needs
assessment had to be taken to determine organizational technology needs. The results showed
that there was a need for districts to provide technology accommodations (Malkus et al., 2020a).
School districts provided information about those accommodations on their district websites.
Thirty seven percent of schools are in districts whose websites mentioned the programs they had
in place to provide the appropriate technology to students that did not have a device at home
(Malkus et al., 2020a). Forty-six percent of schools provided information on free or reduced
internet (Malkus et al., 2020a).
With the transition to virtual learning, 44% of the principals in schools that had zero
preparedness indicators in place pre-pandemic reported concerns about providing equitable
instruction (Diliberti et al., 2020). The transition to distance learning presented an evolution in
the traditional learning model structures. Many school districts provided voluntary supplemental
content which included links to digital resources in district and outside vendors. Instruction was
delivered through synchronous and asynchronous lessons (Malkus et al., 2020a). This was done
through platforms such as Google Meet and Zoom, instructional work packets, and web-based
platforms such as Google Classroom (Diliberti et al., 2020; EdSource, 2020a; Los Angeles
Unified School District [LAUSD], 2021; Malkus et al., 2020a). In Fall of 2020, thousands of
school campuses remained closed for in person instruction, leading to full distance learning for
14

those students. Some students were given the opportunity to return to the classroom in a hybrid
model where they would spend part of the week in school and part of the week at home attending
school virtually. This hybrid model was intended to keep students safe while also allowing for
some sense of normalcy (EdSource, 2020a). Full time instruction resumed in regions where
closures were no longer in effect (EdSource, 2020a).
Training
During the rapid and unexpected transition to virtual learning schools had to
acknowledge and bridge the gap between teachers and technology (Castelo, 2020). Castelo
(2020) shares that in a remote learning guide published by the Consortium for School
Networking (CoSN) noted that teacher readiness and preparedness is key for transitioning to
online learning. The guide states, ““Teaching online requires specialized skill sets including an
understanding of how to conduct classes in a virtual environment, knowing when and how to use
videoconferencing, share content, respond to students’ submissions and more,” (CoSN, 2020).
Transitioning into remote learning is not just a technological issue, but also a pedological and
instructional issue (CoSN, 2020). Publishers such as Heinemann, Corwin, Curriculum
Associates, McGraw Hill and tech companies such as Zoom and Google offered tutorials and
virtual resources for virtual learning (Castelo, 2020). Education nonprofits such as the American
School Counselor Association (ACSA), the National Association of School Psychologists
(NASP), the National Parent Teacher Association (PTA), Digital Promise, Common Sense,
Learning Keeps Going, the Smithsonian Institution, Institute of Child Nutrition, and Teaching
Tolerance, among many others, also provided training on virtual learning pedagogy and practice
as well as social emotional learning (Castelo, 2020).
15

Teachers felt overwhelmed by the enormous amount of online resources (Schwartz,
2020). Research indicates that professional development that is tailored and responsive can
promote mastery and a source to increase teachers’ collective efficacy (Goddard, 2000). As
teachers entered virtual learning, their sense of efficacy was critical for effective virtual
instruction. Teacher readiness and preparation is key for districts that are switching to online
learning (Castelo, 2020). Teaching online requires a specialized skill set. Districts had to find
ways to prepare teachers to teach remotely and deliver instruction, and (Castelo, 2020). Flot &
Simpson (2020) suggested the types of support that instructional coaches could provide to
teachers specific to digital learning. Instructional coaches provided resources for the subject area,
feedback on videos, and activities etc. before they were uploaded for students. Instructional
coaches also consulted with support staff to create differentiated tasks for digital learning.
Specifically, they assisted teachers with taping prerecorded videos for asynchronous lessons.
Instructional leaders also worked with teachers to co-plan synchronous and asynchronous lessons
and virtually taught lessons with the teacher they were coaching (Flot & Simpson 2020).
Training for COVID preparation and protocols were also a necessity. District and school
leaders looked to federal, state and local agencies for guidance on planning, preparation, and
protocols for the opening, closing, and reopening of schools. Leaders referred to the Centers for
Disease Control’s (CDC) indicators for decision making at schools (CDC, 2020a). The CDC
created the “Operational Strategy for K–12 Schools Through Phased Mitigation”, which
contained updated indicators for assessing the level of COVID-19 transmissions, mitigation
strategies, learning modes, and testing. Federal agencies provided resources for planning
classroom layouts, contact tracing, hygiene, and cleaning (CDC, 2020a). The California
Department of Education (CDE) provided resources for California schools in the form of a State
16

of California Safe Schools For All Hub. This Hub provided support and accountability to help
minimize in school transmission. This Hub also contained key resources and information such as
funding, testing, safety guidance, and vaccines (CDE, 2021). Local agencies like LA County
updated their reopening protocols to help provide guidance to schools through the process of
opening, closing and reopening which included workplace policies, physical distancing,
equitable access to critical services, communication, and infection control (County of Los
Angeles Public Health, 2020).
Many school nutrition programs have federal policies in place to support students to have
access to food (CDE, 2020).. Federal, state, and local governments passed down training
requirements, protocols, and policies for school nutrition guidelines. The state provided
guidelines regarding meals, funding, waivers, etc. (CDE, 2020). Districts got their information
from local county/state governments and used that information to guide nutrition departments in
their districts. The CDC (2020b) provided guidance and training on what school nutrition
professionals needed to do to maintain safe and healthy food distribution (U.S. Department of
Agriculture [USDA], 2020).
Leaders also received training from their districts. Districts received their guidelines and
guidance from local and state governments (CDE, 2020). Many organizations and nonprofit
groups offered a variety of training. EdWeek (2020) offered online summits. Edutopia (2020)
provided a multitude of resources that provide leaders a chance to reflect on questions they might
have while trying to address COVID-19. The Association of California School Administrators
(ACSA, 2020) provided leaders with guidance that help with strategies for connection with
students and families.
17

With the shift to remote learning parents had to deal with an added role in the schooling
of their children. Districts and schools worked to provide families with support in remote
learning at home. This new school routine was difficult for parents to adapt to. In parents
discussions of the impact that online learning has had on their daily routine, they consistently
mentioned that the transition to virtual learning was difficult, and the impact it had on their
child's social development (Bhamani et al., 2020).
Implementation
The implementation of these new policies and guidelines required leaders to take on new
roles in the context of the pandemic. A mindset shift had to happen. Their new role as crisis
leaders also required them to become the primary caregiver of the school community. Principals
felt responsible for monitoring and supporting students and families as well as providing families
with the appropriate resources to help students continue their learning at home while still
connecting them to school (Anderson et al., 2020). Leaders supported staff members’ mental
health while they felt overwhelmed and isolated. Principals partook in individual outreach and
community building. They addressed the well-being of their staff members by calling teachers
and checking in on them. To build community among staff, some school leaders used
professional development time and staff meetings for teacher appreciation, a space to raise
concerns, or process their feelings (Cipriano & Bracket, 2020). Principals prioritized their own
self-care through exercise, staying connected with other principals, and remaining optimistic and
hopeful (Cipriano & Bracket, 2020). They took care of others but also made sure to take care of
themselves in order to be able to show up for others. Many schools also stepped up in
collaborating with parents during the pandemic (Walters, 2020). In some schools, educators
have stepped up weekly meetings for children and their families with school counselors and
18

social workers to help assist the most vulnerable students with the remote learning transition
(Walters, 2020).
Leadership in Crisis Situations Facing Schools
Northouse (2018) defined leadership as a process that requires interaction, relationship,
and influence. School leadership is a part of a complex process that deals with policy
development, interpretation, implementation, partnership, motivation, and personnel and
resource management (Miller, 2018). Varela and Fedynich (2020) emphasized that school
leaders often balance the academic, social, emotional, and physical needs of the students they
serve, staff, students' families, as well as those of their larger communities. School leadership is
the second most influential aspect in student learning with effective classroom teaching being the
first (Leithwood & Day, 2008).
The leadership characteristics and skills that are required of school leaders in times of
crisis are fundamentally different from what is expected from leaders in a ‘normal’ school
environment (Smith & Riley, 2012). In times of crises, school leaders are magnified and
scrutinized because a school leader needs to make careful decisions regarding the best ways to
serve their communities. Strong school leaders develop a clear and meaningful vision and
empower others around them to unleash their potential in order to create rich learning
environments for the students they serve. In the context of a crisis in schools, school leaders must
minimize personal and organizational harm to the school and the school community. They must
provide certainty, cultivate hope and ensure open and credible communication to all the affected
members of their community. Leaders must cultivate trust and become a credible voice for their
community (Netolicky, 2020; Smith & Riley 2012).
19

A crisis is defined by Pearson and Clair (2008) as: “a low probability, high impact event
that threatens the viability of the organization and is characterized by ambiguity of cause, effect
and means of resolution, as well as by a belief that decisions must be made quickly” (p. 60).
According to Smith and Riley (2012), due to the unpredictability of a crisis, no organization can
successfully prepare for every possible crisis. However, it is still considered important to plan for
future crises by deciding what goes on during and after the crises occur. Effective school
leadership in times of a crisis deals more with the attributes that a leader can bring instead of
leaning solely on plans that are in place. It is important to prepare to act decisively and
appropriately when a crisis arises unexpectedly (Smith & Riley, 2012). Bishop et al. (2015)
stated, “A crisis can, with appropriate responses, be managed in such a way as to lessen its real
or potential negative impact” (p. 216). A successful crisis leader asserts certain skills and
attributes that make an effective leader. Therefore, leaders and their responses hold the key to the
outcome of a crisis.
During major crises such as Hurricane Katrina, deadly tornadoes in Alabama, or the
devastating school shootings of Columbine, leaders began to reframe their current role as
community leaders and healers (Bishop et al. 2015; DeMatthews & Brown 2019). Leaders have
shared stories that show the possession of moral authority that allows them to not only lead their
school districts but also their communities (Bishop et al. 2015; DeMatthews & Brown 2019). In
the aftermath of the Columbine shooting, leaders made an effort to gain a sense of order and
control driven by their sense of responsibility and job description they did this by using their
personal definition of leadership as a compass while taking action mid-crises (Fein & Isaacson,
2009).
Leaders had to shift their priorities from student achievement to the welfare of the
20

children, families, the communities they serve, and the staff that they lead. They took the role of
healers (Bishop et al., 2015; Gouwens, 2008). Leaders collaborated with school counselors to
advance partnerships with community mental health organizations/agencies (DeMatthews &
Brown, 2019). This helped expand the school mental health program to help address the effects
of the community (DeMatthews & Brown, 2019).
Crisis requires swift decisive actions. In times of crisis, it can be difficult for leaders to
make critical decisions out of fear of making the wrong decision. During the time of a crisis,
there could be a lack of the information needed to make the correct decision. It is suggested that
a leader should use their best judgment in order to move forward (Bishop et al., 2015). Leaders
in crisis must prioritize. They must know that recovery efforts take time so they have to focus on
what they can control (Bishop et al., 2015). Leaders were able to collaborate formally and
informally. Superintendents formed a community among themselves and leaned on other districts
that had been successful (Bishop et al., 2015; Gouwens, 2008).
Leaders use tactics such as ‘self-talk’ to remind themselves of their highest priorities,
existing systems, and to choose action over emotions (Fein & Isaacson, 2009). Swift decision
making comes from the leader's intuition. Effective crisis leaders accept that there is a level of
risk based on the information at hand. “Intuition is not information-free -it is derived from what
we have observed and experienced in our past” (Smith & Riley, 2012, p.66). It is important for
leaders to collect as much information as they can, while also trusting their instinct and
experience (Bishop et al., 2015). These strategies can help leaders make quick decisions during a
time of uncertainty.
Stoll and Temperley (2009) argued for the need for creative and adaptive leadership.
Creative leaders go beyond problem solving. It is about looking at their current situation and
21

assessing the challenges that need to be addressed in order to prevent a derailment of efforts to
move the school community forward. This is done by moving away from managerial skills to
allow leaders to break the rules in ways that can allow for progression in solving the crisis at
hand. Crisis leadership will need to rely on creative intelligence. Leaders that have creative
intelligence are leaders that are comfortable with thinking outside of the box. These leaders are
also able to operate beyond established procedures. An important attribute to crisis leadership is
thinking of a crisis as ‘opportunity solving’. Every crisis should be viewed as an opportunity for
improvement. Finding value in our problems is essential so that a school or organizations end up
in a better place after a crisis than it was before a crisis (Smith & Riley, 2012).
Financial Support and Guidance From Outside Agencies
With this abrupt shift to distance learning, financial support became critical in order to
operate effectively in this new environment. A major source of financial support came from the
federal government with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act)
that was signed into law on March 27, 2020 (CDE, 2020). This act provided public school
districts with economic relief by allocating funding for COVID-19 response measures, student
nutrition and mental health, and afterschool and summer school programs (Princehorn et., 2020).
The CARES Act established an Education Stabilization Fund of $30.75 billion dollars. These
funds were split between emergency relief funds for higher education ($14.25 billion) and
emergency relief for elementary and secondary schools (13.5 billion). The Governor’s
Emergency Relief Fund also earmarked about $3 billion for governors to disperse grants to
school districts that had been most impacted by the pandemic (Princehorn et., 2020).
In California, Governor Gavin Newsom’s plan to open schools proposed $2 billion in
incentives to the districts that adopted a safety and health protection plan, comprehensive
22

COVID testing procedures, and established a schedule for the return of students (Jones &
Freedburg, 2021). In February of 2021, Gov. Newsom signed SB 86 which tied funding to the
reopening of schools. Though credited Gov. Newsom for taking proactive measures and laying
out the critical components of returning back to school, many organizations wanted a
modification of Gov. Newsom’s strategy (Fensterwald, 2021b). For districts that did not open by
April 1, 2021, the funding that they received would be reduced by 1% every day through May
15th. This bill was the center of a heated debate in the state capitol. Some legislators worried that
the bill did not adequately address safety concerns for staff, students, and families while others
believed that this bill should have included the return of more students. Though the bill was seen
as controversial, the majority of the legislators supported the bill and saw it as a necessary and
important step toward the reopening of schools statewide while also considering the need for
safety (Jones & Freedburg, 2021).
New categories for student and staff safety, known as the Blueprint for Safer California,
went into effect on April 7, 2021. This Blueprint is a framework for reducing COVID-19 across
California and allowing for the reopening of schools. These criteria either loosened or restricted
activities based on the spread of COVID-19 (California Department of Public Health [CDPH],
2021). Reopening safely has been a challenge across America. With this understanding, the
CARES Act funding can be used to purchase personal protective equipment (PPE), sanitizing
materials, or any supplies needed to maintain a safe school during and after the pandemic. These
funds can also be used to pay for services, equipment, and supplies needed to continue teaching
and learning while keeping students and staff safe (EDSource, 2020b).
The COVID-19 pandemic has stretched education governance systems as state, district,
and school leaders set new expectations for schooling. At the start of the 2020–2021 school year,
23

many state and local decision makers proposed school reopening plans. With the announcement
of the transition back to in person learning, some teachers and teachers’ unions pushed back due
to safety concerns (Goldstein & Shapiro, 2020). This resistance from teachers’ unions took many
forms from protests to the filing of lawsuits for refusing to negotiate details in reopening plans
(Hemphill & Marianno, 2021).
Unions
Teachers’ unions are one of the most influential groups in education. They aim to
represent the interests of their teachers and are advocates for teacher policy by negotiating
collective bargaining agreements with school districts and administrators (Hemphill & Marianno,
2021). These collective bargaining agreements cover a broad range of issues from the allocation
of district funds to teacher requirements. In 44 states, collective bargaining agreements, contract
negotiations, and educational policy are largely influenced by teachers’ unions (Moe, 2009).
Research shows that districts with strong teacher unions have been able to negotiate policies in
collective bargaining agreements that established higher salaries, smaller class sizes, and longer
planning periods (Hemphill & Marianno, 2021).
The push to open schools for in person learning has required teachers’ working
conditions to change. This placed teachers’ unions in a position to be able to influence the
opening of schools through collective bargaining agreements. The decision to reopen schools
was placed on school boards and district administrators instead of policy makers, which left
teachers’ unions in a position to influence when and how schools reopen (Hemphill & Marianno,
2021).
As a result, teachers’ unions are playing a powerful role in determining the shape of
public education during the pandemic. Teachers in many districts are pushing for longer school
24

closures, stronger safety requirements, and limits on what they are required to do in their virtual
classrooms. The largest teachers’ union raised the stakes dramatically by utilizing local state
chapters to strike if school districts did not take sufficient precautions such as requiring masks
and updating ventilation systems (Goldstein & Shapiro, 2020). In California, five unions
representing California School employees (California Teachers Association; California
Federation of Teachers; California School Employees Association; Service Employees
International Union [SEIU] and Council 57 of the American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees [AFSCME]) set forth new conditions in hopes to influence districts that
were contemplating a return to in person learning. These conditions would require that the state
offer vaccinations to all school employees before returning, while prioritizing employees
working at schools that are already opened. The conditions also included orders that schools
could not open if the COVID rates were not at the low risk level of transmission (Fensterwald,
2021b).
Curriculum and Instruction Transition
America’s K–12 public education system has had to deal with an unprecedented dilemma
and transition to online learning almost overnight with very little time to plan due to widespread
school closures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Educators were largely unprepared for
this disruption to student learning (Herold, 2020). In the span of two weeks, the coronavirus
pandemic led to a closure of 124,000 school buildings, leaving more than 55 million children
without access to in person instruction, counseling, and many other services (Herold, 2020).
School and district leaders’ main focus then became providing students with food and
transitioning to virtual instruction. Teachers and school leaders not only had minimal training,
but also juggled their own family responsibilities and dealing with the pandemic as they sprang
25

into action. School leaders sent school buses on their regular routes to distribute paper lessons to
students, distributed Chromebooks, sent Wi-Fi enabled school busses into students communities,
distributed hot spots, transitioned into teaching on Instagram Live, hosted class discussions via
Google Meets and Zoom, and called students and parents on the phone to make sure they were
ok (Herold, 2020). At a national level, the effort has been hectic and uneven. Millions of rural
and poor families did not have reliable internet access (Herold, 2020). Many schools did not
have enough computers or tablets for all of their students or a plan for distribution (Herold,
2020). Many schools are running into huge obstacles as they attempt to use technology to keep
the education system up and running (Herold, 2020).
The traditional school day has changed drastically. In the midst of a global pandemic,
teaching and learning priorities have shifted. According to the Education Week Research Center
survey (year), 37% of teachers shared that they have interacted with students at least once a day
since the school closures. Sixteen percent of teachers shared that they have not had any
interaction with their students since the closures. In that survey, more than half of district leaders
said that they were not able to provide online opportunities for all of their students. In some
communities, photocopies of worksheets were disseminated to students (Herold, 2020). Some
state school districts had partnerships with PBS affiliates and delivered lessons on public
television (Herold, 2020). Other school districts focused on curating and disseminating links to
free online learning sites such as Khan Academy (Herold, 2020). Other schools had teachers post
their assignments on learning platforms such as Google Classroom or Canva (Herold, 2020).
These platforms allowed students to upload their work directly to these sites. Other schools
focused on social connections among staff and students and encouraged the usage of office hours
or photos on Seesaw (Herold, 2020). Some teachers quickly made online lessons more accessible
26

