Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals
(USC Thesis Other)
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on K-12 Public School Districts in Southern
California: Responses of Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, and Principals
by
Isaac Olvera
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 Isaac Olvera 2022
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Isaac Olvera certifies the approval of this Dissertation
David Cash
John Roach
Castruita, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022
iv
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern California K-
12 public school districts, specifically the responses of educational leaders: superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals. The research questions used to guide the study were:
What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on public
school K-12 districts in Southern California, and how have district superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals addressed these implications?; What, if any, have been the
impacts of Federal, state, and local health agencies on public school K-12 districts in Southern
California, and what strategies have district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
principals followed to address the suggested guidelines?; How, if at all, have union negotiations
played a role in public school K-12 Southern California’s responses to the COVID-19
pandemic?; How, if at all, have public school K-12 Southern California 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 open schools due to the COVID-19
pandemic? The methodology for this study was a mixed-method design. There were quantitative
and qualitative data collected and analyzed. Surveys and interviews were conducted among 9 K-
12 Southern California public school district educational leaders: three superintendents, three
assistant superintendents, and three principals. Findings and implications related to spending
flexibility, prioritization of safety, instructional models, and academic concerns arose from the
interviews and surveys.
v
Dedication
To my partner, Tian Liu, for continuous support throughout the entire process and exhibiting the
most patience as I wrote and completed my study. To my mother, Maria Gomez, for instilling a
sense of drive and tenacity towards achieving higher-level education and aspiring for greatness.
To my father, Jose Gomez, for always demonstrating and teaching hard work, perseverance, and
true grit. And to my chair, Dr. Rudy Castruita, for his endless support towards completing the
dissertation process.
vi
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 3
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 4
Limitation and Delimitations .............................................................................................. 5
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 5
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 10
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 12
Historical Background ...................................................................................................... 14
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 27
Chapter Three: Research Methodology ........................................................................................ 28
Overview of the Study ...................................................................................................... 28
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 39
Background ....................................................................................................................... 39
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 40
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 41
Coding of Data .................................................................................................................. 41
Demographic Data ............................................................................................................ 42
vii
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Implications ................................................................................ 68
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 68
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 68
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 68
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 69
Results and Findings ......................................................................................................... 70
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................ 76
Concluding Remarks ......................................................................................................... 76
References ......................................................................................................................... 79
Appendix A: Superintendent Interview Protocol .............................................................. 88
Appendix B: Superintendent Survey ................................................................................ 91
Appendix C: Superintendent Letter of Invitation ............................................................. 96
List of Tables
Table 1: School District Participants: Demographic Information 43
Table 2: Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information 44
Table 3: Quantitative Survey: Superintendent Perception of Financial Implications of COVID-19
48
Table 4: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ Perception of the Impact of Health and Safety
Guidelines 50
Table 5: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ Perception of the Impact of Union Negotiations
57
Table 6: Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ Perception of Parent Concerns 63
Table B1 Survey Items 91
i
List of Figures
Figure 1 Triangulation of the Data 36
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, with the exception of school closures lasting several weeks (Fensterwald, 2020).
However, whether full or partial, the school closures caused by COVID-19 continue to impact
schools after two years. As the pandemic persists, the issues facing school leaders and their
school communities are complex (Mayer et al., 2008).
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 the guidance was
considered very helpful at times, it 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 basic aspects of working conditions
during this time to keep members safe and to express how the pandemic impacted their work.
Parents were also heavily affected 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.
Background of the Problem
Over the last century, schools throughout the United States have had to face various
2
public health crises that have impacted schooling for K-12 students. One of the deadliest
pandemics in human history was the Spanish Flu of 1918 (H1N1, Influenza A), which lasted two
years, infected approximately 500 million people, and left behind a death toll of an estimated 20
to 50 million (Stern et al., 2009). Some 80 years later, the world saw Severe Acute Respiratory
Syndrome (SARS) circle around the globe from 2002 to 2004, which infected over 8,000 people
from 29 different countries and caused a death toll of 774 (CDC, 2005). In 2009, the Swine Flu
(another H1N1 virus similar to the Spanish Flu of 1918) broke out worldwide, lasted just under 8
months, and caused an estimated 284,000 deaths (Braunack-Mayer, 2013; Stern et al., 2009).
COVID-19 was not the first time American schools closed their doors due to a flu pandemic. The
deadly second wave of the 1918-19 Spanish flu pandemic caused many urban K-12 public
schools to close their doors for up to 15 weeks (Stern, 2009). What is different about the
COVID-19 pandemic related to school closures is that they occurred as a preventative public
health measure for the disease, not as a response to massive community spread (Stern, 2009).
The most recent and current pandemic, COVID-19, was first identified in December 2019
and has resulted in over 32 million confirmed cases and over 578,000 documented deaths in the
United States alone as of May 2021 (California Department of Education, 2020). This pandemic
has resulted in over 156 million confirmed cases and over 3.2 million documented deaths
worldwide (World Health Organization, 2021). While COVID-19 has yet to rival the statistics of
the Spanish Flu from a hundred years ago, the U.S. education system’s response to the current
COVID-19 crisis is unparalleled in history (Berkman, 2008; Malkus et al., 2020a-c; Stern et al.,
2009).
Statement of the Problem
The COVID-19 Pandemic disrupted Southern California K-12 school districts, causing
3
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 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 respond to the COVID-19 crisis.
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, has 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
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 Southern 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 a myriad of student needs throughout school closures. By
analyzing the effective practices and shortcomings of this crisis from the leaders on the
frontlines, superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals, we hope to gain insight into
prevention and implementation as future crises occur in education. If a pandemic ever arises
again, this study will support how the problems would be addressed through the systems in place
by school leaders, educators, boards of education, and community stakeholders that are meant to
reimagine and revolutionize a new educational landscape that is committed to building a culture
of equity to repay the educational debt.
5
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 ongoing disruptions caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic on public education; the participants are only from Southern California
public schools; self-reporting surveys are included; interview questions may contain researcher
bias; interviews conducted virtually; and the sample may not accurately represent all schools’
districts in California. The next steps would include 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 the 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 provides $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 allocates $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 adds a year of
school for all 4-year-olds, significantly expands Cal Grants and middle-class scholarships for
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).
6
Asynchronous learning occurs without direct, simultaneous interaction of participants,
such as videos featuring direct instruction of new content students watch on their own time
(California Department of Education, 2020).
California Department of Education (CDE), the governmental body that oversees the
state’s diverse public school system, 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 laws and regulations and continuing to reform and improve
public school programs (California Department of Education, 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 (California Department of Public Health,
2021).
California School Employees Association (CSEA) is the largest classified school
employees’ 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, paraeducator services,
library and media assistance, computer services, and more (California School Employees
Association, 2021).
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. Of that money,
7
approximately $14 billion was given to the Office of Postsecondary Education as the Higher
Education Emergency Relief Fund (California School Employees Association, 2021).
Center for Disease Control (CDC), the nation’s health agency that “conducts critical
science and provides health information” and responds to health crises (Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, 2021).
Cohort “refers to a group of individuals who have something in common” such as the
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. 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 during the contract period. This can be especially
significant when the Legislature and governor have passed new laws—for example, regarding
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, 2021; Xiong et al.,
2020).
Distance learning, the 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 (California Department of Education, 2020).