by translating material into multiple languages and having audio recorded instructions and videos
as accommodations.
Technology
Prior to the pandemic, 12 million American children did not have quality to high-speed
internet connection at home (Herold, 2020). The U.S. Department of Education (2021) advised
leaders that online learning opportunities being offered in response to the pandemic school
closures had to be accessible to all students. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) explained that school districts had to
take the necessary steps to address the health, safety, and well-being of all students and staff. A
fact sheet was shared to provide expectations for distance learning that complied with the federal
law. This fact sheet stated that the United States Department of Education (USDOE) recognized
that the pandemic had affected the way in which special education and related services and
supports are provided to students. As a result, the USDOE. offered flexibility. School districts
must provide a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) to students with disabilities. This
provision of FAPE can include special education and related services that can be provided
through phone, computer, or internet. The federal law does not mandate specific ways to deliver
instruction or services. Educators must provide equally effective alternate access to curriculum
or services to students even when technology is not accessible.
Hybrid Learning
U.S. school districts are currently using a “hybrid learning” model which is a mix of in
person and online instruction. This model varies from school to school based on the local
COVID-19 transmission rates, the funds that are available to support this new instructional
approach, and the willingness of staff and students to return to campus (Lieberman, 2020). Some
27

students have opted into learning entirely in person, entirely online, or a combination of the two
where students may spend a couple of days a week in person and the rest of the days at home.
Some schools have decided to set aside spots for in person instruction for vulnerable groups such
as students with special needs, English language learners, and students that are experiencing
homelessness (Lieberman, 2020).
Increases in COVID-19 rates caused some schools to revert to 100% remote instruction
(Lieberman, 2020). Some schools that have remained remote are slowly transitioning more
students to campus (Lieberman, 2020). Many students and families have reported being
appreciative of the creative ways that schools were transitioning students back to campus while
still maintaining safety measures (Lieberman, 2020). Other families have been reluctant to
resume in person learning and have been frustrated with the constant changing of school plans
(Lieberman, 2020). Hybrid learning has been a blessing and a curse for some schools. Some
schools have been able to keep students and staff safe while simultaneously providing them with
meaningful instruction and the appropriate tools to do valuable schoolwork at home. On the
other end of the spectrum, teachers were feeling forced to cut corners on instruction. Schools
struggled to transition students from in person to virtual learning and vice versa. Students
learning at home were behind those students who opted into in-person or hybrid learning models
(Lieberman, 2020). The need for a new instructional approach completely new to the U.S. has
not been easy. The challenges stem from a lack of adequate resources.

28

The Impact on Children in Schools During a Pandemic
Mental Health
In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 was officially a
pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a drastic change in the way that people lived their
daily lives (de Figueiredo et al., 2021). Although children and adolescents appear to be less
vulnerable to COVID-19, the non-medical side effects of the pandemic have been devastating
(de Figueiredo et al., 2021). Children and adolescents have been exposed to stressors due to the
safety measures put in place to reduce the spread of the virus. These stressors are primarily due
to the disruption of their daily lives and their daily routines as the result of social isolation
combined with their inability to fully comprehend the short- and long-term consequences of the
outbreak (de Figueiredo et al.,2021; Guessoum et al., 2020).
Even with this drastic disruption in students’ routines due to school closures and the
disruption of outside activities, some students might not be completely isolated (Guessoum et al.,
2020). In most cases, parents are at home and adolescents might not experience loneliness due to
the ability to spend more time with family and on social media (Guessoum et al., 2020).
However, these increased academic stressors can make it difficult for students to use typical
coping strategies such as relying on a trusted adult or family member because families are all
experiencing the heightened distress as well (Guessoum et al., 2020).
Adolescence is the time where students are becoming independent. Students begin to
prioritize peer connections and this disruption comes with challenges to a student’s wellbeing (de
Figueiredo et al., 2021). Students can also experience increased anxiety due to the threat of the
pandemic and the ways it can affect them and their loved ones (The Lancet Child & Adolescent
Health, 2020). In terms of the COVID-19 pandemic, many parents had to balance and reorganize
29

their lives with working from home and child management. This abruptness in overload put
parents under stressful conditions. This can potentially increase the risk of children facing
emotional and behavioral problems (Crescentini et al., 2020; Walters, 2020). This pandemic has
affected people in a multitude of ways. It has impacted students' well-being, increased their
screen time, affected their healthy weight status, and introduced an increased risk of dangerous
habits such as snacking that can damage the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal health (The
Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2020). Due to the risks above, there has been an increase in
demand for services. The focus of these services has been on guiding parents to create schedules
and routines for their child's school day (Walters, 2020). Unfortunately, there are populations
that do not have access to these services and could use this guidance during this trying time
(Walters, 2020). People have been affected physically, emotionally, psychologically, socially,
and economically. These factors have led to unpredictable consequences on mental health
especially in our most vulnerable populations, children (de Figueiredo et al., 2021).
There is evidence of negative psychological impacts of COVID-19 on children and
adolescents that have been in quarantine (de Figueiredo et al., 2021; Fegert et al., 2020). These
social isolation stressors have made these individuals susceptible to developing long term
psychiatric disorders (de Figueiredo et al., 2021; Fegert et al., 2020). This persistent and
heightened stressful event during early life can negatively affect their immune, endocrine, and
nervous systems (Dahmen et al., 2018). Students can experience a reduced motivation towards
their schooling and feel pressured to learn independently, which could also lead to higher
dropout rates (Guessoum et al., 2020). In a survey conducted by Young Minds (year), it was
reported that 83% of students felt that the pandemic worsened pre-existing mental health
30

conditions mainly due to school closures, a loss of their routines, and a lack of and restricted
social connections (Guessoum et al., 2020).
The Educational Debt
School closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic shed light on the stark realities in
education. The achievement gap is one that is very pervasive in our education system (Schneider,
2020). Students from historically marginalized communities, on average, score lower than their
privileged peers (Schneider, 2020). More often than not, education has been used as the problem
solver of the achievement gap (Schneider, 2020). Gloria Ladson-Billings (2006) argues that the
achievement gap is a misnomer. The achievement gap implies that students can level the playing
field through education. This implies that students all start in the same place when they do not.
Historically marginalized communities are dealing with an education debt that sheds light on the
historical, economic, sociopolitical, and moral decisions and policies that characterize our
society. The COVID-19 pandemic has made this education debt visible (Schneider, 2020). If the
achievement gap is about leveling the playing field, then the pandemic should have leveled it.
With all students shifting to online learning it should have narrowed the achievement gap,
making schools more or less equal. However, some students will make significant educational
progress while other students fall behind (Schneider, 2020). The achievement gap that we often
discuss is a symptom of the inequalities from both the past and present. For example, there are
differences in the amounts of resources that are available to students. Twice as many children
from middle class and affluent households are more likely to have high speed internet access at
home as well as devices to access their schoolwork in comparison to low-income families
(Schneider, 2020). Their homes are more likely to be set up in a way that supports their school
learning. These differences explain why summer breaks from school continue to widen the
31

achievement gap (Schneider, 2020). Our schools are not equal. Schools in affluent
neighborhoods often have more resources than those in low income neighborhoods. Schools in
affluent neighborhoods generally have easier access to quality resources such as more
experienced teachers and a well-rounded curriculum (Schneider, 2020). The achievement gap is
the product of our unequal society. This is an educational debt that has not been paid back for
years. This is not something that schools can fix alone and that has been made clear through the
realities of the COVID-19 pandemic. This pandemic has started conversations about student
success. Instead of faulting the educators, it is important to consider what it would take to create
true equity in our schools (Schneider, 2020).
Potential Impact of COVID-19 on Student Achievement
Though schools were sprung into action and provided ways for students to learn
remotely, it is still unknown how effective remote learning actually was. K–12 students and
teachers had little experience with online instruction and technology access was a major issue in
many parts of our country (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). While many aspects of the pandemic and their
impact on achievement is difficult to estimate, there are parallels between remote learning due to
the COVID-19 pandemic and other planned or unplanned reasons why students have missed
school that can help quantify the impact (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). There has been research on the
effects of summer vacation, weather related school closures, and out of school time due to
absenteeism that have provided insight on how COVID-19 might affect student achievement
long term.
Teachers, school leaders, and parents have worked hard to keep learning alive. Despite
their efforts, the quality of education that is delivered has not been up to par within person
instruction Dorn et al., 2020). There are persistent achievement disparities across income levels
32

and between White students and students of color (Dorn et al., 2020). School closures
exacerbated the current inequities and caused disproportionate learning loss for students on top
of the pre-existing academic gaps (Dorn et al., 2020). Learning loss will likely be the greatest
amount among low income, Black, and Latinx students. Dorn et al. (2020) shared that lower
income students are less likely to have access to high quality remote instruction or to a conducive
learning environment. Many students did not have access to a quiet space free from distractions,
devices that did not need to be shared, high speed internet, and parental guidance and supervision
(Dorn et al., 2020). The creators of the iReady (year) digital-instruction and assessment software
shared that only 60% of low-income students are regularly logging into online instruction in
comparison to 90% of high-income students. Engagement rates are also lagging in schools where
they serve predominantly Black and Hispanic students. Sixty to seventy percent of students are
logging in for online instruction regularly (Dorn et al., 2020).
The learning loss due to the school closures is predicted to increase high school dropout
rates (Dorn et al., 2020). School closures have disrupted the support that helps vulnerable kids
stay in school. Academic engagement, strong relationships with supportive and caring adults,
and supportive home environments have been disrupted. Pre-pandemic data shows that students
who miss more than 10 days of school are 36% more likely to drop out (Dorn et al., 2020). When
looking at other school closures such as Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Maria, 14 to 20% of
students never returned to school. It is estimated that two to nine percent of high school students
could drop out as a result COVID-19 school closures. The economic damage has stressed state
budgets. Low income and minority students in K–12 education will most likely receive budget
cuts at a disproportionate rate, furthering the achievement gap.
33

The quick transition to remote learning left leaders wrestling with the decisions to
continue standards aligned curriculum in a virtual setting or to provide online materials for
review. Many leaders opted for providing online material for review and enrichment. In a global
study of school response and planning in anticipation of the 2020–2021 academic school year,
the majority of respondents shared that it was challenging to ensure continued academic learning,
provide students and families with the appropriate remote learning support, define curricular
priorities, and ensure the well-being of staff and students (Varela & Fedynich, 2020).
Varela and Fedynich (2020) conducted a study among Texas school leaders regarding
their experiences with and responses to school closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They
found that there was a commitment of school leaders to one another as well as to their staff,
students, families, and stakeholders at large, but they had difficulty fulfilling their commitments
due to the lack of resources. Seventy-nine percent of school leaders reported feeling confident in
their preparedness to lead instruction when it came to supporting their teachers, students, and
parents during remote instruction. In order to effectively teach, teachers needed training and
support while students needed the adequate technology and resources. Varela and Fedynich’s
results indicated that 63% of school leaders believed that their campus or district was not
prepared with the appropriate resources needed to provide students with high quality remote
instruction. K–12 education has been greatly impacted by this pandemic and will never be the
same. This crisis has proven that our education system can no longer maintain the status quo.
Varela & Feynich’s results indicate that school leaders are ready and committed to do the work,
but need to be given the adequate and appropriate resources to serve their students.
34

Conclusion
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, K–12 schools were disrupted which caused many ripple
effects in the U.S. education system. The review of the current literature demonstrates the ways
that state policy makers and local school leaders were forced to make decisions with incomplete
and, at times, contradictory data. Consequences from the pandemic included financial
implications, the impact of agencies, negotiations with unions, and the impact on students and
the larger community. Initially, federal guidance focused mainly on how to safely operate
schools by using preventative measures. These measures included the usage of masks, physical
distancing, and increasing ventilation in school buildings. There was a lack of guidance in terms
of when it would be safe to reopen schools. This meant that state and local leaders had to create
thresholds for community conditions and protocols (Bailey, 2021). COVID-19 shifted the roles
and scope of school leaders, moving them beyond instructional leaders and transforming them
into “crisis managers”. The focus of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic on K–12 school districts and understand what district and site administrators have
learned from their experiences as well as their decision-making responsibilities in managing the
crisis. Winston Churchill is credited with saying, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” COVID-
19 opened our eyes to the stark realities of educational inequities in our country. As K–12
schools prepare for reopening and to gain a sense of normalcy, it is important to not let this crisis
be in vain. Gaining insight on the experience of K–12 leaders can allow us to reimagine and
revolutionize a new educational landscape that is committed to building a culture of care and
closing the educational gap.

35

Chapter Three: Methodology
The preceding chapters provided an overview of the study, the research questions guiding
the study, and a literature review that is relevant to the topic under discussion. This chapter reviews
the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, and the research questions. It includes a
discussion of the design of the research study, a summary of the methodology, identification of
the participants, and the instruments used to conduct the research. It concludes with an explanation
of
how the data will be collected and analyzed and a summary of this chapter.
Statement of the Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted K–12 school districts, causing unforeseen
consequences within the education system and highlighting financial implications, the impact
of agencies, negotiations with unions, and the impact on students and the community.
COVID-19 shifted schools and school leaders’ roles and scope, beyond instructional leaders
and transformed them into “crisis managers”.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
Southern California K–12 school districts and understand what district superintendents,
assistant superintendents and principals have learned from their experiences and their decision-
making responsibilities managing the crisis. This study brings to light the impact of the
pandemic on students, families, leaders, schools, and districts. Most importantly, this study
examines how district and school leadership influences administrative practices, student
achievement, financial responsibility, union leadership, and community/parent support as they
responded to the COVID-19 crisis.
36

Research Questions
The study was guided by four research questions:
1. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had
on K–12 public school districts in Southern California and how have district
superintendents, assistant superintendents and principals addressed these
implications?
2. What, if any, have been the impact of federal, state, and local health agencies on
K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and what strategies have
district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to
address the suggested guidelines?
3. How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12 Southern California
public school districts' response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
4. How, if at all, have K–12 Southern California public school districts leadership
teams comprised of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals
addressed the concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition, distance
learning, lack of technology, academic standing, and how and when to re-open
schools due to the COVID 19 pandemic?
Research Team
Dr. Rudy Castruita from the University of Southern California (USC) Rossier School of
Education led the research team. The dissertation group was composed of twenty-two students,
with Dr. Castruita as the lead researcher and the supervisor for the study. The research team,
which consists of three members, began meeting in the spring of 2021, and contributed to the
literature review bibliography, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, research
37

questions, conceptual framework, and data collection instruments. Due to the many group
aspects of the thematic process, there may be some similarities in the dissertations.
Research Design
This study was designed as a mixed-methods study, utilizing qualitative and quantitative
methods to collect and analyze the data. A mixed-methods approach was selected to establish
triangulation for more accurate findings and make the research study more holistic (Maxwell,
2013). Lochmiller and Lester (2017) state that triangulation establishes evidence across
multiple data points to support the claims made in the study. Collecting data through interviews
and surveys enables triangulation between the results, which is crucial for cross-checking the
data collected and supporting the study’s findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study was
conducted with school superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals of Southern
California K–12 public school districts. This study involved collecting qualitative data from
open-ended interview questions with superintendents, assistant superintendents, and school site
principals and quantitative surveys completed by the same district and school leaders that were
interviewed.
Qualitative Methods
In qualitative research, the researcher is the primary data collection and analysis
instrument, and the product is very descriptive. Qualitative researchers study their natural
settings and are often interested in comprehending how people interpret their experiences and
what meaning they attribute to their experiences. They use an inductive process to understand
from the perspective of the study participants (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Qualitative methods allowed researchers in this study to uncover how
school leaders made decisions and addressed challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. The
researchers used nine interviews in conducting this qualitative research study. The semi-
38

structured interview protocol developed by the research team consisted of 26 questions, and
researchers were able to ask follow-up questions. Separate interview protocols with minimal
vocabulary changes and similar questions were created for superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals. The interview protocols can be found in Appendix E–G. The
researchers conducted the interviews via Zoom and took an average of 35 minutes to complete.
The interview protocol was followed consistently throughout the interviews, and additional
questions were asked when necessary. Via the interviews, the researchers gathered data that
reflected the participants’ opinions, decisions, and knowledge. Qualitative research aims to
interpret how individuals make sense of a process and describe how they interpret what they
experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Quantitative Methods
Quantitative research describes patterns, trends, and relationships using numerical data.
Quantitative research usually collects data using instruments such as assessments, surveys, and
existing datasets. The most commonly used protocol for gathering quantitative data is a survey.
Surveys allow the researcher to obtain information from the participants and then easily convert
it to quantitative data to be analyzed (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). For this study, quantitative
data were collected using a self-administered question survey given on Qualtrics (see Appendix
A–C). The survey questions were developed around the four research questions (see Appendix
H). The survey was designed to gather data that reflected the school leaders’ experiences, views,
decisions, and knowledge about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern California
K–12 public school districts. Separate surveys with minimal vocabulary changes and similar
questions were created for superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals. The surveys
consisted of 5-point Likert scale questions using the following responses: 1 = strongly disagree
39

to 5 = strongly agree. The surveys took an average of 35 minutes to complete. The survey link
was emailed to all nine Southern California K–12 school district leaders: three superintendents,
three assistant superintendents, and three principals. The survey included the research
participants invitation email (see Appendix D), the survey questions, and final instructions.
Participants completed the survey using Qualtrics, which tabulated the number of responses
returned. Each survey was slightly altered for each participant group to create more relevancy to
the role and experience of each of the three roles included in this study. This also allows the
researcher access to the best possible responses to address the research questions and quantify
the level of support for each specific survey item (Creswell, 2018).
Sample and Population
The identified population for the study consists of leaders of Southern California K–12
public school districts, superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals. Convenience
sampling and purposeful sampling were utilized in selecting the school districts and the
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals who participated in this study.
Convenience sampling happens when the researcher selects individuals based on proximity and
accessibility rather than specific criteria. Purposeful sampling occurs when the participants are
selected based on specific criteria (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This
research study included purposeful selection to ensure that all participants worked in public
Southern California K–12, K–8, Elementary, and High School districts in superintendent,
assistant superintendent, or principal roles. The selection criteria included the following:
• traditional California K–12, K–8, Elementary, and High School district
superintendent, assistant superintendent, or principal;
• public schools;
40