8
Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) established in the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act and further funded under 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 conduct a range of essential operations and services to continue critical
infrastructure operations (National Conference for State Legislatures, 2021).
Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), an education system where all students
ages 3 to 22 receive a free public education that meets their educational needs. They have a right
to participate in school life, including after-school activities fully. What is “appropriate” for each
child will be different because each has unique needs (Exceptional Lives, 2019).
Hybrid (blended) learning, a combination of in-person and distance learning (California
Department of Education, 2020).
In-person instruction, where students receive at least part of the instructional day for the
entire week (CA Safe Schools for All, 2021).
Learning loss refers to any specific or general loss of knowledge and skills or 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 vast area, crossing
international boundaries and usually affecting many people” (Singer et al., 2021).
9
Personal protective equipment (PPE), 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 protective equipment may include gloves,
safety glasses and shoes, earplugs or muffs, hard hats, respirators, 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. It helps students develop skills they need for
school and life (California Department of Education, 2020).
Stakeholders refer 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 they have a personal, professional, civic, or
financial interest or concern (Edglossary.org, 2021).
Synchronous learning occurs in real-time, with the 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 (California Department of Education, 2020).
10
Williams Compliance act, the 2000 Eliezer Williams, et al., vs. the 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 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 (California Department of Education, 2020).
World Health Organization (WHO), a team of more than 8000 professionals, 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 provides an introduction
to the study, a 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
reviews the existing literature relevant to the problem. Chapter Three presents the research
design methodology, sampling and data collection procedures, instruments designed for data
collection, and data analysis procedures. Chapter Four gives the findings and major themes of the
11
research and an analysis of the data. Chapter Five summarises the study’s findings, a conclusion,
an examination of possible implications for further research, and recommendations for future
research.
12
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter reviews current literature to understand how district and site educational
leadership members have adapted to crises and changes made to the education system. The
chapter will first discuss historical examples of where and how leadership has had to adapt
during various crises, including Hurricane Katrina, and simultaneously meet the needs of school
and districts stakeholders (Gouwens & Lander, 2008). Chapter two also reviews current literature
that focuses on educational leadership’s shift to crisis managers during the current COVID-19
pandemic. K-12 educational leadership has had to transform from instructional and school
leaders to crisis managers, ensuring they meet the mental, socioemotional, and physical needs of
students and faculty/staff (Harris & Jones, 2020). The relationship between COVID-19 and the
K-12 education system will be highlighted in this chapter.
Educational leadership continues to change at the district and site level, as some districts
will continue their virtual/distance learning efforts throughout the next school year. The decision
made reflects the issue of safety felt among several stakeholders, including parents, students, and
teachers (Tadayon, 2021). One rising issue highlighted by the pandemic is the overwhelming
number of students and families facing mental health-related issues. According to the surveys,
50% of the parents reported emotional distress if their children participated in virtual instruction,
and 25% reported their children’s worsened mental or emotional health (Wood & Mascarenhas,
2021). These jarring numbers demonstrate the need for site and district leaders to allocate time
and energy to assist students who will continue to receive instruction from home for the next
foreseeable school year.
The difficulties associated with the pandemic’s relationship to the K-12 education system
also created positive changes for many students, especially our historically marginalized youth,
13
families, and community members, leading to educational leaders’ efforts (Nieto, 2021). After
much debate about the equitableness of the SAT/ACT requirement, the UC system officially
announced they would scrap optional testing when it comes to admission and scholarships
(Nieto, 2021). This change supports historically marginalized youth, as many low-
socioeconomic and students of color have struggled mentally and emotionally during the
COVID-19 pandemic (de Figueiredo et al., 2021; Wood & Mascarenhas, 2021). Outside the
scope of college admission testing adjudgments, educational leaders, in conjunction with local
and state officials, have been able to provide free daily meals for low-income students
throughout CA (Tadayon, 2020). The USDA extended the federal waives that allow schools to
offer free grab-and-go meals to students, regardless of eligibility. Additionally, there were fewer
time limitations for when meals could be distributed, and family members could pick up
students’ grab-and-go meals (Tadayon, 2020).
County, state, and federal health officials continue to guide the safe reopening of schools
throughout California (California Disease Control, 2021). Ever-changing guidelines under the
pandemic have contributed to financial implications on K-12 education, including Biden’s
proposal of the COVID relief fund and the one-time emergency funds known as The Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act (California Department of Education,
2021). Both the relief fund and the one-timer emergency funds demonstrate two commitments
from educational leaders to reopen schools safely, meet the varied needs of all students, and
prioritize educators and students in receiving the vaccination they desire (California Department
of Education, 2021). Additionally, a historic amount of money was distributed to high-poverty
schools, further illuminating areas of need throughout California (California Department of
Education, 2021).
14
Union negotiations also played an important role when considering COVID-19 and its
relationship to the K-12 education system (Hemphill & Marianno, 2021). A study that checked
the Memorandum of Understandings of 25 districts throughout the U.S., areas that teach roughly
6% of the total K-12 population in the U.S., found several changes related to teacher workload,
grading procedures, student support staff, and collaborative teacher expectations (Hemphill &
Marianno, 2021). The continued importance of building a relationship between educational
leaders and union representatives to set appropriate teacher expectations under changing
circumstances appears needed throughout the pandemic.
Historical Background
Throughout the past two decades, K-12 educational leadership has appropriately adapted
to crises that have affected the education system’s daily operations (Gouwens, 2008; Larideri,
2019). Since the early 2000s, nearly two-thirds of the emergency California school closures have
been due to wildfires or the threat of wildfires (Larideri, 2019). California public schools have
reported over 34,000 cumulative days missed across all public schools due to the emergency
closures. Scott Roark, a spokesman for the California Department of Education, said that the
state worked hard to mitigate these effects after the CampFire (Larideri, 2019). The department
coordinated mental health and trauma support for teachers, students, staff, and community
members and negotiated nearly $1 million in technology purchases for the Paradise Unified
School District to rebuild schools following the fire (Larideri, 2019). California district, local,
and state leaders showed initiative and reflection in repairing the parts of the K-12 education
system from the destructive effects of the natural disaster.
As leaders of communities, educational leaders are responsible for effectively responding
to crises within their sphere of influence. One such crisis in 2008 where educational leaders had
15
to respond was related to Hurricane Katrina (Gouwens & Lander, 2008). 7 Mississippi
Superintendents were interviewed regarding the crisis of Hurricane Katrina. The interviews
highlighted how the superintendents demonstrated appropriate responsiveness and effective
practices for school site and district stakeholders (Gouwens & Lander, 2008). The stories of the
Superintendents underscore their moral authority, as they shifted their immediate priorities from
student achievement to the welfare of the children and the families and communities the
Superintendents serve (Gouwens & Lander, 2008).
A study in 2011 regarding destructive tornadoes and how they affected school attendance
found that four different themes: crisis management, crisis leadership characteristics, post-crisis
support, and crisis preparation, emerged from the violent thunderstorm (Bishop et al., 2015).
Under crisis management, educational leaders were required to meet the physical and emotional
needs of the students while maintaining communication and coordinating resources (Bishop et
al., 2015). Due to the destruction caused by the tornadoes, mobile units needed to serve as
temporary classrooms. Maintaining communication throughout the crisis was vital to move
forward during and after the chaos (Bishop et al., 2015). The Superintendents attempted various
communicative techniques, such as texting, word-of-mouth, and signage due to tornadoes
disrupting phone lines. Superintendents also noted the importance of maintaining normalcy
throughout the transitional phase, noting the importance of quelling worry among stakeholders
(Bishop et al., 2015). Superintendents continued to demonstrate care and compassion for their
stakeholders by attempting to meet their needs during unprecedented and challenging situations.