• the superintendent, assistant superintendent, or principal must have worked in the
current role for at least one year
• the superintendents, assistant superintendents, or principals served in these positions
during the 2020–2021 school year; and
• the student population of the district is at least one thousand.
The sample size for the interviews was set at nine participants, and the minimum sample size
for the survey responses was set at nine participants. Superintendents, assistant superintendents,
and principals selected for this study played a role in supporting school districts and school sites
during the COVID-19 pandemic. The interviews and surveys collected will be compared to the
results collected by other research team members. Table 1 displays the identified population for
this study

Table 1
Participant Selection Criteria
Superintendent Assistant superintendent Principal
In position for at least two
years
In position for at least two
years
In position for at least two
years
Served in position during
2019–2020 and 2020–
2021 school years
Served in position during
2019–2020 and 2020–2021
school years
Served in position during
2019–2020 and 2020–2021
school years
Leader in public, K–12
district in Southern
California
Leader in public, K–12
district in Southern
California
Leader in public, K–12
district in Southern
California
Completed study survey
and interview
Completed study survey and
interview
Completed study survey and
interview
41

Researcher 1 School District Information
School district A serves 6,603 students grades kindergarten through 12th grade (EdData,
2021). The district has an average daily attendance of 4,765 (EdData, 2021). According to
EdData (2021), nearly 37.2% of the student population are English Learners and 91.2% receive
free and reduced-price meals. School district B serves 4,612 students grades kindergarten
through 12th grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily attendance of 2,426
(EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 7.8% of the student population are English
Learners and 38% receive free and reduced-price meals. School district C serves 16,278 students
grades Kindergarten through twelfth grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily
attendance of 15,755 (EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 27.3% of the student
population are English Learners and 63% receive free and reduced-price meals.
Researcher 2 School District Information
School district D serves 24,776 students grades kindergarten through 12th grade (EdData,
2021). The district has an average daily attendance of 19,393 (EdData, 2021). According to
EdData (2021), nearly 26.3% of the student population are English Learners and 93.4% receive
free and reduced-price meals. School district E serves 3,406 students grades kindergarten
through 12th grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily attendance of 3,176
(EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 25.6% of the student population are English
Learners and 91.2% receive free and reduced-price meals. School district C serves 23,699
students grades kindergarten through twelfth grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average
daily attendance of 22,301 (EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 13% of the
student population are English Learners and 27.5% receive free and reduced-price meals.
42

Researcher 3 School District Information
School district G serves 3,502 students grades kindergarten through eighth grade
(EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily attendance of 3,408 (EdData, 2021).
According to EdData (2021), nearly 3.1% of the student population are English Learners and
14.6 % receive free and reduced-price meals. School district H serves 15,730 students in
Kindergarten through eighth grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily attendance
of 15,194 (EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 46.3% of the student population
are English Learners and 86.9% receive free and reduced-price meals. School district I serves
23,724 students grades 9th through 12th grade (EdData, 2021). The district has an average daily
attendance of 22,611 (EdData, 2021). According to EdData (2021), nearly 6.3% of the student
population are English Learners and 60.9% receive free and reduced-price meals.
Instrumentation
After analyzing the current literature and participating in collaborative discussions to
identify gaps in research, an interview protocol and a survey were designed to address the
research questions guiding this research study. The interview and survey questions were field-
tested beforehand to ensure they were concise and that the results generated addressed the
research study questions. Interviews took place virtually because of the safety protocols due to
the COVID-19 pandemic and out of consideration of the time constraints of the participants who
were still leading school through a pandemic. Survey instruments were sent to the participants'
email of choice. All the interviews were recorded with participants’ permission, and notetaking
was also used. Appendix E–G contains the interview protocol that was used. The survey
instruments were administered to Southern California K–12 public school superintendents,
43

assistant superintendents, and principals. The link to the survey questions was emailed to the
participants. Appendix A–C contains the survey questions that were sent to each participant.
The conceptual framework (See Figure 1) utilized for this research study was based on
three theoretical frameworks. The three frameworks assist in developing an understanding of the
theories that impact school leadership and how they can be adapted to the current situation of
managing the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The four frames, political, structural, human
resources, and symbolic, described by Bolman and Deal (2017) provide school leaders at both
site and district levels the roadmap to navigate the different aspects of leadership and how leader
actions and habits can impact the organization. Fullan’s (2014) The Principal: Three Keys to
Maximizing Impact goes deeper into the specific role of principals as enacting change at the site
level through being a lead learner, district and system player, and change agent. Westover’s
(2020) framework provides the guiding principles that districts can enact to create an
organization that can move together through change and create for continuous improvement
systems. These three frameworks together provide Southern California K–12 school districts
with the steps to persist, at all levels of leadership, even through a crisis like the COVID-19
pandemic.

44

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Data Collection
After approval was obtained from the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) during the fall of 2021the data collection process began. District
superintendents were contacted via a formal written request (email), followed by a phone
conversation to obtain permission for the study and access to assistant superintendents and
principals. Once the district superintendents granted permission, participants were contacted for
participation in the study via an email. The email included a summary of the research study, a
request to participate, and a link to the survey. In addition, participants were contacted by phone
to encourage responses to the surveys and to request interviews.
45

The researchers distributed the surveys through Qualtrics, an online format that allows
participants to complete the survey at their discretion. Participants spent an average of 15
minutes completing the online survey. The semi-structured interviews took place via Zoom and
took an average of 35 minutes to complete. All interviews were recorded with participants’
permission. A professional transcriber transcribed the recordings from the interviews.
Data Analysis
This mixed-methods study used qualitative data from interviews and quantitative data
from surveys. After the data was collected, the qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed
separately based on the four research questions delineated in the study. The qualitative data
collected from the interviews were organized and analyzed to identify common themes. The
researchers read through the interview transcripts, made notations using open coding followed
by axial coding and concluded with selective coding. Common themes and patterns were
identified to understand the impact of the pandemic on schools, students, and leaders and how
school leaders managed the crisis.
The researchers compiled the quantitative data collected by the survey instrument and
analyzed the data using Qualtrics. Each participants’ responses were separated and organized
using the Likert-scale values 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The average score from each question was
calculated for each participant and included one overall average score across all participants’
questions. The researchers evaluated the responses to determine commonalities and differences.
Ethical Considerations
The research process demands that researchers think cautiously about the interaction with
others and the consequences of those interactions. Likewise, ethically responsible agents place
the voice of the oppressed at the center of inquiry and use that inquiry to reveal the change and
activism needed to help people. So, an important aspect of ethical research is the focus on
46

respect for the individuals and the community (Denzin, 2016; Glesne, 2011; Lochmiller and
Lester, 2017; Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). The researchers followed all ethical considerations
throughout the design and implementation of this research study. All guidelines and procedures
for the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) were reviewed and
implemented throughout the entire research study. To ensure that the researchers conducted the
study in an ethical manner, all participants were informed of the purpose of the study, and it was
clearly stated that their participation in the study was voluntary. Participants were also informed
that their identities and responses would be kept secure and confidential, and the data would be
handled carefully and safely. During the interviews, explicit permission was requested to record
the sessions. The participants were made aware that the findings would be distributed as a
dissertation in the doctoral program at the University of Southern California.
Summary
This chapter restated the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, and the
research questions. The research design, which included details of the research methods,
including the sample and population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis were
also presented in this chapter. Data collection began after the researchers obtained approval for
IRB. This study used appropriate tools and followed all ethical standards to ensure the validity
and reliability of the study. The superintendent, principals, and assistant principals willingly
participated in this study. The research findings of this study and in-depth analysis will be
presented in chapter four.

47

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12
Southern California school districts and understand what district and site administrators have
learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing the crisis.
This study brings to light the impact of the pandemic on students, families, leaders, schools, and
districts. Most importantly, this study examines how district and school leadership influences
administrative practices, student achievement, financial responsibility, union leadership, and
community/parent support as they responded to the COVID-19 crisis.
This study was designed as a mixed-methods study, utilizing both qualitative and
quantitative methods to collect and analyze data. A total of 27 Southern California K–12 district
leaders and school leaders—nine superintendents, nine assistant superintendents, and nine
principals- participated in the study. A mixed-methods approach was selected to establish
triangulation for more accurate findings and make the study more holistic (Maxwell, 2013).
Qualitative methods allowed for examining how school leaders made decisions and addressed
challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. The researchers used interviews to collect data
during the study’s qualitative phase. The semi-structured interview protocol consisted of 14
questions and a series of follow-up probes. The interviews were used to gather data that reflected
the participants’ opinions, decisions, and knowledge. This study involved collecting qualitative
data from open-ended interview questions with participants and quantitative surveys completed
by the interviewees.
The survey questions were also developed around the four research questions and
designed to gather data that reflected the school leaders’ experiences, views, decisions, and
knowledge about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern California K–12 public
48

school districts. This study gathered data using three variations of the same survey ( one version
was used for the superintendent, one version was used for assistant superintendents, and one
version was used for principals), distributed to all 27 participants. The surveys consisted of 5-
point Likert-scale questions. The following descriptors were used for each of the 26 survey
items: 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The survey instrument was web-accessible to
all participants and was designed to capture the numeric description of the perceptions of the
district- and site-level administrators regarding district- and site-level challenges related to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
The quantitative findings, shown in Tables 5 to 8, show the average participant score for each
survey question. Chapter Four presents the findings from the research questions. The results
found in this chapter are the results of the online survey and zoom interviews. The following four
questions guided the research study:
1. What are the financial implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public
school districts in Southern California and how did district superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals address these implications?
2. What was the impact of federal, state, and local health agencies on K–12 public
school districts in Southern California, and what strategies did district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals follow to address the
guidelines suggested by these agencies?
3. What was the role of union negotiations in K–12 Southern California public school
districts' response to the pandemic?
4. How did K–12 Southern California public school districts leadership teams composed
of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals address the parent
49

community’s concerns regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of
technology, academic standing, and how and when to reopen schools due to the
pandemic?
Participants
Nine school districts located in Southern California were contacted to participate in the
study. The nine districts were located in Los Angeles, Ventura, and San Bernardino counties. All
nine school districts serve demographically diverse students in kindergarten through high school.
All nine districts met our selection criteria which included the following:
• traditional Southern California K–12 district superintendent, assistant superintendent,
or principal;
• public schools;
• the superintendent, assistant superintendent, or principal must have worked in the
current role for at least one year;
• the superintendents, assistant superintendents, or principals served in these positions
during the 2020–2021 school year; and
• the student population of the district is at least one thousand.
The 27 school and district leaders who met the criteria completed a self-administered survey
designed around four research questions and participated in a virtual interview via Zoom. To
protect the identities of all superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in our study,
all participants were assigned pseudonyms.
Demographic Data
As shown in Table 2, 27 participants were chosen from nine different K–12 public school
districts in Southern California. The nine participating school districts served a total of 122,330
50

students, with the smallest school district (District E) serving 3,406 students and the largest
school district (District D) serving 24,776 students. An average of 62.9% of all enrolled students
across all nine districts were identified as socioeconomically disadvantaged (SES), with the
smallest percentage of SES students (14.6%) in District G and the largest percentage of SES
students (93.4%) in District D. Of the total student enrollments in all nine school districts, an
average of 22.7% of students were identified as English learners (EL), with the smallest
percentage of EL students (6.3%) in District I and the largest percentage of EL students (46.3%)
in District H.

51

Table 2
School District Participants: Demographic Information
District Grade
levels
Student
population
Socioeconomically
disadvantaged
Average
daily
attendance
English
learners
District A K–12 6,603 91.2% 4,765 37.2%
District B K–12 4,612 38% 2,426 7.8%
District C

District D

District E

District F

District G

District H

District I
K–12

K–12

K–12

K–12

K–8

K–8

9-12
16,278

24,776

3,406

23,699

3,502

15,730

23,724
63%

93.4%

91.2%

27.5%

14.6 %

86.9%

60.9%
15,755

19,393

3,176

22,301

3,408

15,194

22,611
27.3%

26.3%

25.6%

13.2%

14.6%

46.3%

6.3%

Note. Data reflects the 2019–2020 school year (EdData,2021)

As part of the research process, 27 participants were asked two demographic questions:
1. How many years have you served in the leadership role?
2. How many years have you served in your current role within the school district?
It was critical that research participants had experience leading their districts and schools during
the COVID-19 pandemic.
As displayed in Table 3, three out of the nine participating superintendents (33%) had
served in their role for just 1 to 2 years. Similarly, three participants (33%) had served in their
52

role for over ten years. Two of the nine participating superintendents (22%) had served in their
role for 3 to 5 years. Additionally, as can be seen in Table 3, one of participating superintendents
(11%) had served in their position in their current district for 6 to 10 years. All nine
superintendent participants (100%) experienced leading through the COVID-19 pandemic.

Table 3
Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information
Position Southern California
district
Years in position Years in position at
current district
Superintendent A1 Yes 1 to 2 Less than 1
Superintendent B1 Yes 3 to 5 3 to 5
Superintendent C1

Superintendent D1
Yes

Yes
3 to 5

Over 10
3 to 5

6 to 10
Superintendent E1

Superintendent F1
Yes

Yes
1 to 2

1 to 2
1 to 2

1 to 2
Superintendent G1

Superintendent H1
Yes

Yes
6 to 10

Over 10
6 to 10

Over 10
Superintendent I1 Yes Over 10 Over 10

53

As shown in Table 4, six of the nine participating assistant superintendents (67%) had
served in their position for 3 to 5 years. One of the nine assistant superintendents (11%) was
newer to the position, having served only 1 to 2 years. Two of the nine participants (22%) had
served in their position for 6 to 10 years. Eight participating assistant superintendents had served
in their current position exclusively in their current, respective districts. All nine assistant
superintendent participants (100%) experienced leading through the COVID-19 pandemic.

Table 4
Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information
Position Southern California
district
Years in position Years in position at
current district
Assistant
Superintendent A2

Yes

6 to 10

6 to 10
Assistant
Superintendent B2

Yes

1 to 2

1 to 2
Assistant
Superintendent C2

Yes

3 to 5

3 to 5
Assistant
Superintendent D2

Yes

3 to 5

1 to 10
Assistant
Superintendent F2

Yes

3 to 5

3 to 5
Assistant
Superintendent G2

Yes

6 to 10

6 to 10
Assistant
Superintendent H2

Yes

3 to 5

3 to 5
Assistant
Superintendent I2

Yes

3 to 5

3 to 5
54

As indicated in Table 5, one out of the nine participating principals (11%), had served in
their role for just 1 to 2 years. Similarly, one out of nine participants (11%) served in their
position for 3 to 10 years. In contrast, three out of nine participants (33%), had served in their
position for 6 to 10 years. Four out of the nine who participated (44%), had served in their role
for over 10 years. Seven of the nine participating principals (77%) had held the position of
principal exclusively in their current, respective districts. All principal participants (100%)
experienced leading through the COVID-19 pandemic.

Table 5
Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information
Position Southern California
District
Years in position Years in position at
current school
Principal A3 Yes 6 to 10 6 to 10
Principal B3 Yes 6 to 10 6 to 10
Principal C3 Yes 6 to 10 6 to 10
Principal D Yes Over 10 6 to 10
Principal E3 Yes Over 10 Over 10
Principal F3 Yes Over 10 Over 10
Principal G3 Yes 1 to 2 1 to 2
Principal H3 Yes Over 10 1 to 2
Principal I3 Yes 3 to 5 3 to 5

55

Results for Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked the following: What are the financial implications of the
COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 public school districts in Southern California and how did district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals address these implications? The
unprecedented financial implications facing K–12 school systems due to COVID-19 include but
are not limited to rising costs, declining revenue due to declining enrollment, and greater student
needs; this has impacted how leaders approach their finances (Zhou et al, 2021). Given the
impacts of factors such as fluctuating revenue projections, unpredictable enrollment numbers, the
uncertainty of the ongoing costs related to COVID-19, and the greater breadth and depth of
students’ needs, it will take a transformed vision of schooling to effectively meet these needs
(Educational Research Strategies, 2021) and financial resources to support that vision. The first
question was designed to assess the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on schools and
to learn how districts used the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act for
the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER) to respond to those
needs and if the additional funds helped mitigate the challenges school districts are facing.
There were six survey questions addressing research question one. The survey questions
were designed to learn about district leaders’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the ESSER
Funds given to their districts from the CARES Act as a resource to respond to and mitigate the
needs brought on by the pandemic. As seen in Table 2, there were two areas where most
superintendent respondents (77.8–100%) agreed or strongly agreed that CARES Act funds met
their district’s funding needs. The majority of superintendents (77.8%) agree that the CARES
Act met their district’s funding needs in the area of personnel. All superintendent respondents
(100%) agree or strongly agree that the CARES Act met their district’s funding needs for
56

personal protective equipment (PPE). Whether the CARES Act met the district’s funding needs
in the area of facility upgrades, superintendents responded differently, with responses ranging
from disagree to strongly agree.