Changes in Educational Leadership
Harris and Jones (2020) discuss some emerging insights about leadership due to the
COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on educational leadership. At the core, educational
16
leadership has changed considerably. There is an explicit, underlining importance of having
context-responsive leadership, ensuring leadership shifts in relation to the needs of the school
(Harris & Jones, 2020). Before COVID-19, educational leaders could be described as
“traditional,” Their role was defined by running the physical school site and ensuring
instructional practices were meeting standards (Harris, 2020). Nowadays, however, educational
leaders on a global level are still unable to always meet in a physical, in-person setting, so all
educational leaders find themselves with their laptops, phones, iPads, and on communicative
platforms, like Google Meet and Zoom (Harris, 2020). The shift to more technology has created
a different set of needs for all stakeholders within the K-12 education setting, including students’
and families’ need for reliable wireless internet, functioning laptops, and more readily available
technical support (Avila et al., 2021).
COVID-19 has disrupted the education system globally, affecting more than 1.6 billion
young people out of school (Harris, 2020). Polarizing viewpoints have arisen from this global
pandemic, as some are hopeful for the possibilities of reimagining the education system, while
others are hoping to return to what could be deemed as “normal life” (Harris, 2020). Harris
discusses some patterns of educational leaders adapting their instructional and school leadership
practices to a virtual platform. Given the immediate need of equipping faculty and staff with the
tools and skills needed to be effective, distributed leadership becomes necessary since it aims to
build capacity (Northouse, 2018). Since distributed leadership benefits from the strengths of each
team member’s leadership abilities, there is shared influence among all (Northouse, 2018).
Understanding an educational leader’s strengths and one’s own can support a leader’s self-
awareness skills, which is a major component of authentic leadership (Northouse, 2018). The
pandemic’s challenges for the K-12 education system call for self-aware leaders ready to
17
strengthen areas of need and continue supporting stakeholders with an adaptable and appropriate
leadership style (Harris, 2020; Northouse, 2018).
Based on the currently available science, reports from local and state counties, and
consultations with health experts, the CDC released a document titled Considerations for School
Closures, calling for educational leaders to assess the pros and cons of closing school sites given
the information (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). The document discussed
different possible timelines, discussing that school could be closed for as little as 2-4 weeks
school closure, but also leaving room for the unknown with language like “up to several months”
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). The document also highlighted different
factors that contributed to school closures, such as the impact of the COVID-19 disease within
different contexts: schools, families, and mental, emotional, and physical health (Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). The rationalizing, decision-making, and communication
of all stakeholders were regarded as “extremely important” during the beginning stages of
COVID-19, as was communication between state and local educational agencies to ensure
infrastructure and services needed to be appropriately provided for the school, so educational
leaders could be organized and efficient with haste (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
2019). Nowadays, educational leaders must continue adapting their leadership style to meet the
pandemic’s ever-changing needs of California’s K-12 education system.
Change in Assessments
The COVID-19 pandemic highlights inequities found within the education system, and
one particular transformation involves university-required assessments (Moody, 2020). In March
2020, the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and the American College Test (ACT) April test dates
were canceled as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (Moody, 2020). By May, The UC
18
announced the phasing out of SAT/ACT over the next four years (Moody, 2020). The
groundbreaking and highly argued topic hopes to provide more access for students from
historically marginalized groups who, research has shown, continue to perform at a much lower
disproportionate rate when compared to their non-historically marginalized peers (Gordon,
2020). Additionally, The College Board, which administers the SAT, acknowledged the
changing nature of testing policies, and vocalized their support for higher education members to
implement more permanent policies post the pandemic (Moody, 2020). The College Board added
that its purpose is to create more access for students to attend college and not need students to
take the SAT (Moody, 2020). Allowing students to apply for colleges without taking the SAT
and ACT clarifies that the change in assessments sparked by the pandemic is beneficial to
aspiring learners of higher education.
Bob Shaeffer is the Public Education Director at FairTest, a national organization that
focuses on eliminating barriers that contribute to inequities (Moody, 2020). FairTest states it
aims to provide equal opportunity for K-12 students by uncovering biases and flaws within the
standardized test, such as SAT and ACT, commenting on the breadth and depth of learning that
occurs throughout a student’s years of high school classes and how it “means more” than any
standardized test (Moody, 2021). More than 500 colleges signed a statement from the National
Association for College Admission Counseling to display their agreement to test-optional
policies (Moody, 2021). As more county, state, and federal educational agencies become aware
of stakeholders’ shifted needs given the pandemic, educational leaders should rejoice in their
decision-making that has granted more students access to universities right out of high school
(Moody, 2020).
19
Growing Need for Mental Health Resources
Many mental health issues have arisen with the pandemic forcing individuals to stay
isolated and distant from others. A study in India, which focused on the psychological impacts of
COVID and quarantining, found that over 60% of children respondents between the ages of 9-18
indicated worsening symptoms. 68.59% felt worried, (66.11%) felt helpless, and 61.98% felt fear
(Saurabh & Ranjan, 2020). Students and families were interviewed about their knowledge of the
quarantine, including rules of compliance, the purpose, and psychological effects that may have
resulted (Saurabh & Ranjan, 2020). The most common reasons interview participants felt
worried, helpless, and fearful were related to job losses, socioeconomic restrictions, and inability
to gather basic needs. The study calls for more collaboration between mental health specialists,
such as psychiatrists, psychotherapists, researchers, and community stakeholders, to reduce the
negative psychological impacts of future occurrences that might lead to quarantines (Saurabh &
Ranjan, 2020). The power of collaboration among educational leaders and local and state
officials is evident and can hopefully continue to contribute to positive support within
California’s K-12 education system.
A study conducted in China examined 1036 quarantined children and adolescents from
ages 6 to 16. Of the 1036 children and adolescents, 112, 196, and 68 presented depressions,
anxiety, and both, respectively (de Figueiredo et al., 2021). The number is alarming when you
consider that almost 40% of students evaluated discussed negative symptoms. Another worrying
element related to the quarantine’s impact on students is how persistent and enhanced stressful
events during early life (childhood and adolescence) can drive stressful, negative responses by
the immune, endocrine, and nervous systems (de Figueiredo et al., 2021). Students are already
exhibiting the behavior and social ramifications of stress and depression. Some immediate
20
behavior and social consequences that students who have quarantined areas are currently dealing
with are distress and hopelessness, irregular food intake, abuse and trauma, interpersonal and
environmental restraints, and sensory deprivation and neglect (de Figueiredo et al., 2021). Some
possible longer-term consequences are underdeveloped brain circuitry, obesity, substance abuse,
lack of emotional processing, psychiatric disorders, and suicidal thoughts (de Figueiredo et al.,
2021).
Another study published in The Lancelet said that separation from loved ones, loss of
freedom, boredom, and uncertainty could have a negative impact on an individual’s mental
health (Javed et al., 2020). Since students who have experienced anxiety, distress, social
isolation, or an abusive environment during quarantine time can negatively affect mental health,
campaigns must be created to raise public awareness of the importance of maintaining mental
health (Javed et al., 2020). With more developing information taking place every day, it is vital
educational leaders continue their efforts to combat the repercussions of the pandemic and its
association with negative mental and socioemotional effects on students.