57

Table 6
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents of the Nine School Districts’ Perception of Financial
Implications of COVID-19
Element Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
The CARES Act
met my district’s
funding needs in
the area of
personnel.
0.00% 0.00% 22.2% 55.5% 11.1%
The CARES Act
met my district's
funding needs in
the area of
personal
protective
equipment
(PPE).
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 44.4% 44.4%
The CARES Act
met my district's
funding needs in
the area of
technology.
0.00% 0.00% 33.3% 22.2% 33.3%
The CARES Act
met my district's
funding needs in
the area of
professional
learning and/or
training.
0.00% 11.1% 22.2% 55.5% 0.00%
The CARES Act
met my district's
funding needs in
the area of
facility
upgrades.
11.1% 22.2% 11.1% 33.3% 22.2%
58

There were four interview questions that directly addressed the research question and
were designed to allow respondents to discuss the financial implications more broadly. Interview
responses to the four questions provided the researchers with information to better understand
financial and fiscal decision-making made by school and district leaders during the COVID-19
pandemic crisis. The unprecedented challenges faced by K–12 school systems nationwide
required coordinated action from district, state, and federal leaders and a sustained, multi-year
effort to transform and rebuild the nation’s schools. However, federal and state education leaders
had to help districts not only with financial support, but also by removing barriers and creating
pathways that made it easier to implement strategies that were sustainable for students, teachers,
and districts (Zhou et al., 2021). There were two themes that emerged during the interviews
about financial and fiscal decision-making made by school and district leaders during the
COVID-19 pandemic crisis—government relief and the lack of incentives.
Government Relief
Schools in California were allowed to re-open for in-person instruction as long as their
districts posted a Coronavirus Safety Plan by February 1, 2021, posted a dashboard listing
COVID positive cases of their students and staff at each school site that was open, and submitted
a COVID-19 Safety Plan to their local health officer and the state’s Safe Schools for All team
(Harrington, 2021). In addition to guidelines and mandates, schools were also provided with
financial support. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which
provided states with federal funds, was signed into law on March 27th, 2020 (CDE, 2021). The
$30.75 billion in emergency education funding was distributed to states through the Governor’s
Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Fund and the Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund, which provided financial support to local educational agencies
59

(LEAs) to assess and address the various ways in which COVID-19 has and may continue to
impact the educational landscape and needs of school communities (CDE, 2021). In the
interviews, K–12 school and district leaders in Southern California expressed their appreciation
for government aid amidst the pandemic and how these monies provided school districts with
opportunities to support students.
Superintendent B1 explained the way in which government relief prevented detrimental
cuts and supported the maintenance and growth of programs that support student learning.
There was sort of an ebb and a flow, rollercoaster sort of, as we started the
pandemic, because we entered March of 2020 looking at that budget going into
June, and the approval of the governor's budget at that point, looking at a
significant cut to the LCFF. So we were planning for what we would call a worst-
case scenario, a really tragic scenario, in terms of staffing and layoffs and
program cuts and all of that. And then, the government stepped in and provided
relief and it ended up totally flipping. And so then, there was enough money,
obviously, to be able to maintain and grow programs, really in response to
COVID.
Superintendent E1 provided an example in which one-time, government funding helped
mitigate district expenses brought upon by the COVID-19 pandemic.
All the one-time money we've gotten from the state and the federal government
has helped really to mitigate some of the expenses tied to the COVID 19.
pandemic, and helped we needed to buy additional PPE, air filters, upgrading the
filters in the H vac systems. And you know, moving forward with some of the
money to replace some of our older H vac systems to newer ones.
60

Superintendent F1 also expressed the ways in which one-time, government funding
helped mitigate district expenses as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Well, I think it's been positive. With all the one time funding from for COVID
relief, and the increases that people didn't see coming with all of the, you know,
the revenues at the state level, you know, that's going to really help here in the
short term, but also kind of as we push through this to, to mitigate some of the
effects and what we're able to provide for students.
No Incentives
In California, Governor Newsome signed Senate Bill 86, which allocates $2 billion to schools
that submitted reopening plans by April 1 and brought elementary students back by April 15
along with other prioritized, high-needs students (Jones & Freedburg, 2021). In addition, Senate
Bill 86 also proposed that some schools may face penalties such as having their allocated grant
reopening funding cut by 1% per day if they do not open by the deadline (Jones & Freeburg,
2021). However, in the interviews, district leaders unanimously claimed that the additional
funding did not serve as an incentive for their reopening plan. Instead, the preparedness and
readiness of their staff and students served as the main driving force behind allowing students
back into the classroom.
Superintendent H1 explained that schools in their district planned to open as soon as they
could and their timeline was not influenced by additional government funding.
Not at all. Again, from the very beginning, the mantra was, we don't know when
but we are opening the schools. We try and you know, I got a lot of heat for that
at the beginning. When people asked me will you be waiting until…,and my
answer is always, we are getting ready to open tomorrow. And even though
61

tomorrow, it wasn't literally, I wanted people to know that as soon as we could,
we will open.
Superintendent I1 clearly expressed that their decision to reopen was driven by what’s
best for students.
Zero. That wasn’t the incentive. Umm the incentive was for us to get students
back in the classroom because we believe that is the best situation for them.
Umm, we do have some students that chose not to do that, but uhh, a very very
small percentage, less than 2%.
School and District leaders in Southern California K–12 schools agreed that financial
government relief helped mitigate some of the costs brought upon by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Students remained a priority when considering how money was spent and timelines for
reopening school buildings.
Results for Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked the following: What, if any, have been the impact of Federal,
State and Local Health agencies on K–12 school districts, and what strategies have districts
followed to address the suggested guidelines? In the Spring of 2020, schools were facing a
complicated array of health considerations; throughout the state, districts were navigating these
and other issues with guidance from federal and local health government agencies, organizations,
and health experts to safely prepare for the return to in-person learning (Kearney & Childs,
2021). School and district leaders grappled with inconsistent guidance and surging community
infections (Gross et al., 2021). Safety guidelines and mandates from county and state officials
provided school and district leaders with a set of criteria to safely reopen schools (Harrington,
2021). The California Department of Education (CDE) created resources for how parents can
62

support their children at home and a Strong Together Plan which provided a comprehensive
checklist for reopening schools, mental health, and well-being among other topics (CDE, 2021).
The school-reopening guidance offered by the CDC naturally focuses on public-health
considerations, leaving it to educators to devise how to keep students and staff safe while also
meeting students’ educational needs (Bailey, 2020).
The second research question was designed to understand better the impact of health and
safety guidelines on school districts’ ability to reopen schools safely. Research study participants
responded to three survey questions related to health and safety guidelines. As seen in Table 7,
all of the superintendent respondents (100%) agreed that health guidelines impacted their
district's return to school plan in the spring of 2021. Most superintendents (66.6%) strongly
disagreed or disagreed that the federal, state, and local health guidelines were clear in providing
information to support the safe reopening of schools, while some (22.2%) agreed or disagreed on
the same element. Whether superintendents understood how to safely bring back staff during the
fall of 2020 to work sites based on the public health guidelines, superintendents also responded
differently with responses ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

63

Table 7
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents of the Nine School Districts’ Perception of the Impact of
Health and Safety Guidelines
Element Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither agree
nor disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
The federal, state, and
local health
guidelines were
clear in providing
information to
support the safe
reopening of
schools.
11.1% 55.5% 0.00% 11.1% 11.1%
I understood how to
safely bring back
staff during the fall
of 2020 to work
sites based on the
public health
guidelines.
11.1% 11.1% 0.00% 44.4% 22.2%
The health guidelines
impacted our
district's return to
school plan in the
spring of 2021.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 33.3% 55.5%

Four interview questions directly addressed the research question and were designed to
provide respondents with an opportunity to discuss the impact, if any, of the health and safety
guidelines from various governmental agencies they had to implement to reopen schools safely.
Responses to the three questions provided the researcher with information to better understand
64

the collaboration between various agencies and the strategies districts used to safely implement
the guidance and reopen schools. Two themes emerged during the interviews.
Difference of Opinion of Consistent Guidance
District and school leaders disagreed on the opinion of consistent guidance for the
implementation of health and safety mandates and policies from federal and local health
government agencies, organizations, and health experts. Superintendent B1 discussed the
challenges that school and district leaders faced due to inconsistent communication from federal
and local health government agencies, organizations, and health experts.
I'm talking specifically about, let's talk about county and state organizations, going to talk
specifically about the health departments, maybe the Governor's office too, in that, there
just was a lack of alignment in getting the message to school leaders quick enough,
getting it where it was clear enough, where it was in print fast enough and where the
voice of the school administrators, the school district leaders was taken into account.
And, that was a big challenge. And I have to say that, looking at CDC guidelines versus
LADPH guidelines versus California Department of Health guidelines, Cal/OSHA
guidelines and all of the others, was extremely, extremely challenging. And, when one
organization doesn't talk to the other organization, you're left in a position where you're
susceptible and you're vulnerable. And, it's hard as a leader to be vulnerable when you're
trying to battle a pandemic and deal with all the fallout of a pandemic.
Superintendent A1 explained how inconsistent communication from federal and local
health government agencies, organizations, and health experts left district superintendents feeling
lots of pressure from schools and the communities they serve.

65

I think it was hit and miss. You know, medical people, the science people, you know,
they come out, they share information and then when it would reach down to our
Department of Public Health, sometimes it would align, sometimes it wouldn't. You
know, as a school district, you have a lot more pressure on you, especially as a
superintendent to say, I'm sorry, I know the school down the road that's in another county
has said, no more masks, or you don't have to do this anymore. But we are gonna follow
the guidelines, we're gonna stay true to this until we hear differently, and sometimes
that's not the popular thing to do.
Superintendent D1 expressed a different opinion regarding guidance and communication
from federal and local health government agencies, organizations, and health experts.
The LCDPH did a fantastic job of providing guidance. We meet on a weekly basis to
receive updates related to state and county guidelines pertaining to COVID 19
Guidelines, mandates and recommendations. This is an ongoing process that allows us to
update our COVID 19 Protocols within our school district.
Principal D3 also mentioned that their school and district depended heavily on guidance
from federal, state, and local government agencies and community organizations to keep school
communities safe.
We also, of course, had guidance from the CDC, the Health Department, the Los Angeles
County Office of Education, and as soon as any new finding was revealed dealing with
COVID we complied and we made sure that we reassess our situation and went along
with whatever plan they had. because we understood it's a pandemic, and we couldn't
take it lightly. There were health issues at stake. You know, these are people's lives at
stake. And so we want to make sure that everyone was as healthy as possible coming
66

back and re engaging. But we always followed the agencies that I just named, we always
followed the plan.
Communication and Collaboration
Despite a difference of opinion in how various government agencies, organizations, and
health experts offered guidance to school and district leaders, superintendents agreed that
communication and collaboration played a critical role in interpreting and implementing health
guidelines and policies. Superintendent A1 shares the process of communication and how school
and district leaders collaborate to ensure there is an alignment in messaging to staff, students,
and families.
I quickly just made that decision, like, no, we're gonna do weekly updates, you know,
even if there are no updates, just to sort of say, like, here's our, you know, information.
So in terms of communicating that piece, it always begins with, you know, I meet with
my cabinet, and we listen to the conversation, to the updates and guidelines and say,
okay, what changes do we need to make? Okay, this, okay, what's a clear way to say that?
So we've been tweaking, copying, from different districts that have these great graphics,
or these visuals that we can use; infographics to help. But you know, once we sort of
come up with the way we're going to communicate it, then I communicate that to my
administrators and directors, once they give the blessing or say, hey, you know what,
maybe we should also say this, and then we communicate it to staff. And then the final
piece is communicating to parents, you know, making sure that's all in alignment. And
obviously, we can mitigate that in Spanish as well.

67

Assistant Superintendent F2 also discussed how school and district leaders collaborate to
communicate with students and families to help them understand decisions and district policies.
I think the biggest strategy, it certainly comes under the umbrella of communication to
why is what we like to refer to it as where it's, it's not just a, you know, distribution of
rules and info. And, you know, without it being a dialogue. So I'd say, you know, we had
a lot with every phase of reopening, we had the district level, and then at the local school
level. It gave folks a chance to know and understand the why behind a decision making,
and the construction of the boundaries and, you know, restrictions that are put in place,
and how to feel assured that what we're doing is, you know, going to be done safely and
with thorough thought.
Principal E3 discussed the ways in which their district communicated and collaborated
with health agencies to remain up to date with mandates and procedures.
I would say that, like, I know, the superintendent had, like a weekly meeting with, you
know, our LA county superintendent and health, LA County Health and so forth. So
different agencies there. And I know there was a weekly meeting, and that's where the
updates would come in. And then our district office would relay those to us.
Some district leaders shared the challenges that school and district leaders faced as a result of
inconsistent communication from federal and local health government agencies, organizations,
and health experts. In contrast, other district leaders had a difference of opinion and felt that
agencies such as Los Angeles County Department of Public Health did a fantastic job of
providing guidance. Despite a difference of opinion, Superintendents and Assistant
Superintendents agreed that communication and collaboration played an instrumental role in
implementing and interpreting health guidelines and policies.
68

Results for Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked the following: How, if at all, have union negotiations played a
role in K–12 district’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic? After the initial closures in March
of 2020, school districts were forced to quickly roll out distance learning plans and revisit the
present collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) that were negotiated between teachers' unions
and district administration (Hemphill & Marianno, 2021). State health and educational agencies
provided guidance that helped district leaders negotiate agreements or Memorandums of
Understanding (MOUs) with certified and classified unions to determine staff members’ work
stipulations due to the pandemic. These MOUs determined compensation, work hours, non-
teaching duties, evaluation, leave, and technology (Hemphill & Marianno, 2021. COVID cases
began to decline in the spring of 2021, and schools began to reopen, which placed teacher unions
in a position to influence schools’ opening through collective bargaining agreements. The
decision to reopen schools is placed on school boards and district administrators instead of
policymakers which leaves teacher's unions to influence when and how schools reopen
(Hemphill & Marianno, 2022).
The third research question was designed to help the researchers better understand the
role of labor unions in shaping districts’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Study participants
responded to three survey questions related to Research Question 3, as seen in Table 8.
Superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals were all aligned in their responses.
Overall, participants felt very strongly that union negotiations with both certificated and
classified staff were important in effectively responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.

69

Table 8
Quantitative Survey: District and Site Leaders’ Perceptions of the Impact of Union Negotiation
Superintendent
Assistant
superintendent Principal

Negotiations with certificated unions
influenced the way my district
effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.

3.9 2.9 4.3
Negotiations with classified unions
influenced the way of my district
effectively responding to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.

3.2 3.5 4.3
Negotiations with the teacher’s union
impacted the quality of instruction
offered to students during distance
learning.
3.6 3.9 3.9

Note. The online Qualtrics® survey incorporated a 5-point Likert scale response, indicating the
following: 1= strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Four interview questions directly addressed research question number three and were
designed to provide respondents with an opportunity to discuss the impact, if any, of union
negotiations on districts’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses to the four questions
provided the researchers with information to better understand the interaction between district
leadership and labor unions and the impact on districts as they planned their response to the
COVID-19 pandemic. Three themes emerged during the interviews: nourishing relationships
70

amongst classified and certificated staff, redefining roles and responsibilities for classified and
certificated staff, and return to in-person learning.
Nourishing Relationships Amongst Classified and Certificated Staff
Assistant Superintendent I2 highlighted the importance of using principal and teacher
voices as a guide to making decisions.
And so at every school site, you had school leaders just coming together to find solutions.
And then the broader picture of principals bringing these ideas together. And then based
on the feedback that we're getting from all those schools, that really shaped how
negotiations went. So, it was really a bottoms-up, grassroots, teacher led initiative, from
my perspective, but obviously, as you do that, you begin to learn about certain things
begin to look at certain perspectives, and then all that becomes part of the negotiation.
They have become part of negotiations. So, I would say the leaders, the teacher
leadership, in their knowledge is what really shaped negotiations for the instructional
programs, particularly when it came to working on Zoom, and working online. And then
the district came behind that to assist in the implementation and obviously bringing some
more things that we think could augment what the teachers wanted, and needed,wasn't
always the most fun thing to do, but I thought it's pretty successful in being able to pivot
from being in the classroom, to going online.
Assistant Superintendent F2 highlighted the importance of collaborating with their
classified staff.
We had conditions in place that were mutually worked through and agreed upon. I'll say
it was extremely amicable. We were, we're very fortunate. And I think our teachers union
would say the same that, you know, we really do work collaboratively. And, and it was,
71

we all had the same idea in mind, you know, let's, let's make sure what we're doing is
thoughtful, and that we're doing it safely, that we understand the rules, and you know, the
restrictions and boundaries that are given to us by other people who are more expert in
this than us. And then let's do everything we can to do what's best for kids and get back to
whatever thing we can do that's closest to normal. And that was the mindset, and I, you
know, it hasn't changed, fortunately.
Superintendent C1 discussed the importance of having mutual agreements with the
unions:
But we have a really solid relationship with our teachers union. And so we had handshake
agreements every step of the way. And then we followed up with those with
memorandums of understanding. And as we hit bumps in the road, we talked them
through, but there's not been one issue that we haven't been able to come to some level of
mutual agreement upon, because I think we philosophically agree on the need to protect
our workforce, while serving our kids.
Superintendent B1 reiterated the importance of listening to the staff and their needs.
And then, you have to be open to listening. For a lot of us who are in district leadership
positions, we've been out of the classroom for quite some time. So, that direct impact to
teacher, to student, we can think and think we know all we want, but the reality is, until
you're in the classroom and dealing with the day to day, we don't. And so we have to
listen. But we also have to make sure that our focus is on the student. And adults need to
keep adult issues to adult issues. And so, again, to resolve it, we wanted to come up with
this... My mantra always is, "let adult problems be adult problems, and not let that impact
72

kids." And so, going through negotiations, as hard as it is, is still trying to keep that
center.
Principal F3 emphasized the importance of going the extra mile to hear concerns and
allowing staff to have input in the layout of their workspace.
It was how we're setting up their classrooms. And also, how are we screening kids
coming in. And so we took an extra step here, there was the healthy screening survey,
every student had to take every student coming in at the gates, I just show their green
screen. We also went all spring, we were doing temperature checks. We provided the
masks, the hand sanitizer, and the wipes, not just for the teachers, but in every classroom
students, we had boxes laid out throughout every classroom. So we had 1000s and 1000s
of 1000s of wipes on campus. And then making sure their workspace or no student desk
was within six feet of the teachers teacher station. So those are the things that we put in
place in partnering with the teachers union.
Redefining Roles and Responsibilities Schedules for Classified and Certificated Staff
Superintendent A1 discusses how a work day for classified staff versus certificated staff
was presented and justified.
Truly, it was, you know, that bonus pay, because, you know, when everybody was able to
stay home, a lot of our classified didn't have that option. They had to be here, like the
lunch people, right, the custodians, so making sure that they got that hero pay. So that
was another way of negotiating with our unions, you know, finding that flexibility, where
in the past, you couldn't do something out of your classification. They basically said,
okay, because we're short handed, because we need all hands on deck, we're gonna allow
you to do this from here to this date. So like I said, and some, I really found that, you
73

know, working with unions, they were like, Okay, we'll do it, because it's what's best. But
there were some situations where I really do feel that it was just sort of, like, you know,
shame on you for doing that. And, and it's unfortunate. But, you know, the whole
rationale was, there's money, you know, why not give it to us kind of thing.
Assistant Superintendent H2 highlights how deciding to have classified staff onsite
impacted their relationship.
We needed to have people at our schools to open our offices to answer questions to
provide our parents services-to assist our parents with helping them just logging on and
you know, we implemented Canvas, well, if you don't know how to access that initially,
then having a virtual video isn't gonna get you to where you need to get, and so the
burden of that day, the responsibility of that was to a certain extent placed on our
classified staff, our outreach consultants and our office staff and being able to open our
offices. And so that was probably the most complex. Ultimately, it happened, but it didn't
happen without some rub, that we're still dealing with the consequences of that, right, of
those relationships, of feeling that they're less valued because and it's not a matter of
value, it was really a matter of, we have to continue to operate and offer our families, the
services, and teachers could teach virtually, but you know, and so we're still dealing with
that. That relationship building, I think.
Superintendent G1 discussed the need to negotiate higher expectations for the hybrid
model in order to serve students best.
Between March of 2020, when we initially closed schools, in June of 2020, the level of
teacher time and in quality of programs was not good. And so when we came back to
negotiate the fall of 2020 to 2021, what hybrid was going to look like? It was absolutely
74

necessary that we were going to have more rigor, we were going to have more teacher
time in front of the zoom, we were going to have more student check ins, we were going
to have social emotional learning. And so the district took a more active role in what
virtual hybrid learning was going to look like. Because they didn't do a very good job.
The first three months, what we did do well on was we literally close school and send
kids home on Friday, the 13th of March. And on Saturday, or on Monday, the 16th of
March, we reopened virtually, and every student had a device. So we had no pause in
access, or in devices of instructional program. But the quality of what they got was not
that good.
Return to In-Person Learning
Assistant superintendent F2 discussed the teachers’ concerns regarding the conditions of
returning to work.
Well, certainly working conditions when we moved to being at home, work didn't get
easier. Certain factors of work changed. The idea of helping students in person and
dealing with some of the distractions and nuances of behavior, and a classroom was very
different on Zoom. They asked for some training, they asked for some time to prepare, so
they could do that job well, and we were able to provide that to them. When we shifted
from one to the other, we had the terms spelled out with mutual agreement via the MOU
process specific to that, so that everybody knew and understood that regardless of what
school you worked for, what grade level you work for, when it was your turn, to come
back, and be in person with live students that we were going to allow for a transition
period to occur.

75

The superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in this study concurred that
safety was the most important topic addressed in union negotiations. Principal C3 highlighted
how negotiations informed safety procedures:
I think just make sure that we had enough of the PPE for all of our staff members,
making sure that we followed what the guidelines were from the Department of Health to
have lots of the Senate, a lot of hand sanitizers. Making sure that like everything is
cleaning and custodial staff UPS goes in and cleans them regularly. So, and making sure
that if there was a positive case, then we would make sure that we have a team going in,
and making sure that we can clean off the tables a little bit more doing a deep cleaning,
rather than just in general. So, so that was an impact from our work, they wanted to make
sure that that was safe for the students and staff.
Results for Research Question 4
Research Question 4 asked the following: How, if at all, has your district addressed the
concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of
technology, academic standing, and how and when to open schools due to the COVID-19
pandemic? During a pandemic, the decision to close schools is tough. On the one hand, closing
schools sends a powerful message to the community about the severity of the pandemic, but
closure also means that the needs of the communities will not be met (Braunack-Mayer et al.,
2013). Closing schools impacted many social structures in the community; therefore, public
health benefits from school closures are to be weighed against life-altering costs such as the
educational, economic, and social-emotional turmoil that was imposed on students and their
families (Bailey, 2021). In a nationally representative, online poll of 1,720 educators
administered on April 7 and 8, 2020, 99% of district leaders said that they were at least doing
76

something to address equity during closures. They were doing this by offering pick-up/delivery
of free or reduced-price meals, providing devices, providing additional online tutoring available,
and providing online/phone therapy for students that need them (Kurtz, 2020). Amid disruptions
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, a majority of parents of K–12 students expressed concerns
about their child falling behind (Horowitz & Igielnik, 2020). Parents with lower incomes were
more likely than middle-income and upper-income parents to voice concerns about their children
falling behind due to pandemic disruptions (Horowitz & Igielnik, 2020). Many students relied on
free or reduced meals provided at schools, and when schools close, nutrition was compromised.
According to Sharfstein and Morphew (2020), “ There are major divides by
race/ethnicity, geography, and economic class in access to home computers and high-speed
internet” (p.133). Successfully operating schools during the COVID-19 pandemic required
sufficient resources to implement and sustain effective mitigation strategies. School districts
across the country grappled with safely operating schools in the 2020–21 school year, they
leaned on the CDC, which provided indicators to help guide school districts to operate schools in
the safest ways possible. Rice et al. (2021) stated,
These indicators include measures of underlying community transmission and a measure
of adherence to five primary mitigation strategies:
1. consistent and correct use of masks,
2. social distancing to the extent possible,
3. hand hygiene and respiratory etiquette,
4. cleaning and disinfection, and
5. contact tracing in collaboration with the local health department. (p. 1917)
77

The fourth research question was designed to help the researcher better understand the
relationship between school districts and the parent community during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Research study participants responded to seven survey questions. As seen in Table 9, 88.8% of
superintendent participants agreed or strongly agreed that their districts maintained good
communication with families during the pandemic and met the needs of students and families in
nutrition and technology (computers/devices). As seen in Table 9, there were four areas where
superintendents believed they could have served their constituents better: in the area of meeting
students' needs in technology (internet service), in meeting students’ academic needs, in meeting
students’ social-emotional needs, and in the area of health and safety. 66.6 % of superintendent
participants agreed or strongly agreed their district met the needs of students and families in the
area of technology (internet service) while 11.1 % of participants neither agreed nor disagreed
and 11.1 % of superintendent participants disagreed that their district met the need of students
and families in the area of technology (internet service). 33.3% of superintendent participants
disagreed that their district met the academic needs of students.
In contrast, 33.3 % of superintendent participants agreed that their district met the
academic needs of students, while 22.2 % of superintendent participants neither agreed nor
disagreed. 55.5 % of superintendent participants agreed or strongly agreed that their district met
the social-emotional needs of students in their district, while 11.1 % neither agreed nor
disagreed, and 22.2 % disagreed that their district met the needs of students' social-emotional
well-being. 66.6% of superintendent participants agreed or strongly agreed that their district met
the needs of students and families in health & safety, while 22.2 % of superintendent participants
disagreed.

78

Table 9
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ of the Nine School Districts’ Perception of Parent
Concerns
Element Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
My district maintained
good communication
with families during
the pandemic.
0% 0% 0% 22.2% 66.6%
My district met the needs
of students and
families in the area of
nutrition.
0% 0% 0% 33.3% 55.5%
My district met the needs
of students and
families in the area of
technology
(computers/devices).
0% 0% 0% 33.3% 55.5%
My district met the needs
of students and
families in the area of
technology (internet
service).
0% 11.1% 11.1% 33.3% 33.3%
My district met the needs
of students and
families in the area of
social emotional well
being.
0% 22.2% 11.1% 33.3% 22.2%
My district met the needs
of students and
families in the area of
health & safety.
0% 22.2% 0% 33.3% 33.3%
79

Element Strongly
disagree
Disagree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
My district met the
academic needs of
students.
0% 33.3% 22.2% 33.3% 0%

Two interview questions directly addressed the research question and were designed to
provide respondents with an opportunity to learn more about the relationship between the parent
community and school districts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses to the two questions
provided the researchers with information about parents’ perceptions of school districts meeting
their needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Four themes that emerged during the interviews,
safety as a priority, food insecurity, technology needs of students and their families, and
students’ academic needs.
Health and Safety Needs
Superintendent C1 discussed that parents were more involved than ever before, which
was an indication that they needed to make sure they had built-in streams of communication.
Early on, I realized that this pandemic woke up the sleeping giant, and that's parents. I'm
not exaggerating. We're a district of 15,000 kids. Prior to the pandemic if we called a
district-wide meeting regarding LCAP (Local Control Accountability Plan) input we got
25 parents, If so. Remember March 20, we shut down, we started our LCAP planning,
like in May, April, May, we held a zoom LCAP meeting, I had 1,100 parents in that
meeting. I don't think they knew that they were coming to, but they were hungry and
needing to connect with the schools. So we realized real quick, we had to have these
avenues for connecting.
80

One hundred percent of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in
Districts A- I shared that their community's main concern was surrounding their children's safety.
Assistant Superintendent B2 spoke about families' safety concerns regarding how schools were
going to maintain safety.
Safety first was just that. how are you going to keep distance? How are you going to
make sure people are going to wear masks? That was the first concern in October,
November, December of 2020. How are you going to make sure kids are going to wear
masks? How are you going to make sure special ed kids are going to wear masks? How
are you going to make sure teachers keep masks on? That was kind of the first thing of,
how safe are you really to come back and what are you going to do if someone gets
COVID? How do you clean? A lot of it was around that safety piece of it, of the
hesitation. Do you guys really know what you're doing? That was part of it.
Principal C3 discussed how parent reassurance of safety made it easy to transition back
into in-person learning.
I think we do a good job of communicating with them with what we're going to do and
how to keep their children safe.
Superintendent B1 reflected on mental health as one of the biggest safety concerns for
students and staff.
I do think that, when I look back and or evaluate where we are now today, the biggest
thing that... I don't want to say I misjudged or was misjudged, but just don't think there
was any way to quantify how bad the mental health side of this was going to be for, not
just for students. I'm talking for staff. I'm talking for parents, families, caregivers. The
level of mental health... I don't know. Gosh, the level of need in the area of mental health
81

was so huge, and still is so huge, that there's just not enough resources to fully address it.
I mean, you do the best you can. But, I don't think that any of us could have guessed to
the extent that this would be such a huge issue for the return. And so I think parents saw
it more, maybe sooner.
Food Insecurity
Superintendent A1 expressed pride in the district’s ability to meet students' nutritional
needs during the pandemic school closures.
Because we're 100% free and reduced lunch there were structures and systems in place,
where our kids can pick up and go every single day. So I think that that system, once they
got those kinks worked out, was great. After a while, not only did kids receive, their
breakfast or lunch, but they were also even given additional food to the families too. So I
think that that was something that the state did a fantastic job. Providing those extra
resources, and nutrition. All nutrition staff, the state really stepped up to another level and
making sure that our families had food. And on some days packing it up, so that way, it
would eliminate the amount of times that our families had to go out and possibly expose
them, to their kids to, to the virus.
Principal B3 also expressed their district’s response to meet the nutritional needs of their
community.
None whatsoever. Because through the entire time, when the school was closed, families
were able to come pick up lunch. And extra too, no questions were asked. If you said I
need three, you got three. We just had to document. Also, the local high school was doing
it. So families who really needed it, they could come here and then go there. Again, no
questions were asked. And this year, all students are getting free lunch as well. So
regardless of socioeconomic status, everybody qualifies for free lunch.
82

Superintendent D1 discussed having to adjust and rethink their nutritional programs to
meet students' nutritional needs
Yes, the packaging and distribution of meals had to be reevaluated. We had to adjust
hours of operations and reconfigure menus. We adapted the pickup process so that
families could pick up meals during virtual learning from any site in the district during
instead of their home school. Multiple meals were sent home instead of one meal per day.
Students’ Technology Needs
Principal B3 discussed how having a one-to-one device allowed for a seamless transition
to virtual learning.
Our district, our site has always been a one-to-one device, one device per student. In
some cases, more because we have a computer lab in addition to every student having
their own device. So students were able to take their Chromebooks home. So even right
now when a student gets exposed, if they have to quarantine for five to 10 days, parents,
we ask parents, "Do you need a Chromebook?" Parents will say, "No, we got it," or yes,
and they sign it out and return it when they come back. We also have hotspots available
for families that don't have internet at home. Luckily, we're in a community or in an area
where I think we probably, at this school alone, only had about five spots that we shared
out during distance learning, and none this year.
Superintendent D1 shared their immediate response to the school closures by getting their
families what they needed to continue schooling.
Yes there were. We did a pretty good job with the distribution of devices and hot spots
for all students that needed them. However we soon found out there were dead zones
within the city. We had to adapt and supply hotspots from all 4 major carriers because
83

certain hot spots worked in areas where others did not. We did a pretty good job of
identifying which families did not have internet access in their homes and as such
supplied them with hot spots.
Superintendent C1 discussed the challenges with students being able to access technology
to participate in distance learning.
We saw like, every school district has a story like you distribute a laptop, a Chromebook.
And then the family calls and says it's not working. So we say, Okay, bring it back, we
get a new one. And then the second one's not working. Okay, bring it back, we get the
third one. It's not working. We realize, you know, it's the user, you know what I mean?
So there's those kinds of things right. But wholesale. Now, you know, we all pivoted and
learned the technology. And so it was bumpy in the beginning, much smoother as we got
into the 2021 school year.
Parents’ Academic Concerns
Superintendent B1 shared how parent concerns around their child's well-being and
academic progress pushed the district to rethink their instructional programs for virtual learning.
Yes. Yes. I mean, pretty much any concern you could think of was brought up probably
at one point throughout this process. And the concerns, as I shared earlier, achievement
gap or the learning gap, social emotional gap, and how are we addressing that, and how
we're making sure students had enough time with their teacher. Very, very big concern in
the district was, was it enough time? Is 40 minutes block period, 40 minutes of time
before a break enough? And, I think we were challenged by our community to revisit and
relook at our schedules, to make sure that we were giving enough time, to make sure we
had conversations with our teachers about the why, why do we need to provide more time
84

for students? But definitely, I say valid concerns from the community related to student
achievement, academics.
Principal A3 discussed the challenges that students had to go through when learning
virtually.
Yeah, I think everywhere, right, and not just specifically to our community, but even in
more affluent communities, we saw that parents were like, What is this? What is this
zoom thing, you know, it is so hard to stay focused via screen. Depending on the kid, you
know, some kids, that was their gig, they were going to be fine. There, there's always
going to be some kids that are going to thrive on something. But then there's those kids
that really need that social interaction that they're just not going to be you are going to
lose them. And so you had parents saying, I don't know how to do this, you know, there's
falling asleep when I'm checking in on them. Or some teachers were saying, you know,
the kids in their bed and the pajamas? Well, yeah, they're at home, you know, and then
we have little control of that. Or we have the parents in the background, you know, doing
all kinds of things like cooking. And some parents live in a tiny house and so they had
four or five kids zooming. So the reception was horrible. Just so many stories, and so
many dilemmas than you know, I could write a book. But yeah, it was a challenge.
Superintendent A1 discussed parent concerns about their child's support and lack of
motivation.
I think mostly our special ed families, were the biggest ones to really advocate for the
lack of live instruction, the lack of support. Because I mean, although I think all students
didn't benefit from distance learning, and that's just my take, because you obviously can't
replace that day to day interaction and connection. But when you're looking at students
85

with very severe learning disabilities, there's no way that their needs could have been
met. You know, most of these kiddos, are in a classroom, they have an aide right next to
them that teacher which helps them stay engaged and super focused. And like I said, I
think, for the most part, those are the families that were heard the most from, and a lot of
our students who are, you know, learning English, it was hard for them to navigate to not
having that constant support, the scaffolding, you know, all the different supports that are
put in place. With that piece. interventions. A lot of families at the middle school
advocated for the fact that their students were just not motivated. Like, they were
disconnected.
Research Question Four sheds light on parents' concerns around student safety, student
health and wellness, and students achievement. Across all nine districts parents advocated for
students which pushed superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals to revamp their
communication strategies and supports during the COVID 19 pandemic.
Summary
Chapter Four reported the findings of 27 southern California school leaders; nine
superintendents, nine assistant superintendents, and nine principals. Our study collected
qualitative and quantitative data through survey questionnaires and zoom interviews that all 27
participants completed. The results from this study bring to light the impact of the pandemic on
students, families, leaders, schools, and districts. The study provides insight into how leadership
practices were influenced by the financial implications, government agencies, and concerns
among parents and unions brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most importantly, this study
examined what district and school leadership learned from their experiences and their decision-
making responsibilities in managing the crisis. Based on the analysis of the responses from the
86

surveys and interviews, several common themes were identified in the leadership of participating
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals across all nine districts: communication
and collaboration, safety, and financial implications.
Communication and Collaboration
Collaboration and communication with local agencies
Undoubtedly, the pandemic required leaders to respond quickly, efficiently, and
proactively but not alone. Because the crisis was uniquely rooted in health and safety, it was
crucial for public schools to partner with state and local health agencies. Superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals across all nine districts shared mixed experiences
regarding their collaboration with local agencies and implementation of COVID-19 guidelines.
Some district and school leaders shared common challenges and frustrations with not being able
to provide input into the guidance for schools issued by their local health agencies. Findings
from the data indicate that collaboration between these entities was primarily a top-down, one-
way approach, with district leaders receiving information and implementing it accordingly
without being able to put much input into the protocols and guidelines put forth by public health
agencies. Leaders also expressed how the implementation of safety protocols looks different
from one district to another because of the ambiguity of guidelines. On the other hand, other
leaders felt a strong collaboration with local agencies and felt confident in implementing the
health and safety guidelines. The responsibility put on the public-school leaders to make
decisions regarding the safety and health of all employees and students was made more difficult
by the reported challenges with collaboration.