A study from the CDC found that non-white parents with children in public schools were
more likely to report their children received virtual instruction (Verlenden et al., 2021). The
demographics are quite startling when contrasted with White parents, as nearly 66% of Hispanic
and 55% of Black parents reported their students received virtual instruction compared to 32% of
White parents (Verlenden et al., 2021). Additionally, 25% of parents who had children engaging
in virtual instruction reported a decline in mental health compared to the 16% of parents whose
students attended in-person instruction (Verlenden et al., 2021). Hence, many students negatively
impact their mental health when engaging in virtual instruction. How educational leaders
continue to drive action towards combating inequity is still an occurring issue.
21
Health Agencies Guidance on Reopening Schools
On December 30, 2020, California’s Governor Newsom stated that the in-person setting
was determined best to meet all students’ learning, mental, and social needs (CA Safe Schools
for All, 2021). He unveiled California’s program, the “Safe Schools for All” guidelines (CA Safe
Schools for All, 2021). “The Safe Schools for All Hub,” a government website from the state of
California, provides several needed resources, including interactive maps that display different
school districts, charter schools, and private schools’ statuses on reopening. Additionally, there is
information about how and why some schools have begun opening and guidance for 2021
commencement ceremonies. Lastly, the hub also explicitly states its “transparency,” sharing
current data reported from schools about reopening, displaying California’s K-12 School
Framework, and offering the COVID-19 Safety Plan School Guidance Checklist (CA Safe
Schools for All, 2020). The transparency offered by “The Safe schools for all HUB” informs
stakeholders of up-to-date information to assist with planning. All members continue to navigate
the difficulties associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Also located on the hub are current tier assignments for California. Working closely with
the California Department of Public Health, the framework displays the different components
required for each county to meet different standards (California Department of Public Health,
2021). Tier 1, known as the Purple tier, is the highest risk found on the Blueprint for a Safer
Economy. Tier 4, known as the Yellow risk, is labeled “Minimal risk” and is considered the least
restrictive tier. The framework has rules, including how the CDPH will assess indicators weekly
on Mondays and provide updates for any different tier assignments by Tuesday (California
Department of Public Health, 2021). Also, the minimum amount of time a county must stay in a
tier is three weeks prior to moving to a least restrictive tier. And also, the county is only able to
22
advance one tier at a time, regardless of if they have the numbers needed to qualify for one that is
less restrictive (California Department of Public Health, 2021).
The push for in-person instruction comes from Gavin Newsom’s announcement of “Safer
Schools For All”, as he speaks to the necessary support for students’ needs, including learning,
mental, and socio-emotional (EdSource, 2021). A bill accompanying the Legislature in 2020
stated that school districts should provide in-person instruction to the greatest extent possible
(EdSource Staff, 2021). However, regardless of the CDC stating schools in appropriate tiers can
successfully reopen, most families remain hesitant about joining physical school sites and
continue to engage in distant learning. Additionally, according to the Los Angeles Times
monitoring and tracking of school openings in California, 62% of elementary students have the
option to return. Unfortunately, the numbers are even lower for middle school and high school
students, as 37% of middle school students and 39% of high school students have the option to
return, respectively (Los Angeles Times, 2021). The lack of families being able to or wanting to
send their youth back to school calls into question what safety measures families are most
concerned with, given that the CDC has deemed schools safe for reopening.
Increased Access and Availability of Food for Families
Since many schools serve as the distributor of students’ primary meals throughout the
school day, there was a concern about how students would eat as schools closed due to COVID-
19 (Tadayon, 2020). In response to the growing severity of the pandemic, the United States
Department of Agriculture issues waivers in all 50 states and U.S. territories to allow states and
school districts to meet the needs of students throughout the nation (United States Department of
Agriculture, 2020). Due to the waivers mentioned above, program operators could serve meals at
different times than before, allowing a streamlining of the process and feeding more students.
23
Second, students could receive snacks after school hours, regardless of if they were not
participating in an afterschool enrichment program (United States Department of Agriculture,
2020). Lastly, in partnership with Baylor Collaborative on Hunger and Poverty, McLane Global,
PepsiCo, and others, meal delivery service is an option in certain areas based on State agency
approval. Summer Food Service Programs may occur regardless of closed school buildings
(United States Department of Agriculture, 2020).
When considering over 30 million students nationwide rely on school for free or reduced
meals, school district officials commented on the difficulties of feeding many students in a
system created as it is being implemented (Turner & Kamenetz, 2020). The grab-and-go meals
have become an integral part of food distribution at eligible school sites, usually filled with a
sandwich and milk, along with several nonperishables, such as chips, granola bars, fruit cups,
and juice boxes (Turner & Kamenetz, 2020). Regardless of the valiant efforts of educational
leaders at the school sites, many students still find themselves without access to free distributed
meals due to several possible reasons, including students isolating themselves because they live
with elderly family members, babysitting younger siblings while distance learning, and lack of
transportation to retrieve meals (Turner & Kamenetz, 2020). As a result, some school districts
have allocated funds for the drivers to deliver food on their routes. Additionally, the federal
government’s COVID-aid package allows families enrolled in food stamps programs to receive
the value of school meals to buy food where groceries are sold (Turner & Kamenetz, 2020).
There is no minimizing the quick efforts of educational leaders adapting to the needs of
students regarding food distribution. One factor that has arisen from the isolative effect and
closures of physical spaces due to the COVID-19 pandemic is understanding the reduction of
opportunities for students to engage in physical activity (Rundle et al., 2020). Also, considering
24
the pandemic has highlighted the scarcity of needed goods, toilet paper, water, and other
essential items, households are more likely to stock up on shelf-stable foods, usually highly
processed and high in calories (Rundle et al., 2020). Educational leaders need to search for
innovative ways to assist students with the physical exercise needed during situations like the
COVID-19 pandemic (Rundle et al., 2020). Fortunately, California is required by state law to
provide at least 400 instructional minutes of physical education every 10 school days for middle
and high school students. Physical education is half the time for elementary school students
compared to middle school and secondary education, only requiring 200 minutes (California
Department of Education, 2021).
When think of the correlation between social isolation and weight gain, it is further
problematic when considering the disproportionate effects of obesity on marginalized groups,
such as black and brown bodies. Additionally, it is important to note that studies have shown
excessive weight gain in times of Summer (Von Hippel et al., 2016). There is a question as to
how much educational leaders can assist with student lives outside of the school year and
environment, as school-based interventions have had little effect (Von Hippel et al., 2016). Other
areas that warrant additional exploration are primarily viewed as out-of-school behaviors, such
as summer camps and other enrichment activities. Effective interventions will require
educational leaders to provide assistance and support to parents/guardians, advocating for
programs and solutions that reduce screen time, parent/student nutrition education, and on the
state level, less marketing of calorie-dense foods to children (Von Hippel et al., 2016).