87

Collaboration and communication with stakeholders
Overall, the researchers found that the superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals across all nine districts that participated in this study placed a high value on the
relationships between management, school staff, and certificated and classified unions, which
was leveraged during negotiations. District leaders and classified and teacher unions negotiated
throughout the pandemic to ensure that evolving working conditions were safe and that they
were also proactively planning for multiple scenarios. Findings also revealed that leaders
emphasized the importance of creating a space where staff were being given updates regularly
and being provided the opportunity to get any questions or concerns answered. One frequent
mode of communication was zoom, which most leaders found to be efficient. It allowed them to
communicate to all stakeholders, especially with the ever-changing findings delivered by the
CDC. Leaders also took advantage of hosting meetings online to reduce anxiety amongst
families, especially when students returned to on-campus instruction. Some common practices
that superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals participated in were updating the
school’s website regularly, posting information on social media, sending surveys home for
feedback, and mass phone calls to ensure current information was accessible to families. While
communication regarding myriad topics during COVID-19 was confusing, complex, and ever-
changing, the data suggest that associated challenges led to opportunities for district and school
leaders to strengthen, diversify, and effectively communicate with their collaborators and
stakeholders.
Safety
Overall, superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in the study discussed
safety as the most important priority for their decision-making during the COVID- 19 pandemic.
88

During the transition to virtual learning, districts put students' and communities' health and safety
at the forefront. District leaders ensured that all students, no matter their socioeconomic status
(SES), were to have access to free nutrition. Structures and systems were put in place for families
to pick up multiple lunches without question. All leaders discussed the pride in their district's
ability to meet students' nutritional needs during school closures. When students transitioned
back to in-person learning, leaders quickly dealt with another safety concern surrounding
students and staff's mental health. Students' motivation had declined, and schools saw more
absenteeism, more fights, and more substance abuse. Leaders prioritized safety from COVID- 19
and worked collaboratively to mitigate the spread of the virus, and attempted to create the safest
learning environment for students and staff, but underestimated the extent of the pandemic’s
impact had on students’ mental health. School sites hired more school counselors across all
schools to help with students' social-emotional learning and mental health concerns. Responses
from all nine districts indicated that leaders put all of their efforts into addressing student safety
and addressing the uneasiness of the school community.
Due to the uncertainty with the COVID-19 virus, parent involvement was at its all-time
high. Parents joined zoom meetings, met with district and school site leaders, and voiced
concerns about their child's safety on district and site level surveys. Parents wanted to know what
the health and safety guidelines would be at their child’s school site and how those guidelines
would be enforced and maintained. Parents expressed concerns with the systems in place to
ensure student compliance with safety protocols, the privacy of their students’ COVID status,
their students’ potential exposure to the virus, and their child's mental health. Superintendents
and assistant superintendents followed required public guidelines and implemented safety plans
to ease stakeholders’ concerns around safety surrounding the reopening of schools. Findings
89

indicated that parent and staff concerns with reopening schools surrounded appropriate PPE,
facility upgrades, masking, sanitation, physical distancing, and contract tracing. Superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals made sure to build in communication streams to help
ease parent concerns around safety.
Financial Implications
Throughout the interviews, researchers learned about how financial government relief
supported schools and districts in Southern California, as well as the influence on the decisions
that school and district leaders made. The Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security
(CARES) Act for the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER)
provided school districts with additional funds to help mitigate the challenges brought on by the
COVID-19 pandemic. The Governor’s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Fund and the
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund both provided relief funds
to local educational agencies (LEAs) to assess and address the various ways in which the
educational landscape was and may continue to be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Student health and safety remained a deciding factor in how government relief aid was
spent. School and district leaders were also pressured to make financial decisions based on
guidance from federal, state, and local governments. This required the purchase of materials and
spending on changes made to facilities to keep the school community safe. Districts also spent
additional monies on new education programs, student technology, hot spots, and academic
support staff to adapt to the transition from in-person to remote learning. In addition, district
funding components such as average daily attendance (ADA) were negatively impacted by the
pandemic and played a critical factor in school and district spending.

90

Chapter Five: Discussion
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global
pandemic. The lives of millions of students, educators, and classified school staff throughout the
United States experienced disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the mitigation policies
associated with the virus (Hinrichs, 2021). School-related crises have been historically short-
term such as active shooters or natural disasters. The disruption to education caused by the
COVID- 19 pandemic has been unique in recent history due to its lingering effects persisting for
over two years (Gainey, 2009). The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented challenge for
school districts as they were forced to close schools on very short notice due to the lockdown
mandate, not knowing when schools would reopen. With no concrete timeline, superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principles began facing challenges due to this crisis.
As revealed in the data from this study, this health crisis impacted public education.
Consequences of the pandemic included financial implications, the impact of agencies,
negotiations with unions, and the impact on students and the community. Examining the data
explored how COVID-19 shifted the roles and scope of schools and school leaders, beyond
instructional leaders and transformed them into “crisis managers” to lead and guide their
organizations through the COVID-19 pandemic effectively. This chapter provides a summary of
the key findings of each research question along with the implications of the study,
recommendations for future research, and a conclusion.

91

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
Southern California K–12 school districts and understand what district and site administrators
have learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing the
crisis. This study brings to light the impact of the pandemic on students, families, leaders,
schools, and districts. Most importantly, this study examines how district and school leadership
influences administrative practices, student achievement, financial responsibility, union
leadership, and community/parent support as they responded to the COVID-19 crisis.
Participants
The 27 research participants in this study consisted of nine superintendents, nine assistant
superintendents, and nine principals across nine K–12 public school districts in Southern
California. These research participants qualified if they held their current position for at least one
year, they served in their position during the 2020–2021 school year, and the student population
of their district is at least one thousand.
Findings
The following section presents the key themes of the four research questions that guided
this study as found by the research team across all nine participating school districts.
Findings for Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked, “What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-
19 pandemic has had on K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and how have
district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these implications?”
The first research question was written to assess the financial implications of the COVID-19
pandemic on schools and to learn how districts used the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic
Security (CARES) Act for the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund
92

(ESSER) to respond to those needs. It was also asked to determine if the additional funds helped
mitigate the challenges school districts were facing. Responses to this research question provided
researchers with information about how school districts and sites met their financial needs and
obligations during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the responses of superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals, the financial implications highlighted two themes,
which included government relief and the need to prioritize students' safety over the financial
incentive of opening schools.
Theme 1: Government Relief
The first theme identified how funding from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic
Security (CARES) Act provided relief to the districts and prevented detrimental cuts while
allowing for maintenance and growth of programs. Interviews indicated the emphasis on one-
time money being used to meet the needs of students and staff. Some leaders discussed wanting
more flexibility, while other leaders felt that the flexibility was there. Although leaders shared
that they were appreciative of the “one-time money”, some mentioned that they were limited in
their ability to create programs that would require ongoing funding.
Theme 2: No Incentives
The second theme identified was the district's priority around student safety. Though
financial incentives seemed enticing in theory, district leaders realized that student and staff
safety was their number one priority. Findings showed that district leaders were not influenced
by incentives to reopen schools in the spring of 2021 and stood firmly on their priority of staff
and student safety.
Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked, “What, if any, have been the impact of federal, state, and
local health agencies on K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and what strategies
93

have district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to address the
suggested guidelines?” This research question was designed to create a better understanding of
the impact of health and safety guidelines on school districts’ ability to reopen schools safely.
While health and safety are always a priority in the public education system, the COVID-19
pandemic demanded an entirely new understanding and meaning of student and staff health and
safety. The research findings highlighted the significance of guidance from federal and local
health government agencies, organizations, and health experts. These guidelines were critical in
assisting schools in reopening safely. Two key themes emerged from this research question: a
difference of opinion on consistent guidance and the importance of communication and
collaboration across school and district stakeholders.
Theme 1: Difference of Opinion of Consistent Guidance
The first theme among the respondents was a difference of opinion on consistent
guidance for the implementation of health and safety mandates and policies from federal and
local health government agencies, organizations, and health experts. Guidelines were
occasionally misaligned with information issued by several state and federal agencies, creating
confusion. Responses indicated that participants in this study disagreed that communication from
government agencies, organizations, and health experts was clear and consistent. The findings
indicate that some school and district leaders faced several challenges, such as pressure from
parents and the surrounding community, resulting from inconsistent communication from
government agencies, organizations, and health experts. Responses also show that other school
and district leaders felt that communication from agencies, organizations, and experts was
consistent and provided clarity around COVID-19 protocols and health and safety mandates that
were easy to follow.
94

Theme 2: Communication and Collaboration
The second theme among respondents was the importance of communication and
collaboration across school and school district leaders. Study participants unanimously agreed
that collaboration and communication were critical when interpreting and implementing health
guidelines and policies. Respondents shared that school and district leaders collaborate to ensure
alignment in messaging to staff, students, and families. Collaboration and strong communication
also helped school and community stakeholders understand decisions and district policies.
Findings for Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked, “How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12
Southern California public school districts' response to the COVID-19 pandemic?” The third
research question was designed to help the researcher better understand the role of labor unions
in shaping districts’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals felt very strongly about working with their union to solve their
respective problems for both certificated and classified employees. Regular communication
between the Superintendents, assistant superintendents, principals, and the unions, allowed them
to meet the needs of their schools and their employees regarding safety, learning, and new
working conditions. Given these needs, three themes emerged from the participants regarding
working with unions during the COVID-19 pandemic, which focused on nourishing relationships
amongst classified and certificated staff, redefining roles and responsibilities for classified and
certificated staff, and returning to in-person learning.
Theme 1: Nourishing relationships amongst classified and certificated staff
The first theme that emerged from Research Question 3 was the importance of listening
to the staff and their needs and using them as a guide when making decisions.
95

Changing working conditions for teachers and classified personnel prompted superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals to consistently nourish their relationships and meet with
their unions, teachers, and community members with a collaborative mindset. These
collaborations often required leaders to be proactive with asking for concerns prior to scheduled
meetings so that it allowed them to attend with answers. In general, leaders understood the
anxiety the school community felt, and as a result, they seized every opportunity they could to
communicate with transparency.
Theme 2: Redefining roles and responsibilities for classified and certificated staff
The second theme that emerged was redefining employees’ roles and responsibilities. As
schools closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, for some employees’ their work could be done
online, and for others, it required them to be onsite. As a result, research participants indicated
negotiations were vital in temporarily redefining roles and responsibilities as new working
conditions demanded. The participants in this study concurred that teacher unions played a
crucial role in representing the views of frontline education workers during a period of
unprecedented difficulty. Therefore, consistent collaboration was a need amongst unions,
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals.
Theme 3: Return to in-person learning
The third theme that emerged was teachers’ concerns regarding the conditions of
returning to work. As education leaders announced their plans to return students to classrooms,
some teachers and teachers’ unions pushed back, often citing fears for their own or their
students’ safety. The superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in this study
concurred that safety was the most important topic addressed in union negotiations.
Superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals highlighted the importance of
reassuring and educating families on how the school will implement layered prevention
96

strategies (PPE Equipment, sanitizing areas frequently) in alignment with CDC
recommendations in order safely reopen for in-person learning.
Findings for Research Question 4
Findings Research Question 4 asked, “How, if at all, have K–12 Southern California
public school districts leadership teams comprised of superintendents, assistant superintendents,
and principles addressed the concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition,
distance learning, lack of technology, academic standing, and how and when to re-open schools
due to the COVID-19 pandemic?” This research question was designed to help the researcher
better understand the relationship between school districts and parents during the COVID-19
pandemic. Four themes that emerged from the research participants’ perceptions included themes
around health and safety, food insecurity, student technology needs, and parents' concerns
around students’ academics. Research Question Four sheds light on parents' concerns around
student safety, student health and wellness, and student's achievement, which pushed
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals to revamp their communication
strategies and supports during the COVID 19 pandemic.
Theme 1: Health and Safety Needs
The first theme from Research Question Four revealed an increase in parent participation
which led superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals to create consistently
streamlined communications with families and the community. Parents' main concern was
surrounding their child's safety and the ability of the respective schools to keep their children
safe as students returned to in-person schooling. District and sight leaders shared their reflections
on how they were not equipped to support the mental health concerns that arose due to the
pandemic.
97

Theme 2: Food Insecurity
The second theme revealed that 100 % of districts and schools in this research study met
the student's nutritional needs during the school closures. The interviews highlighted that while
some districts felt the pressure to prioritize this need, other districts offered nutritional services,
but it was not a pressing need in their respective communities.
Theme 3: Student’s Technology Needs
The third theme that emerged was the importance of technology for the continuation of
learning during school closures. Findings indicated that 100% of districts could distribute the
appropriate technology such as laptops and hotspots for students in their respective districts.
Some districts were able to have a seamless transition as their student population had a one-to-
one computer prior to the pandemic. Other districts discussed the challenges with transitioning to
virtual learning due to the digital divide in the student and families that their districts serve.
Theme 4: Parents’ Academic Concerns
The fourth theme that emerged was parent concerns around their child's academic
progress, lack of student motivation, and the lack of support, which pushed districts to rethink
their instructional programs and how students were receiving support and accommodations.
Implications for Practice
This research study examined the impact that the COVID -19 pandemic has on K–12
public school districts in Southern California. Through this mixed-methods study, the three
members of this research study were able to collect surveys and conduct interviews to collect
data for this study. The research team was able to understand better what superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals have learned from their experiences and their decision-
making process and responsibilities when managing the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. This study
sheds light on COVID-19’s impact on stakeholders such as students, families, staff, leaders, and
98

their respective schools and districts. Most importantly, this study examines how district and
school leadership administrative practices and financial responsibility impact student
achievement, union leadership, and community/ parent support as they respond to the COVID-19
crisis. The use of relevant literature and data collection for this study led the research team to
three implications for practice regarding school district and site leaders becoming crisis
managers, the need for leaders to collaborate, and the need for clear communication during the
COVID-19 pandemic. The conceptual framework in Figure 1 utilized for this research study was
based on three theoretical frameworks. The three frameworks assist in developing an
understanding of the theories that impact school leadership and how they can be adapted to the
current situation of managing the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. When compared to the findings of
this study, the three theories used to develop the conceptual framework present important
implications for leaders and their changing roles throughout this crisis.
The first implication for practice by superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals, as they became crisis managers during the pandemic, is utilizing appropriate
leadership frames to enact unpredictable guidelines during a crisis to keep the school community
safe (Bolman & Deal, 2017). The four frames, political, structural, human resources, and
symbolic, described by Bolman and Deal (2017) provide school leaders at both site and district
levels the roadmap to navigate the different aspects of leadership and how leader actions and
habits can impact the organization. Because of the ever-changing challenges teachers
encountered due to the pandemic, ranging from layoffs, pay cuts, and fear of COVID-19
exposure, it became crucial for leaders to communicate with their stakeholders accurately
(Nicosia, 2020). Because superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals were
continually shifting between roles as they navigated unpredictable and rapidly changing
guidelines, it became crucial to increase communication, which resulted in strengthening
99

meaningful partnerships with local community organizations that helped their organizations
navigate this pandemic.
The second implication the three research team members found for leadership practice
during a crisis is the need for clear communication. The school leaders interviewed utilized a
variety of focused but far-reaching communication strategies (e.g., zoom meetings, town halls,
surveys)-and frequently collaborated with outside entities to ensure they were receiving the most
up to date information, which allowed them to enact change (Fullan, 2014). Further, leaders
highlighted the importance of being proactive in listening to the community and attending
meetings with answers. Educational leaders must create dedicated time to solicit feedback,
whether virtually or in-person.
The third implication for practice by superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals is the need for leaders to be teaching leaders to help their organizations best manage
an unpredictable situation like the pandemic. Westover’s (2020) framework provides the guiding
principles that districts can enact to create an organization that can move together through
change and creates continuous improvement systems. The school leaders interviewed highlighted
the importance of creating spaces where they can lean on other leaders, share ideas, and build
collective expertise.
Future Research
The literature review provides context for the study of school leadership as they took on
the role of crisis managers during the COVID-19 pandemic. At the time of this study, the
pandemic continues to impact school communities and district leaders. Due to the current and
ongoing pandemic, there are many unknowns about the long-term impact on students, staff, and
school leaders. These unknown long-term consequences of the pandemic present several
100

opportunities for future research to assess how COVID-19 has created lingering implications for
school communities.
Recommendation 1
The first recommendation for future research is to examine the long-term effects of the
COVID-19 pandemic on K–12 students’ mental health, especially those living in historically
socioeconomically disadvantaged communities. The American Psychological Association
(APA) reports that 81% of teens, ages 13–17 experienced more intense stress during the
COVID-19 pandemic (2021). This presents itself in many ways, including increased diagnoses
of anxiety and stress and increased reports of self-harm and suicide (Golberstein et al., 2020).
Furthermore, low-income and marginalized communities are negatively affected by multiple
determinants of health while also battling the coronavirus pandemic, including housing
instability, homelessness, and lack of access to healthcare or mental health services (Banfer &
Wiley, 2020). Future research can help determine if school closures and isolation have added to
mental health concerns and can also provide guidance for treating and preventing the impacts of
future crises.
Recommendation 2
The second recommendation for future research will be to examine and provide guidance
for how school and school district leaders can support students, families, and staff across
socioeconomically diverse communities in navigating technology and technology platforms and
access to high-speed internet. According to Benton Institute, up to 12 million K–12 students
experience a lack of connection to high-speed internet due to limitations of poor broadband
mapping data, current infrastructure, and supply chains, insufficient marketing and adoption
support, and inadequate funding (2021). The need for closing the digital divide, even after the
pandemic, goes beyond distributing laptops to students. Technology plays a critical role in
101

providing students with a high-quality education experience. This presents an opportunity for
future research to provide information that will help construct systems and implement strategies
for technology that will benefit student learning experiences for future generations.
Conclusions
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, K–12 schools were disrupted, causing many ripple
effects in our education system. Gaining insight into the experience of K–12 leaders can allow us
to reimagine and revolutionize a new educational landscape during a time of a crisis. During the
COVID-19 crisis, superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals became responsible
for managing the pandemic’s impact on school sites. This requires leaders to shift into crisis
managers and prioritize collaboration and clear communication to better serve staff, students, and
their families. The research participants relied on the power of nourishing relationships, both
new and ongoing, to ground their decision-making in their values in prioritizing the safety and
needs of their staff, students, and parents. District and site leaders quickly realized that
collaborating and sharing resources was the only way to move forward. These practices will help
improve the school system and student learning experiences during the pandemic and, in future
attempts, provide a more equitable landscape for students and staff. The data collected through
this study supports how K–12 Public School District leaders in Southern California became crisis
managers during the COVID-19 pandemic by focusing on safety, clear communication, and
relationships.