Financial Implications Related to COVID-19 and K-12 Education
As the pandemic continues to shed light on the importance of how money factors into
educational success, specifically for marginalized groups, the COVID relief plan and the
25
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act look for ways to satisfy some high-cost
matters to meet the needs of students (States News Service, 2021). District and site leaders are
pegged with the difficult task of meeting the growing needs of all stakeholders, specifically those
students in need. Since some schools still do not have psychologists, nurses, or counseling
support, a large amount of money will be allocated from President Biden’s one-time funds for
some districts to hire these needed supports (States News Service, 2021). The Center on Budget
& Policy Priorities released a statement explaining the need to fund K-12 schools, so they may
appropriately and effectively transition back to in-person instruction safely (States News Service,
2021). President Biden’s proposal, which includes $130 billion given to schools nationally over
two-and-a-half years, attempts to improve conditions for disproportionately affected subgroups,
such as low SES and students of color, by protecting schools from budget cuts in lower-income
areas (States News Service, 2021).
Outside of the extra mental and socioemotional support needed for students, educational
leaders need to decide how they will assist with the learning loss associated with the pandemic
(States News Service, 2021). With our students’ increased learning needs, especially given a year
of learning loss, district leaders must decide how to invest the money received to assist with
extended learning time (Zhou et al., 2021). District/site leaders will need to appropriately use the
funds given from the CARES act and one-time funds given from Biden’s COVID-Relief Plan to
continue to dismantle inequities that persist in K-12 education during and outside the COVID-19
pandemic (States News Service, 2021). State leaders must remove traditional, outdated
restrictive barriers to instructional constraints, such as seat requirements, and focus on innovative
solutions to support student learning and academic achievement (Zhou et al., 2021).
26
Union Negotiations
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, an estimated 37.2% of public sector
employees, including teachers, are covered by a union or an employee association collective
bargaining agreement (Fay & Ghadimi, 2020). Due to a significant number of teachers involved
within a union or collective bargaining committee, understanding the relationship between union
negotiations and K-12 districts’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is critical in identifying
strengths and areas for improvement to ensure educational leaders are meeting the varied needs
of students and stakeholders.
A few recommendations for unions arose from public management and policy scholars
when assessing collective bargaining during the pandemic, including engaging with leadership
early and often, incorporating the government’s reasoning into the negotiations, and prioritizing
issues of workgroups who are most affected by the crisis (Fay & Ghadimi, 2020). Considering
the impact COVID-19 has had on students’ learning, educational leaders want to ensure they are
also responding to union leadership swiftly and effectively. Additionally, there should be
multiple opportunities for stakeholder involvement within the bargaining unit, including all
affected parties related to the negotiations (Fay & Ghadimi, 2020).
With the increasing use of technology found within K-12 districts, union leaders and
site/district administrators have an opportunity to invite and engage more members and involve
them in the negotiation process (Fay & Ghadimi, 2020). District and site leaders are responsible
for setting up an effective virtual format, which will require intentionality and collaboration with
different types of stakeholders. Consistently keeping members informed of the bargaining
process, important timelines, and impactful decisions are key elements in empowering more
27
members to join the process, given increased access to a new virtual space and platform (Fay &
Ghadimi, 2020).
Conclusion
Educational leaders across CA continue to deal with the ramifications presented by
COVID-19 and have reimagined how the K-12 education system can effectively function
through technological platforms. While simultaneously focusing on instructional and school
leadership, educational leaders have also been tasked with increasing concerns related to the
financial implications of the pandemic, growing mental health needs, and time-intensive union
negotiations. Additionally, inequities that have persisted throughout K-12 education have
become more highlighted, positively creating action plans towards combating identified
disparities. SAT/ACT tests are now optional for UC systems, with the Cal State system still
pending a final decision. Through school districts, food availability for all community members
also became a possibility, groundbreakingly creating a different pathway to feed our populations
in need throughout CA.
Due to the ongoing persistence of the pandemic and understanding how educational
leaders are still finding what works best for all stakeholders, research is scant. Every day
continues to bring changes and modifications to current county and state mandates, leaving room
for school districts to change their policies related to COVID-19 as needed. As educational
leaders continue to build the plane while flying, stakeholders are continuously asked to adjust
their expectations accordingly. Creating equitable action that supports all students, with special
attention to historically marginalized groups, is key to overcoming the challenges the COVID-19
pandemic has brought onto K-12 education and its leadership.
28
Chapter Three: Research Methodology
Overview of the Study
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”. Principals, assistant principals, and superintendents across
California have been met with adapting to a myriad of stakeholders’ needs posed by the COVID-
19 pandemic (Harris, 2020; Harris & Jones, 2020). The purpose of this study was to gauge the
perspectives and understandings of K-12 principals, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents in relation to their decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic that
impacted k-12 schools. K-12 educational leadership has transformed from instructional school
leaders to crisis managers, meeting students and faculty’s various mental, socioemotional, and
physical needs (Cowie & Myers, 2021). The persistent changes in educational leadership
continue to test the virtual/distance learning efforts of site and district leaders, specifically
principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents.
This chapter discusses the specific research methods of the study regarding the
relationship between COVID-19 and the decision-making made by K-12 principals, assistant
superintendents, and superintendents within California. Chapter 3 explains the research design
methods as part of the data collection process, detailing the reasons behind using a mixed-
methods approach of surveys and interviews. The first section restates the research questions
used to guide this study. It describes the University of Southern California’s (USC) research
team participants. They were assembled to conduct the study in a coherent and interdependent
29
model of collaborative leadership (Fullan & Quinn, 2015). The second section provides a
rationale for using qualitative and quantitative approaches, including the reasoning for utilizing a
mixed-methods approach for this study. The third section identifies the sample population and
describes the participant selection process employed. The fourth section defines the
instrumentation, protocols, and conceptual framework applied to execute the surveys and
interviews. The fifth section outlines the germane data collection process and subsequent
analysis. The final section of this chapter addresses ethical considerations of the research
process. It provides a synopsis of the USC Institutional Review Board’s (IRB) process and
observance of the USC guidelines by the research team.
Research Questions
Research questions are used to guide studies in that they explain specifically what the
study will attempt to learn or understand (Maxwell, 2013). This study sought to understand the
following research questions:
1. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on
public school K-12 districts in Southern California, and how have district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these implications?
2. What, if any, have been the impacts of Federal, state, and local health agencies on public
school K-12 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 public school K-12 Southern
California districts’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic?
4. How, if at all, have public school K-12 Southern California school districts leadership
30
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 open schools due to the COVID-
19 pandemic?
Research Team
Dr. Rudy Castruita led the research team from the University of Southern California
(USC) Rossier School of Education. The dissertation group was composed of 22 students, with
Dr. Castruita as the chair and supervisor for the study. All research team members, which began
meeting in the spring of 2021, were integral to the collaborative efforts. They often made
collective professional commitments to meet to identify, schedule, and disseminate necessary
tasks to the individual(s) responsible for completing requisite tasks. Under the direction of Dr.
Rudy Castruita, research team members engaged in collaborative work efforts that included an
extensive review of existing literature, the establishment of research questions that facilitated the
research by providing focus to the team, and the determination of conceptual frameworks that
supported the study. Additionally, the team created survey instruments, discussed interview
protocols for respondents, and ensured ethical considerations were present and reflected upon.
From this thematic group approach to constructing the dissertation, similarities may present
among the final dissertations that this research team cohort was ultimately completed.
Qualitative Research
Qualitative researchers are focused on exploring and understanding meanings using
qualitative data, such as interviews (Johnson & Christensen, 2020). According to Maxwell, we
are not only interested in the physical and behavioral events that occurred but rather how
participants of this study make sense of what happened and note how it affected their behavior.
31
Additionally, the function of the research questions is to frame the study’s intense to help guide
the study (Maxwell, 2013). Qualitative researchers are interested in “how people interpret their
experiences, construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to their experiences”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This mixed-methods study used surveys and interviews of K-12 principals, assistant
superintendents, and superintendents to gain deeper insight into the relationship between
COVID-19 and decision-making for K-12 education within California at the district and site
level. Interview and survey questions were developed from the research questions. Surveys of
principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents within K-12 grade levels in CA
provided data on the different perspectives of decision-making about COVID-19, specifically
focusing on the financial implications, federal, state, and local impact on health agencies, and
how union negotiations played a role as well. Interviews were utilized to provide a deeper
perspective into the consequences COVID-19 brought to K-12 education related to the
educational leader’s current position and unique experiences.
Quantitative Approach
The researchers incorporated a mixed-methods approach for this study, using Likert-
scaled-based quantitative data from surveys. A mixed-methods approach is used to collect,
analyze, and integrate both quantitative and qualitative data to answer the posed research
questions (Creswell, 2014). The researcher followed the explanatory sequential design, where the
quantitative data was collected first, followed by the qualitative data (Creswell, 2015). In this
case, the surveys were administered, and then interviews were conducted.
Testing surveys and their questions before official administration is critical, as it helps
ensure the fluency and understanding of the questions by respondents who can provide useful
32
feedback (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). Our research team will pilot the survey instrument to
elicit rich, robust, and useful data from our primary respondents. The research will ensure the
survey appropriately meets the data collection needs. Additionally, the researcher will ensure the
question type is appropriate, the question design is centered around respondents’ knowledge, and
the questions are focused (Robinson & Leonard, 2019).
Surveys will be given to principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents within
K-12 education in Southern California. There will be approximately 25 survey questions using
the Likert-based scale. The questions survey will be administered online. Some advantages to
piloting the survey before the administration are gathering others’ input for a fresh perspective,
developing a greater understanding of your respondents, and testing the mechanics of the survey
and the reliability of the questions (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). All principals, assistant
superintendents, and superintendents will be provided with the survey beforehand for
convenience and allow the opportunity for questions or concerns before official administration.
Sampling and Population
In order to understand the specific and unique experiences of district and site educational
leaders within Southern California, purposeful sampling needs to be used (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). Purposeful sampling is more evident when considering the unprecedented lack of
information on the relationship between the pandemic on K-12 sites and district leaders’
decision-making, making it an information-rich study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The research
study also uses convenience sampling. Considering the study focuses on California district and
site leaders, including principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents, the location and
availability of respondents were important factors to consider when designing this research study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
33
The research study included purposeful selection to ensure that all participants worked as
a principal, assistant superintendent, or superintendent in public California K-12, K-8
elementary, middle school, and high school districts. The selection criteria for each of the roles
included the following: (a) The principal, assistant superintendent, and superintendent serve in a
K-12, K-8, elementary, and/or high school public district within California and must have
worked in their current role for at least one year; (b) the principals, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents served in these positions during the 2020-2021 school year; and (c) the student
population of the district is at least one thousand. Each of the researchers at USC surveyed and
interviewed a principal, assistant superintendent, and superintendents at three different school
districts with the criteria mentioned above. The minimum sampling size for interviews was set at
nine participants, and the minimum sample size for the survey responses was also set at nine
participants. This study’s principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents played a
significant role in supporting school districts and sites during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The researcher will be investigating three school districts we have given a unique
pseudonym to ensure each district’s anonymity. The researcher will investigate the following
three school districts: District A, District B, and District C.
School Districts Demographic Data
District A serves approximately 72,000 students in kindergarten through adult school.
Approximately 67% of the student population are identified as Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged, nearly 8% are identified as Homeless, nearly 14.5% are identified as English
Learners, and nearly 13% are identified as Students with Disabilities. District B serves
approximately 21,000 students in grades preschool through adult. Nearly 70% of the student
population are identified as Socioeconomically Disadvantaged. Nearly 6% of students are
34
identified as Homeless, around 10% are identified as English Learners, and nearly 13% are
identified as Students with Disabilities. District C serves approximately 21,000 students in
preschool through eighth. Around 38% of the student population are identified as
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged. Less than 1% of students are identified as Homeless,
approximately 14% are identified as English Learners, and nearly 13% are identified as Students
with Disabilities.
Both the survey and interview protocols included an explanation of the purpose of the
study. The participants were informed that the process was voluntary and that confidentiality
would be maintained throughout the entire process. The names of the school districts, schools, or
participants will not be utilized in the study.
Instrumentation and Conceptual Framework
After analyzing the current literature and identifying 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 were
conducted virtually because of the COVID-19 pandemic’s safety protocols and the time
constraints of the participants who were still leading the school through the pandemic. All the
interviews were recorded with participants’ permission, and notetaking was also used. Appendix
A contains the interview protocol that was used for Superintendents. The survey instruments
were administered to California K-12 public school superintendents, assistant superintendents,
and principals. The link to the survey questions was emailed to the participants. Appendix B
contains the survey questions that were sent to each participant.
The conceptual framework (See Figure 1) utilized for this research study was based on
35
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 (2013) 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 a 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 continuous improvement
systems. These three frameworks together provide K-12 school districts with the steps to persist,
at all levels of leadership, even through a crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic.
36
Figure 1
Triangulation of the Data
Data Collection
The data collection process, including surveys and interviews, began during the Fall 2021
semester after obtaining approval from the University of Southern California Institutional
Review (Board IRB). District Superintendents were contacted via a formal written request,
followed by a phone conversation to obtain permission for the study and gain access to assistant
Superintendents and Principals. Once permission was granted, participants were contacted for
participation in the study via 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. The surveys were conducted
37
through Qualtrics, an online format, so that participants could complete them at their own time
and discretion. Participants spent an average of 30 minutes answering the administered survey
questions.
Qualitative research uses the researcher as the primary data collection and analysis
instrument. Qualitative researchers have studied in their natural settings and are interested in
comprehending how people interpret different experiences and the meaning they attribute to
those experiences (Johnson & Christensen, 2020). Qualitative methods allowed researchers in
this study to uncover the different situations and experiences that contributed to decision-making
at the site and district level within K-12 education. The researchers used nine interviewees to
conduct this qualitative research study. The semi-structured interview protocol developed by the
research team consisted of 25 questions, with researchers having the option to use probing
questions. The interview protocol can be found in the Appendix A. The researchers conducted
the interviews via Zoom and took an average of 40 minutes to complete. The interview protocol
was consistently followed throughout the interviews, including the probing questions asked.
After the interviews, researchers gathered relevant data, including recordings of participants’
interviews, that reflected the participants’ experiences, opinions, and decisions. Participants were
asked for permission to record their interviews.
Data Analysis
The 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 posed 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. Common themes and patterns were identified to
38
understand the impact of the pandemic on schools, students, and leaders and how school leaders
managed the crisis.
The quantitative data collected by the survey instrument was compiled and analyzed
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 questions for each participant. Responses were
evaluated to determine commonalities and differences.
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, was also
presented. Emphasis was made that the data collection began after the researcher obtained
approval for IRB. This study used appropriate tools and followed all ethical standards to ensure
the validity and reliability of the study. The research findings of this study and in-depth analysis
will be presented in chapter four.