102

References
Anderson, E., Hayes, S., & Carpenter, B. (2020). Principal as caregiver of all: Responding to
needs of others and self. CPRE Policy Briefs.
https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_policybriefs/92
Association of California School Administrators. (2020, August 2). Strategies for connecting
with students and families. https://content.acsa.org/coronavirus-in-ca-schools/strategies-
for-connecting-with-students-and-families
Bailey, J. (2021). Is it safe to reopen schools? An extensive review of the research. American
Enterprise Institute.
Bhamani, S., Makhdoom, A., Bharuchi, V., Ali, N., Kaleem, S., & Ahmed, D. (2020). Home
learning in times of COVID: Experiences of parents. Journal Of Education And
Educational Development, 7(1), 9–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.22555/joeed.v7i1.3260
Bishop, W., Fifolt, M., Peters, G., Gurley, D., & Collins, L. (2015). Perceptions and experiences
of K–12 educational leaders in response to the 27 April 2011 tornadoes. School
Leadership & Management, 35(2), 215–235.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2015.1041487
Braunack-Mayer, T. (2013). Understanding the school community’s response to school closures
during the H1N1 2009 influenza pandemic. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 344–344.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-344
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, L. G. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership
(6th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
103

Calderon, V.J. (June 16, 2020)U.S. parents say COVID-19 harming child's mental health.
GALLUP. https://news.gallup.com/poll/312605/parents-say-covid-harming-child-mental-
health.aspx.
California Department of Education. (2021). California safe schools for all.
https://schools.covid19.ca.gov/
California Department of Education. (2021, February 2). Distance learning - Curriculum and
instruction resources. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/dl/
CA Safe Schools for All (2021). Definitions. Retrieved August 28, 2021 from
https://schools.covid19.ca.gov/pages/definitions
California School Employees Association (CSEA) (2021). About us.
https://www.csea.com/about-us.
California Department of Education (CDE) (2020). CDE Website. https://www.cde.ca.gov/
California Department of Public Health (CDPH). (2021). Retrieved August 8, 2021, from
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/About.aspx
Castelo, M. (2020, April 14). How to prepare and support educators teaching from home.
EdTech Magazine. https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/ article/2020/04/how-prepare-and-
support-educators-teaching-home
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017, December 6). Severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/sars/about/fs-sars.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019, June 11). 2009 H1N1 pandemic
(H1N1pdm09 virus). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html.
104

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020a, September 15) Indicators for dynamic school
decision making. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/ schools-
childcare/indicators.html#thresholds
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020b, November 12). What school nutrition
professionals and volunteers at schools need to know about COVID-19.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/organizations/ school-nutrition-
professionals.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, September 1). About COVID-19. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-
ncov/cdcresponse/about-COVID-19.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, March 25). Coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/index.html.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). Mission, Role and Pledge. Retrieved
August 15, 2021, from https://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm
Chang, G. C., & Yano, S. (2020). How are countries addressing the Covid-19 challenges in
education? A snapshot of policy measures. World Education Blog.
https://gemreportunesco.wordpress.com/2020/03/24/how-are-countries addressing-the-
covid-19-challenges-in-education-a-snapshot-of-policy-measures/
Cipriano, C. & Brackett, M. (2020). Teachers are anxious and overwhelmed. They need SEL
now more than ever. Greater Good Magazine.
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_to_support_teachers_emotional_needs_
right_now
105

County of Los Angeles Public Health. (2020). Department of Public
Health. https://publichealth.lacounty.gov
Consortium for School Networking. (2020, March). COVID-19 Response:Preparing to Take
School Online. https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/broadband/COVID-
19_Member_CoSN.pdf
Crescentini, C., Feruglio, S., Matiz, A., Paschetto, A., Vidal, E., Cogo, P., Fabbro, F. Stuck
outside and inside: an exploratory study on the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on
Italian parents and Children’s internalizing symptoms. Front. Psychol. 2020;11:586074.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586074.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dahmen, B., Puetz, V., Scharke, W., von Polier, G., Herpertz-Dahlmann, B., & Konrad, K.
(2018). Effects of early-life adversity on Hippocampal structures and associated HPA
Axis Functions. Developmental Neuroscience, 40(1), 13–22.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000484238
de Figueiredo, C. S., Sandre, P. C., Portugal., L. C. L., Mázala-de-Oliveira, T., da Silva Chagas,
L., Raony, Í., Bomfim, P. O. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic impact on children and
adolescents' mental health: Biological., environmental., and social factors. Progress in
Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 106, 110171.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110171
DeMatthews, D., & Brown, C. H. (2019). Urban school leadership and community violence:
Principal perspectives and proactive responses to student mental health needs. The
Educational Forum, 83(1), 28-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2018.1506846
106

Denzin, N. K. (2016). Critical qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 8–16.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416681864
Department of Education – Office for Civil Rights. (2021, June). Education in a pandemic: The
disparate impacts of COVID-19 on America’s students.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/20210608-impacts-of-covid19.pdf.
Diliberti, M., Schwartz, H. L., Hamilton, L. S., & Kaufman, J. H. (2020). Prepared for a
pandemic? How schools' preparedness related to their remote instruction during COVID-
19. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA168-3.html
Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E. (2021, March 1). COVID-19 and
learning loss--disparities grow and students need help. McKinsey & Company.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-
and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help#.
EdData: Education Data Partnership (2021). Negotiating teachers’ contracts in California.
www.ed-data.org/article/Negotiating- Teachers%27-Contracts in-California.
Edglossary.org (2021). The glossary of education reform: Cohort.
https://www.edglossary.org/cohort/
Edglossary.org (2021). The glossary of education reform. https://www.edglossary.org/.
EdSource. (2020a). Families face the demands of online learning: Stories from sixteen families
across the state. https://edsource.org/2020/families-face-the-demands-of-online-and-
hybrid-learning/639224
EdSource. (2020b).The next big hurdle: California schools grapple with how, when or if to
reopen. https://edsource.org/2020/the-next-big-hurdle-california-schools-grapple-
withhow-when-or-if-to-reopen-campuses/639797
107

Education Data Partnership. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ed-data.org/.
Education Resource Strategies. (2021, January 8). Budget planning for 2021-22 | Education
resource strategies. Education Resource Strategies: School Resource Organization and
Transformation. https://www.erstrategies.org/news/blog_budget_planning_for_2021-22
Education Week. (2020, July 1). The coronavirus spring: The historic closing of U.S. schools (A
timeline). Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/the-coronavirus-spring-
the-historic-closing-of-u-s-schools-a-timeline/2020/07.
Exceptional Lives (September 14, 2019). Special education: A glossary of terms and acronyms.
www.exceptionallives.org/blog/special-education-a- glossary-of- terms-and-acronyms
Fegert, Vitiello, B., Plener, P. L., & Clemens, V. (2020). Challenges and burden of the
Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: A
narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long
return to normality. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 14(1), 20–20.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3
Fein, A. H., & Isaacson, N. S. (2009). Echoes of Columbine: The emotion work of leaders in
school shooting sites. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9), 1327-1346.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0002764209332549
Fensterwald, J. (2021a, January 14). Newsom opens one-stop Covid information 'hub' on
reopening schools. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/newsom-opens-one-stop-covid-
information-hub-on-reopening-schools/647075.
Fensterwald, J. (2021b, February 4). Dispute widens between Gov. Newsom, school employee
unions over reopening campuses. EdSource.
https://edsource.org/2021/dispute-widens-between-governor-and-school-employee-union
108

s-over-reopening-california-campuses/648153
Fensterwald, J., Burke, M., Stavely, Z., and Johnson, S. (June 26, 2021). Lawmakers, Newsom
cut deal on state budget: Record spending on pre-K through college. EdSource.
https://edsource.org/2021/lawmakers-newsom-cut-deal-on-state-budget-record-spending-
on-prek-through-college/657001.
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: three keys to maximizing impact. Ch 3, 4. Jossey-Bass.
Gainey. (2009). Crisis Management’s New Role in Educational Settings. The Clearing House,
82(6), 267–274. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.82.6.267-274
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is right. Becoming qualitative
researchers: An introduction, 4, 162-183.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning,
measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal,
37(2), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163531
Goldstein, D., Shapiro, E. (2020, July 29). Teachers are wary of returning to class, and online
instruction too. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/29/us/teacher-union-school-reopening-
coronavirus.html
Golberstein, E., Wen, H., & Miller, B. F. (2020). COVID-19 and mental health for children and
adolescents. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(9), 819-820.
http://jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1456
Gouwens, L. (2008). School leadership in changing cultural contexts: How Mississippi
superintendents are responding to Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Education for Students
Placed at Risk, 13(2-3), 273–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824660802350276
109

Gross, B., Opalka, A. (2020, June). Too many schools leave learning to chance during the
pandemic. Center for Reinventing Public Education.
https://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/final_national_sample_brief_2020.pdf
Guessoum, S., Lachal., J., Radjack, R., Carretier, E., Minassian, S., Benoit, L., & Moro, M.
(2020). Adolescent psychiatric disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown.
Psychiatry Research, 291, 113264–113264.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113264
Harrington, T. (2021). Quick Guide: What California’s color coded county tracking system
means for schools? (February 2, 2021. EdSource. Retrieved on February 2, 2021, from
https://edsource.org/2021/quick-guide-what-californias-color-coded-county-tracking-
system-means-for-schools/639357
Hemphill, A. A., & Marianno, B. D. (2021). Teachers’ unions, collective
bargaining, and the response to COVID-19. Education Finance and
Policy,16(1), 170-182. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00326
Herold B. (2020, March 27). The scramble to move America's schools online.
Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/technology/the-scramble-to-
move-americas-schools-online/2020/03
Hinrichs. (2021). COVID-19 and Education: A Survey of the Research. Economic Commentary
(Cleveland), 2021-4, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.26509/frbc-ec-202104
Horowitz, J. M., & Igielnik, R. (2020, October 29). Most Parents of K–12 Students View
Learning Online Worry About Them Falling Behind. Pew Research Center’s Social &
Demographic Trends Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-
110

trends/2020/10/29/most-parents-of-K–12 -students-learning-online-worry-about-them-
falling-behind/
Jones, C. and Freedberg, L. (March 4, 2021). California Legislature approves plan to encourage
schools to reopen for in-person instruction. EdSource.
https://edsource.org/2021/california-legislature-approves-plan-to-encourage-schools-to-
reopen-for-in-person-instruction/650493
Kearney, C. A., & Childs, J. (2021). A multi-tiered systems of support blueprint for re-opening
schools following COVID-19 shutdown. Children and Youth Services Review, 122,
105919.
Kemp, J. (2020, April 7). The prevalence of written plans for a pandemic disease scenario in
public schools. NCES Blog. https://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/the-prevalence-of-
written-plans-for-a-pandemicdisease-scenario-in-public-schools
Kinsey, E. W., Hecht, A. A., Dunn, C. G., Levi, R., Read, M., Smith, C., Niesen, P., Segilman,
H. K., & Hager, E. R. (2020). School closures during COVID-19: Opportunities for
innovation in meal service. American Journal of Public Health, 110(11), 1635-1643.
http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.2W5/AJPH.2020.305875
Kurtz, H. (2020, April 10). National survey tracks impact of coronavirus on schools: 10 key
findings. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/national-survey-
tracks-impact-of-coronavirus-on-schools-10-key-findings/2020/04
Klaiman, T., Kraemer, J. D., & Stoto, M. A. (2011). Variability in school closure decisions in
response to 2009 H1N1: a qualitative systems improvement analysis. BMC Public
Health, 11, 73. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-73
111

Kuhfeld, M., Soland, J., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, A., Ruzek, E., & Liu, J. (2020). Projecting the
potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educational
Researcher, 49(8), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20965918
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt:
Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003
Lee, S.J., Ward, K.P., & Chang, O.D. (2020). Research brief: Parents' perceptions of the shift to
home-based education during the Covid-19 pandemic. University of Michigan Parenting
in Context Research Lab. https://bit.ly/2Ra5Q2R
Leithwood, K. & Day, C. (2008). The impact of school leadership on pupil outcomes. School
Leadership & Management, 28(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430701799718
Lieberman, M. (2020, November 11). How hybrid learning is (and is not) working during
COVID-19: 6 case studies. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-
hybrid-learning-is-and-is-not-working-during-covid-19-6-case-studies/2020/11
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). (2021). At-home learning: A California
education partnership. https://achieve.lausd.net/pbs
Maciejewski, D., Hillegers, M., & Penninx, B. (2018). Offspring of parents with mood disorders:
Time for more transgenerational research, screening and preventive intervention for this
high-risk population. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, i(4), 349–357.
https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000423
Malkus, N., Christensen, C., & West, L. (2020). School district responses to the COVID-19
112

pandemic: Round 1, districts’ initial responses. American Enterprise Institute for Public
Policy Research. https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/school-district-responses-
to-the-covid-19-pandemic-round-1-districts-initial-responses/
Malkus, N., Christensen, C., & West, L. (2020b). School district responses to the COVID-19
pandemic: Round 2, districts are up and running. American Enterprise Institute for
Public Policy Research. https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/school-district-
responses-to-the-covid-19-pandemic-round-2-districts-are-up-and-running/
Malkus, N. (2020). Too little, too late: A hard look at Spring 2020 remote learning. American
Enterprise Institute. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED610307.pdf
Marianno, B. D., Hemphill, A. A., Loures-Elias, A. P., Garcia, L., Cooper, D., & Coombes, E.
(2022). Power in a pandemic: Teachers’ unions and their responses to school reopening.
AERA Open, 8, 233285842210743. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221074337
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3
rd
ed.). SAGE.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive
approach. SAGE.
Mayer, Moss, J., & Dale, K. (2008). Disaster and Preparedness: Lessons from Hurricane Rita.
Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 16(1), 14–23.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2008.00531.x
McLoughlin, G. M., McCarthy, J. A., McGuirt, J. T., Singleton, C. R., Dunn, C. G., &
Gadhoke, P. (2020). Addressing food insecurity through a health and equity lens: A case
study of large urban school districts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Urban
Health, 97, 759–775. https://doi-org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1007/s11524-020-00476-0
113

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miller, P. W. (2018). The Nature of School Leadership (pp. 165-186). Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70105-9
Moe, T. M. (2009). Collective bargaining and the performance of public
schools. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 156-174.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00363.x
National Conference for State Legislatures (NCSL) (2021). COVID-19: Essential workers in the
States. https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/covid-19- essential-
workers-in-the-
states.aspx#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20U.,to%20defense%20to%20agriculture.
Netolicky, D. M. (2020, May 29). School leadership during a pandemic: Navigating tensions.
Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1-5. https://www.emerald.com/
insight/content/doi/10.1108/JPCC-05-2020-0017
Nichols, C., Trendler, C., & Hayden, S. C. (2021, February 1). 4 Behaviors that help leaders
manage a crisis. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/04/4-behaviors-that-
help-leaders-manage-a-crisis.
Nicosia, M. (2020, September 1). How Is COVID-19 impacting the teacher workforce?
Education Writers Association. https://www.ewa.org/blog-educated-reporter/how-covid-
19-impacting-teacher-workforce.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage
Pearson, C., & Clair, J. (1998). Reframing crisis management. The Academy of Management
Review, 23(1), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/259099
114

Princehorn, R., Swartz, C., Meyer, B. (2021, April 2). The current impact of the CARES Act on
K–12 education. Bricker & Eckler. https://www.bricker.com/insights-
resources/publications/the-current-impact-of-the-cares-act-on-K–12-education
Rice, Miller, G. F., Coronado, F., & Meltzer, M. I. (2021). Estimated resource costs for
implementation of CDC’s recommended COVID-19 mitigation strategies in pre-
kindergarten through grade 12 public schools — United States, 2020–21 School Year.
MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(50), 1917–1921.
https://doi.org/10.15585/MMWR.MM6950E1
Schwartz, S. (2020, March 25). Flood of online learning resources overwhelms teachers.
EdWeek. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/flood-of-online-learning-resources-
overwhelms-teachers/2020/03
Schneider, J. (2020, April 14). How covid-19 has laid bare the vast inequities in U.S. public
education. The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/04/14/how-covid-19-has-laid-bare-
vast-inequities-us-public-education/
Sharfstein, & Morphew, C. C. (2020). The Urgency and Challenge of Opening K–12 Schools in
the Fall of 2020. JAMA : the Journal of the American Medical Association, 324(2), 133–
134. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.10175
Singer, B.J., Thompson, R.N. & Bonsall, M.B. (2021). The effect of the definition of ‘pandemic’
on quantitative assessments of infectious disease outbreak risk. Sci Rep 11, 2547 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81814-3
Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership &
Management, 32(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2011.614941
115

Stern, C. (2009). Closing the schools: Lessons from the 1918–19 U.S. Influenza pandemic:
Ninety-one years later, the evidence shows that there are positive and negative ways to do
it. Health Affairs, 28(Supplement 1), w1066–w1078.
https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.28.6.w1066
Stoll, L., and J. Temperley. 2009. Creative leadership: A challenge of our times. School
Leadership & Management, 29(1), 65-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13632430802646404
The American Journal of Managed Care. (n.d.). A timeline of COVID-19 developments in 2020.
AJMC. https://www.ajmc.com/view/a-timeline-of-covid19-developments-in2020.
The Education Trust. (2020, May 20).Poll: WA parents very concerned about their children
falling behind during school closures. https://edtrust.org/press-release/poll-wa-parents-
very-concerned-about-their-children-falling-behind-during-school-closures/.
The Lancet Child and Adolescent Health (2020). Pandemic school closures: risks and
opportunities. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 4(5), 341–341.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30105-X
Terada, Y. (2020, June 24). Covid-19's impact on students' academic and mental well-being.
Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/covid-19s-impact-students-academic-and-
mental-well-being.
Tönshoff, Müller, B., Elling, R., Renk, H., Meissner, P., Hengel, H., Garbade, S. F., Kieser, M.,
Jeltsch, K., Grulich-Henn, J., Euler, J., Stich, M., Chobanyan-Jürgens, K., Zernickel, M.,
Janda, A., Wölfle, L., Stamminger, T., Iftner, T., Ganzenmueller, T., … Kräusslich, H.-G.
(2021). Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Children and Their Parents in Southwest
Germany. JAMA Pediatrics, 175(6), 586–593.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.0001
116

USDA Food and Nutrition Services. (n.d.). Child nutrition program service during COVID-19.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/child-nutrition-program-meal-service-during- covid-
19?utm_source=website&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=prevent
U.S. Department of Education (May 2021). U.S. Department of Education Website.
https://www.ed.gov.
United States Department of Labor (2021). Personal Protective Equipment -Overview |
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Retrieved August 16, 2021 from
https://www.osha.gov/personal-protective-equipment.
Varela, D., & Fedynich, L. V. (2020). Leading schools from a social distance: Surveying South
Texas School District leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. National Forum of
Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 38(4), 1–10.
https://doi.org/http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Varela
,%20daniella%20Surveying%20South%20Texas%20School%20District%20Leadership
%20NFEASJ%20V38%20N4%202020.pdf
Walters, A. (2020). Inequities in access to education: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Brown Univeristy Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter, 36(8), 8-8.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10/1002/cbl/30483
Westover, J., Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2020). Districts on the move: Leading a coherent system
of continuous improvement. Corwin, a SAGE Company.
World Health Organization (2021). Who we are. Retrieved August 16, 2021 from
www.who.int/about/who-we-are.
World Health Organization Coronavirus Dashboard (2021). World Health Organization
Coronavirus Dashboard. Retrieved April 16, 2021 from https://covid19.who.int.
117

Xiong, J., Lipsitz, O., Nasri, F., Lui, L., Gill, H., Phan, L., Chen-Li, D., Iacobucci, M., Ho, R.,
Majeed, A., & McIntyre, R. S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health
in the general population: A systematic review. Journal of affective disorders, 277, 55–
64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.001
Zhou, T., Molfino, T., & Travers, J. (2021). The Cost of COVID: Understanding the Full
Financial Impact of COVID-19 on Districts and Schools. Education Resource Strategies.