39
Chapter Four: Findings
Background
Chapter four analyzes the data collected from the study, which aimed to investigate the
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California,
specifically the responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals. Over the
last century, schools throughout the United States have had to face various public health crises
that have impacted schooling for K-12 students. The most recent and current pandemic, COVID-
19, was first identified in December 2019 and has resulted in over 32 million confirmed cases
and over 578,000 documented deaths in the United States alone as of May 2021 (California
Department of Education, 2021).
Quantitative data was collected from a survey using electronic questionnaires distributed
to three superintendents, three assistant superintendents, and three Southern California K-12
public schools principals. Each participating leader must have served a minimum of 1 year to be
surveyed. Nine out of nine surveys were answered using the electronic questionnaire, providing a
response rate of 100%.
Qualitative data was gathered using one-on-one interviews of the nine educational
leaders: superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in Southern California with the
same criteria as those surveyed. All respondents who completed the survey were selected to
interview. The nine educational leaders that were interviewed have been referred to as Principals
A-C, Assistant Superintendents A-C, and Superintendents A-C, as seen in Table 1. The
researchers made sure that the confidentiality of each superintendent was preserved throughout
the entire process.
When conducting this research, a semi-structured approach was used during the
40
interviews, which consisted of 14 questions on the interview protocol. The semi-structured
protocol allowed the researcher the flexibility to probe and ask additional follow-up questions as
needed. The established interview protocol captured the behaviors and feelings that could not be
observed (Merriam, 2009).
A mixed-method data approach was conducted using data from the surveys and
interviews. The data was then interpreted and analyzed using the process of triangulation, where
multiple sources of information were applied to support the findings. All data collected was
maintained and protected for confidentiality, especially age, race/ethnicity, marital status, and the
number of children for principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents surveyed and
interviewed.
Research Questions
The findings in this study have been guided by the following research questions:
1. What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had
on public school K-12 districts in Southern California, and how have district
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these
implications?
2. What, if any, have been the impacts of Federal, state, and local health agencies on
public school K-12 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 public school K-12
Southern California districts’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic?
4. How, if at all, have public school K-12 Southern California school districts
41
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 open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
Southern California K-12 public school districts and understand what district and site
administrators have learned from their experiences and their decision-making responsibilities in
managing the COVID-19 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 respond to the COVID-
19 crisis.
Coding of Data
In order to conduct data analysis to answer the research questions, it was important for
the researcher to consolidate, reduce, and interpret what the participants stated in the interviews
and answered the survey questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013). As in Maxwell (2013), the first
step that the researcher took in the qualitative analysis was to reread the interview transcripts and
listen to the zoom recordings. As the researcher completed each of these steps, the memos taken
during the interview were reviewed and developed categories for the data. The researcher looked
for recurring themes in the data to align with the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013).
When the researcher reviewed the interviews, codes were assigned to pieces of the data that
supported the research questions to begin to construct categories. According to Merriam &
42
Tisdell (2013), this process of assigning the codes is referred to as “open coding”.
After reviewing all of the interview data and the data from the survey results, the
researcher then finalized categories and subcategories and coded the information. Each of the
categories had multiple subcategories. As the researcher reviewed the subcategories, connections
were made to the literature review, and the researcher saw some of the same themes from the
data documented in research studies. After all the data was formally coded, formal analysis was
conducted to create the findings from the study that were directly tied to the research questions.
According to Merriam & Tisdell (2013), after creating the categories and coding the data,
it is important to speculate how the data is interrelated and move toward explaining the data’s
meaning as it pertains to the research questions. The data analysis follows from the study, which
aimed to examine the responses of principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents
from Southern California Public school districts related to the COVID-19 pandemic and its
impact on educational leadership. The data gathered from the interviews and survey questions of
Southern California K-12 principals, assistant superintendents, and superintendents were
analyzed to answer the research questions.
Demographic Data
The three district participants comprised of principals, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents. Each district’s participants, referred to as school leaders, included one principal,
one assistant superintendent, and one superintendent. One critical point was that research
participants had experience leading their districts and schools during the COVID-19 pandemic.
As seen in Table 2, three of the nine school leaders (33.3%) have served in their role for over 10
years, two of the nine leaders have served 6-10 years, one has served 3-5 years, and three of the
nine (33.3%) have served for the 1-2 years. Additionally, Table 2 shows that one of the nine
school leaders has served their district for over 10 years, three of the nine school leaders (33.3%)
43
have served in their district for 6-10 years, one out of nine has served their district for 3-5 years,
and three of the nine (33.3%) have served their district for 1-2 years.
Table 1
School District Participants: Demographic Information
District
Grade
Levels
Student Population
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
Homeless
English
Learners
District A Pre k-Adult 69,413 65.00% 7.70% 14.20%
District B Pre k-Adult 20,427 67.90% 5.50% 10.50%
District C Pre k-Adult 8005 75.70% 3.20% 4.70%
44
Table 2
Quantitative Survey: Participant Demographic Information
Position
Southern California
District
Years in Position
Years in Position at
Current District
Superintendent A Yes 1 to 2 1 to 2
Superintendent B Yes Over 10 6 to 10
Superintendent C Yes 1 to 2 1 to 2
Assistant Superintendent A Yes 1 to 2 1 to 2
Assistant Superintendent B Yes Over 10 Over 10
Assistant Superintendent C Yes 6 to 10 6 to 10
Principal A Yes 3 to 5 1 to 2
Principal B Yes 6 to 10 6 to 10
Principal C Yes Over 10 3 to 5
Research Question #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?
Ever-changing guidelines under the pandemic have contributed to financial implications
on K-12 education, including President Biden’s proposal of the COVID relief fund and the one-
time emergency funds known as The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or
CARES Act (California Department of Education, 2021). The relief fund and one-time
emergency funds demonstrate two commitments from educational leaders to safely reopen
schools, meet the varied needs of all students, and prioritize educators and students in receiving
the vaccination should it be desired (California Department of Education, 2021). Additionally,
45
over $100 billion was distributed to high-poverty schools, further illuminating areas of need
throughout California (California Department of Education, 2021).
Six survey questions addressed the first research question. As seen in Table 3, there were
two areas where most Superintendents (66.67%) believed the CARES Act met their district’s
needs: the area of personnel and in the area of technology. Similarly, two out of three
Superintendents (66.67%) believed that the CARES Act met their school’s needs related to
funding in the area of personnel.
Four interview questions addressed the first research question. The four interview
questions provided participating superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals with
an opportunity to share their experience related to COVID-19 and financial implications at the
site and district level. The responses to the four questions provided the researcher with data to
better understand how financial implications influenced leadership decision-making during the
COVID-19 pandemic crisis.
Spending Flexibility and Structure and Staffing Shortages
As the pandemic continues to shed light on how financial matters factor into educational
success, specifically for marginalized groups, the COVID relief plan and the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security Act have looked for ways to satisfy some high-cost matters to
meet the needs of students (States News Service, 2021). District and site leaders have been
pegged with the difficult task of meeting the growing needs of all stakeholders, specifically those
students in need. One common theme from the conversation with K-12 Southern California
public school superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals is the need for more
spending flexibility, especially when thinking of staffing shortages and more personnel.