118

Appendix A: Superintendent Survey
Survey Items
Survey Items Response Choices
1. How many years have you served as a superintendent? Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
2. How long have you been superintendent at your
current district?
Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
RQ1 Financial Implications

3. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of personnel.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
4. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of personal protective equipment (PPE).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
5. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of technology.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
6. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of professional learning and/or training.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
119

Survey Items Response Choices
7. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of facility upgrades.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ2 Health and Safety Guidelines

8. The federal, state, and local health guidelines were
clear in providing information to support the safe reopening
of schools.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
9. I understood how to safely bring back staff during the
fall of 2020 to work sites based on the public health
guidelines.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
10. The health guidelines impacted our district's return to
school plan in the spring of 2021.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ3 Union Negotiations

11. Negotiations with certificated unions influenced the
way my district effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
12. Negotiations with classified unions influenced the
way of my district effectively responding to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
13. Negotiations with the teacher's union impacted the
quality of instruction offered to students during distance
learning.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
120

Survey Items Response Choices
RQ4 Community Concerns

14. My district maintained good communication with
families during the pandemic.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
15. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of nutrition.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
16. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of technology (computers/devices).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
17. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of technology (internet service).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
18. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of social emotional well-being.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
19. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of health & safety.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
20. My district met the academic needs of students. 1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
Overarching

121

Survey Items Response Choices
21. The board of education supported my district’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
22. District administrators supported my district’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
23. District facilities and operations teams supported my
district’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
24. Teachers supported my district’s response to the
COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
25. Classified staff supported my district’s response to
the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
26. Families supported my district’s response to the
COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
27. I recommend the following assistant superintendent
from my district to participate in this study:
[open-ended response]
28. I recommend the following principal from my
district to participate in this study:
[open-ended response]

Closing
122

We appreciate your willingness to participate in the survey. Your responses will help us better
understand the perspectives of district Superintendents during the COVID-19 Pandemic and
experiences as crisis-managers.
We will be in touch to invite you to take part in a virtual 35 minute interview to be scheduled at
your convenience.
Thank you for participating in this survey.

123

Appendix B: Assistant Superintendent Survey
Survey Items
Survey Items Response Choices
1. How many years have you served as an assistant
superintendent?
Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
2. How long have you been an assistant superintendent
at your current district?
Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
RQ1 Financial Implications

3. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of personnel.

1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
4. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of personal protective equipment (PPE).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
5. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of technology.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
6. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of professional learning and/or training.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
124

Survey Items Response Choices
7. The CARES Act met my district's funding needs in
the area of facilities upgrades.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ2 Health & Safety Guidelines

8. The federal, state, and local health guidelines were
clear in providing information to support the safe reopening
of schools.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
9. I understood how to safely reopen work sites based
on the public health guidelines.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
10. The health guidelines impacted the district’s return
to school plan in the spring of 2021.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ3 Union Negotiations

11. Negotiations with certificated unions influenced the
way my district effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
12. Negotiations with classified unions influenced the
way of my district effectively responding to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
13. Negotiations with the teacher's union impacted the
quality of instruction offered to students during distance
learning.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
125

Survey Items Response Choices
RQ4 Community Concerns

14. My district maintained good communication with
families during the pandemic.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
15. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of nutrition.

1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
16. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of technology (computer/devices).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
17. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of Technology (Internet Service).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
18. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of social emotional well-being.

1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
19. My district met the needs of students and families in
the area of health & safety.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
20. My district met the academic needs of students. 1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
Overarching

126

Survey Items Response Choices
21. The board of education supported my district’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
22. District administrators supported my district’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
23. District facilities and operations teams supported my
district’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
24. Teachers supported my district’s response to the
COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
25. Classified staff supported my district’s response to
the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
26. Families supported my district’s response to the
COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
Closing
We appreciate your willingness to participate in the survey. Your responses will help us better
understand the perspectives of district assistant superintendents during the COVID-19 pandemic
and experiences as crisis-managers.
We will be in touch to invite you to take part in a virtual 35 minute interview to be scheduled at
your convenience.
127

Thank you for participating in this survey.

128

Appendix C: Principal Survey
Survey Items
Survey items Response choices
1. How many years have you served as a principal? Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
2. How long have you been principal at your current
school?
Open Ended (Demographic)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 2 years
• 3 to 5 years
• 6 to 10 years
• Over 10 years
RQ1: Financial implications

3. The CARES Act met my school’s funding needs in
the area of personnel.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
4. The CARES Act met my school’s funding needs in
the area of personal protective equipment (PPE).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
5. The CARES Act met my school’s funding needs in
the area of technology.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
6. The CARES Act met my school’s funding needs in
the area of professional learning and/or training.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
129

Survey items Response choices
7. The CARES Act met my school’s funding needs in
the area of facility upgrades.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ2: Health and safety guidelines

8. The federal, state, and local health guidelines were
clear in providing information to support the safe reopening
of my school.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
9. I understood how to safely reopen my work site based
on the public health guidelines.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
10. The health guidelines impacted my school’s return to
school plan in the spring of 2021.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
RQ3: Union negotiations

11. Negotiations with certificated unions influenced the
way my school effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
12. Negotiations with classified unions influenced the
way my school effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
13. Negotiations with the teacher's union impacted the
quality of instruction offered to students at my school during
distance learning.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
130

Survey items Response choices
RQ4: Community concerns

14. My school maintained good communication with
families during the pandemic.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
15. My school met the needs of students and families in
the area of nutrition.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
16. My school met the needs of students and families in
the area of technology (computers/devices).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
17. My school met the needs of students and families in
the area of technology (internet service).
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
18. My school met the needs of students and families in
the area of social emotional well-being.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
19. My school met the needs of students and families in
the area of health & safety.
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
20. My school met the academic needs of students. 1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
Overarching

131

Survey items Response choices
21. The board of education supported my school’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
22. District administrators supported my school’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
23. District facilities and operations teams supported my
school’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
24. Teachers supported my school’s response to the
COVID-19 Pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
25. Classified Staff supported my school’s response to
the COVID-19 Pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
26. Families supported my school’s response to the
COVID-19 Pandemic?
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
Closing
We appreciate your willingness to participate in the survey. Your responses will help us better
understand the perspectives of school principals during the COVID-19 Pandemic and
experiences as crisis-managers.
We will be in touch to invite you to take part in a virtual 35 minute interview to be scheduled at
your convenience.
132

Thank you for participating in this survey.

133

Appendix D: Research Participants Invitation Email

Dear ________________ [stakeholder group role],

My name is [USC STUDENT’S NAME] and I am currently completing my doctoral
dissertation at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education under the
guidance of Dr. Rudy Castruita. I am writing to invite you to participate in a 15-minute survey
and 35-minute virtual interview. In addition, I am also requesting your permission to administer
a survey and conduct an interview with an assistant superintendent and principal in your district.
Within the survey is a place for you to recommend an assistant superintendent and a principal
from your district to participate in this research. Collecting data from highly effective leaders
such as yourselves would be greatly appreciated and is essential for the success of this study.
The ultimate purpose of the study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
K–12 school districts. We aim to understand what district and site administrators have learned
from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing the crisis.
This research study has been reviewed and approved by the University of Southern
California Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects Research (IRB). The IRB believes
that the research procedures safeguard your privacy, welfare, civil liberties, anonymity, and
rights. Please be assured that your participation and answers will be kept confidential and
anonymous. The results will be analyzed solely for this dissertation and no identifying
information will be used.
Please click on this [survey link] to participate.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at -----------@----. Thank you
very much for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,

[researcher’s name]
Doctoral Candidate
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

134

Appendix E: Superintendent Interview Protocol

Interviewer: _____________________________________ Date: _________________________

Interviewee: _____________________________________ Location: _____________________

Job Title: _______________________________________ Contact Information: ____________

Length of Time in Your Position: __________________________________________________

Introduction:
[Introduce yourself and your affiliation.]

During this conversation, we hope to learn more about the COVID-19 pandemic and your
experience as a superintendent during this time. The ultimate goal of this study is to better
understand leadership during a crisis.

Your comments will remain confidential. We would like to record this interview to ensure the
accuracy of our conversation. The recording will be used only by our research team to review
responses and to provide an opportunity to code themes between the various respondents. The
information recorded will remain secure and anonymous. Do we have your consent to record?

This interview will last approximately 35 minutes. Do you have any questions before we begin?

A. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on
K–12 districts and how have district leaders addressed these implications?

1. What have been the biggest financial implications of the pandemic on your
district?
2. In what ways, if any, would more spending flexibility/structure have benefitted
your district?
3. In what ways has COVID-19 related funding been used to meet student needs in
your district?
4. To what extent, if any, did financial incentive influence your district’s reopening
plan/timeline?
5.
B. What, if any, have been the impact of Federal, State and Local Health agencies on
K–12 school districts, and what strategies have districts followed to address the
suggested guidelines?

135

6. In what ways did your district collaborate with federal, state, and local
government agencies and community organizations to support your school district
during COVID?
a. PQ- What agencies or organizations?

7. To what degree, if any, did the various agencies align COVID-19 guidance for
schools?
8. What strategies have been effective for your district in implementing health
guidelines/policies?
9. Who in your district was primarily in charge of interpreting and implementing the
health guidelines/policies?

C. How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12 district’s response to
the COVID-19 Pandemic?

10. What were the most important issues negotiated with your teachers union and
how were they resolved?
11. What were the most important issues negotiated with your classified union and
how were they resolved?
12. In what ways, if any, were instructional programs influenced by union
negotiations in your district?
13. In what ways, if any, were safety protocols influenced by union negotiations in
your district?

D. How, if at all, has your district addressed the concerns of the parent community
regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, academic standing,
and how and when to open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

14. In what ways did your district gather input from and communicate to the
community?
15. What were the biggest concerns from your district’s community and how were
they addressed?
a. PQ - Were there any safety concerns?
b. PQ - Were there any nutrition concerns?
c. PQ - Were there any academic concerns?
d. PQ - Were there any technology concerns?
e. PQ - Were there any re-opening concerns?
Conclusion
Thank you for your time and willingness to meet with me and for all the valuable information
you provided for this study.

136

Appendix F: Assistant Superintendent Interview Protocol

Interviewer: _____________________________________ Date: _________________________

Interviewee: _____________________________________ Location: _____________________

Job Title: _______________________________________ Contact Information: ____________

Length of Time in Your Position: __________________________________________________

Introduction:
[Introduce yourself and your affiliation.]

During this conversation, we hope to learn more about the COVID-19 pandemic and your
experience as an assistant superintendent during this time. The ultimate goal of this study is to
better understand leadership during a crisis.

Your comments will remain confidential. We would like to record this interview to ensure the
accuracy of our conversation. The recording will be used only by our research team to review
responses and to provide an opportunity to code themes between the various respondents. The
information recorded will remain secure and anonymous. Do we have your consent to record?

This interview will last approximately 35 minutes. Do you have any questions before we begin?

A. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on
K–12 districts and how have district leaders addressed these implications?

1. What have been the biggest financial implications of the pandemic on your
district?
2. In what ways, if any, would more spending flexibility/structure have benefitted
your district?
3. In what ways has COVID-19 related funding been used to meet student needs in
your district?
4. To what extent, if any, did financial incentive influence your district’s reopening
plan/timeline?

B. What, if any, have been the impact of Federal, State and Local Health agencies on
K–12 school districts, and what strategies have districts followed to address the
suggested guidelines?

5. In what ways did your district collaborate with federal, state, and local
government agencies and community organizations to support your school district
during COVID?
137

a. PQ - What agencies or organizations?
6. To what degree, if any, did the various agencies align COVID-19 guidance for
schools?
7. What strategies have been effective for your district in implementing health
guidelines/policies?
8. Who in your district was primarily in charge of interpreting and implementing the
health guidelines/policies?

C. How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12 district’s response to
the COVID-19 Pandemic?

9. What were the most important issues negotiated with your teachers union and
how were they resolved?
10. What were the most important issues negotiated with your classified union and
how were they resolved?
11. In what ways, if any, were instructional programs influenced by union
negotiations in your district?
12. In what ways, if any, were safety protocols influenced by union negotiations in
your district?

D. How, if at all, has your district addressed the concerns of the parent community
regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, academic standing,
and how and when to open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

13. In what ways did your district gather input from and communicate to the
community?
14. What were the biggest concerns from your district’s community and how were
they addressed?
a. PQ - Were there any safety concerns?
b. PQ - Were there any nutrition concerns?
c. PQ - Were there any academic concerns?
d. PQ - Were there any technology concerns?
e. PQ - Were there any re-opening concerns?

Conclusion
Thank you for your time and willingness to meet with me and for all the valuable information
you provided for this study.

138

Appendix G: Principal Interview Protocol

Interviewer: _____________________________________ Date: _________________________

Interviewee: _____________________________________ Location: _____________________

Job Title: _______________________________________ Contact Information: ____________

Length of Time in Your Position: __________________________________________________

Introduction:
[Introduce yourself and your affiliation.]

During this conversation, we hope to learn more about the COVID-19 pandemic and your
experience as a principal during this time. The ultimate goal of this study is to better understand
leadership during a crisis.

Your comments will remain confidential. We would like to record this interview to ensure the
accuracy of our conversation. The recording will be used only by our research team to review
responses and to provide an opportunity to code themes between the various respondents. The
information recorded will remain secure and anonymous. Do we have your consent to record?

This interview will last approximately 35 minutes. Do you have any questions before we begin?

A. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on
K–12 districts and how have district leaders addressed these implications?

1. What have been the biggest financial implications of the pandemic on your
school?
2. In what ways, if any, would more spending flexibility/structure have benefitted
your school?
3. In what ways has COVID-19 related funding been used to meet student needs in
your school?
4. To what extent, if any, did financial incentive influence your school’s reopening
plan/timeline?

B. What, if any, have been the impact of Federal, State and Local Health agencies on
K–12 school districts, and what strategies have districts followed to address the
suggested guidelines?

5. In what ways did your school collaborate with federal, state, and local
government agencies and community organizations to support your school during
COVID?
139

PQ- What agencies or organizations?
6. To what degree, if any, did the various agencies align COVID-19 guidance for
your school?
7. What strategies have been effective for your school in implementing health
guidelines/policies?
8. Who at your school was primarily in charge of interpreting and implementing the
health guidelines/policies?

C. How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in K–12 district’s response to
the COVID-19 Pandemic?

9. What were the most important issues negotiated with your teachers union and
how were they resolved?
10. What were the most important issues negotiated with your classified union and
how were they resolved?
11. In what ways, if any, were instructional programs influenced by union
negotiations at your school?
12. In what ways, if any, were safety protocols influenced by union negotiations at
your school?

D. How, if at all, has your district addressed the concerns of the parent community
regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, academic standing,
and how and when to open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic?

13. In what ways did your school gather input from and communicate to the
community?
14. What were the biggest concerns from your school’s community and how were
they addressed?
a. PQ - Were there any safety concerns?
b. PQ - Were there any nutrition concerns?
c. PQ - Were there any academic concerns?
d. PQ - Were there any technology concerns?
e. PQ - Were there any re-opening concerns?

Conclusion
Thank you for your time and willingness to meet with me and for all the valuable information
you provided for this study.

140

Appendix H: Alignment of the Survey Protocol to the Research Questions and Conceptual
Framework
Instrument RQ1
Financial
implications that
the COVID-19
pandemic has
had on K–12
public school
districts in
Southern
California
RQ2
Impact of
federal, state,
and local health
agencies on K–
12 public school
districts in
Southern
California?
RQ3
Role of union
negotiations
played a role in
K–12 Southern
California public
school districts'
response to the
COVID-19
pandemic?
RQ4
Role of public
school districts
leadership teams
comprised of
superintendents,
assistant
superintendents,
and principals in
addressing issues
of concern and
safety
Principal survey 3-7 8-10 11-13 14-20
Principal
interview
protocol
1-4 5-8 9-12 13-14
Assistant
superintendent
survey
3-7 8-10 11-13 14-20
Assistant
superintendent
protocol
1-4 5-8 9-12 13-14
Superintendent
survey
3-7 8-10 11-13 14-20
Superintendent
interview
protocol
1-4 5-8 9-12 13-14

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Full title: Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators, specifically superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals, have learned from their experiences and their decision making responsibilities in managing the crisis. The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern California K–12 school districts and understand what district and site administrators have learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in managing the crisis. This study brings to light the impact of the pandemic on students, families, leaders, schools, and districts and examines how district and school leadership influences administrative practices, student achievement, financial responsibility, union leadership, and community/parent support as they responded to the COVID-19 crisis. More specifically, this study set out to determine: (a) financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on K–12 public school districts in Southern California and how have district superintendents, assistant superintendents and principals addressed these implications, (b) the impact of federal, state and local health agencies on K–12 public school districts in Southern California, and what strategies district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to address the suggested guidelines, (c) how union negotiations played a role in K–12 Southern California public school districts’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and (d) how K–12 Southern California public school districts leadership teams comprised of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed the concerns of the parent community regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, academic standing, and how and when to re-open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study implemented a mixed-methods approach in which 9 Southern California K–12 district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals completed a survey and participated in a structured interview. Through this process of mixed-methods data collection, the study’s findings indicate that district and site administration relied on the power of nourishing relationships, both new and on-going, to ground their decision making in their values in prioritizing safety and needs for their staff, students, and parents. In addition, K–12 superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals acknowledged that collaboration and the sharing of resources played a critical component in moving forward during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. These practices will not only help improve the school system and student learning experiences during the pandemic, but also in future attempts to provide a more equitable landscape for students and staff. Ultimately, this study provides guidance for district and site administrators decision-making responsibilities in managing future crises.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Mora, Christian Yosseline (author)

Core Title Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/09/2022

Defense Date 04/11/2022

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

Tag assistant superintendents,asynchronous learning,COVID-19 pandemic,crises management,K-12 schools,leaders,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals,superintendents,synchronous learning

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Franklin, Gregory (committee member)

Creator Email cymora@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111307101

Unique identifier UC111307101

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Mora, Christian Yosseline

Type texts

Source 20220510-usctheses-batch-941 (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