Superintendent A felt they had a fair amount of flexibility with spending some funds, but
others were stricter:
46
We’ve had a lot of flexibility with spending through the COVID-19 experience, which is
my whole superintendent experience. Some funds had strict accountability, like Title 1 and
LCAP. Other funds had a lot of flexibility. I would point to the “compliance requirement” as not
being flexible. It caused staff to go back and report too much. For example, we had to submit
a plan for expended learning funds. We wanted to save funds for the future but still had to
submit a plan on how we would use the funds in 2024.
Superintendent B discussed the major financial impact as it relates to budgeting with
personnel and how it will be assessed in the future:
The largest financial implications have been staffing to provide distance
learning…Roughly 1,100 teachers in the district. We hired 75 extra teachers to facilitate
distance learning. We budget roughly 1000,000 per teacher as a cost. Multiply by 75.
Major financial impact. Need to reevaluate moving forward.
Superintendent C relayed similar concerns to Superintendent B regarding the financial
concerns of needing to hire more staffing but only having funds designated for protective
equipment:
I wish we had a little more ease on how to spend some of the COVID funding. A lot of
the funding can’t be spent on what we need in the pandemic. We back-filled it with
money the federal and state governments gave us. We wanted to use the money for more
employees and recruiting employees.
Assistant Superintendent A also mimicked the concerns of ensuring the financial support
was sustainable to some extent:
We were deficit spending, but all the influx of funds from the CARES Act meant that
funding was not the biggest issue. We have the money. The issues were personnel,
47
support, and time. The biggest part of funding was the short-term influx of cash and
making sure we use it for sustainable purposes. Planning and requirements…biggest
financial implications to get that.
Assistant Superintendent B:
I think the money that they’re calling “COVID money” was a lot of money, but it was
restricted. I think there were less restrictions on the money. I think the government felt
that if we give all this money to school districts, what are they going to use it for? So they
imposed a lot of restrictions, such as the requirement that all purchases be made in the
form of PPE, such as sprays, masks, and the like. But there were a lot of unforeseen
things that had more to do with employees. If you don’t have employees, you don’t have
to worry about masks. Being able to pay for people to bump up people’s salaries
temporarily to pay extra duty to do work that wasn’t being done. But that had to come out
of general funds, not COVID money. If we had that flexibility, it would’ve been very
helpful.
Principal A discussed how the last year’s funds felt more flexible when compared to this
school year:
I think with the allotment of money this year, that’s been more restrictive. It’s been more
clearly defined, like, “this money is for tutoring and academic support for students.” A
little flexibility there would’ve been helpful. Again, since we’re a title 1 school, we do
have a lot of funds. So I could pay for tutoring from multiple accounts. So, if I had some
flexibility with that money, that would’ve been very helpful because there are still some
things that we could still purchase that are more on the operational side that I wouldn’t be
able to purchase with other funds not designated for it specifically.
48
Table 3
Quantitative Survey: Superintendent Perception of Financial Implications of COVID-19
Element
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
The CARES Act met my districts
funding needs in the area of
personnel
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 66.6% 33.3%
The CARES Act met my school’s
funding needs in the area of
personnel.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 66.6% 33.33%
The CARES Act met my
district’s funding needs in the
area of personal protective
equipment (PPE).
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 66.67%
The CARES Act met my
district’s funding needs in the
area of technology.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 66.66% 33.33%
The CARES Act met my
district’s funding needs in the
area of professional learning
and/or training.
0.00% 33.33% 33.33% 0.00% 33.33%
The CARES Act met my
district’s funding needs in the
area of facility upgrades.
0.00% 66.6% 0.00% 0.00% 33.3%
49
Research Question #2: What, if any, has 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?
On December 30, 2020, California’s Governor Newsom stated that the in-person setting
was determined best to meet all students’ learning, mental, and social needs (CA Safe Schools
for All, 2021). He unveiled California’s program, the “Safe Schools for All” guidelines (CA Safe
Schools for All, 2021). “The Safe Schools for All Hub,” a government website from the state of
California, provides several needed resources, including interactive maps that display different
school districts, charter schools, and private schools’ statuses on reopening.
Also located on the hub are current tier assignments for California. Working closely with
the California Department of Public Health, the framework displays the different components
required for each county to meet different standards (California Department of Public Health,
2021). Tier 1, known as the “Purple tier”, is the highest risk found on the Blueprint for a Safer
Economy. Tier 4, known as the “Yellow risk”, is labeled as “Minimal risk” and is considered the
least restrictive tier.
The second research question focused on understanding the impact of health and safety
guidelines related to safely reopening school districts and sites. As seen in Table 4, a majority of
superintendent respondents (66.67%) felt the guidelines were not clear in providing information
to support the safe reopening of schools. All superintendent respondents (100%) felt they
understood how to safely bring back staff during the fall of 2020 based on the public health
guidelines. All superintendent respondents (100%) agreed or strongly agreed that the health
guidelines impacted their district’s return to school plan for Spring 2021.
50
Table 4
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ 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.
33.3% 33.3% 0.00% 33.33% 0.00%
I understood how to safely bring
back staff during the fall of 2020
to work sites based on the public
health guidelines.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.0% 0.00%
The health guidelines impacted
our district’s return to school plan
in the spring of 2021.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 66.66% 33.33%
Four interview questions aimed to answer the second research question. They were
created to gain insights of participating superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals,
specifically how their leadership was impacted by health and safety guidelines from various
governmental agencies, and what they had to implement to reopen schools safely. Two common
themes resulted from the interviews.
Inconsistent Multi-Agency Guidance
Superintendent A discussed the effectiveness and challenges of having a health
department for their school’s district:
We specifically have our own health and human services department with a medical
director who is also the public health director. That has been effective and challenging
because we are 1 of 80 districts in the county. However, we’re the only district with our
51
own health department. We are fortunate that we have daily talks with the local health
department. It’s all been a challenge, frankly, because we are tasked with translating the
county guidelines and the CA Department of Public Health guidelines into the local
context. Sometimes it’s made us more nimble, and sometimes it’s been even more
confusing.
Superintendent B described a similar challenge of agencies providing conflicting
guidelines related to operating a school during the COVID-19 pandemic:
The organization that comes to mind is the County Department of Public Health. We
worked with them twice a week on protocols, quarantines, and how to run schools in a
COVID environment…One that’s been a constant distraction is all the different
information being surmised during this time…The challenges we faced were the constant
changing and updating of the guidelines given to us by the County Department of Health
and the CDC.
Superintendent C shared their experience of trying to enact the several different
guidelines and what resulted:
We worked with all health agencies to try and develop guidelines to open and stay open.
Last year, the guidelines continued to change and adapt. We hired a principal specifically
to coordinate the COVID process and develop a variety of things, like dashboards, to
keep track of who was out and why they were out. A testing company was hired to test
athletes and employees…We worked closely with the district and then OCEA. First, we
would get the interpretation of the state and county. Then we would look at OCEA to see
what changes were presented and adapt, as necessary.
52
Assistant Superintendent A discussed how there was no aligned guidance from the
various health agencies:
Let’s be absolutely honest. Guidance has been an absolute disaster. I wouldn’t call it
guidance. I would call it “here’s what we’re going to tell you that we can plausibly deny
if you do anything one way or another as a district.” I firmly believe that in the era of
COVID guidance, districts have been hung up to try. For example, in this Omicron surge,
we had 6 updated “guidances” that required very different compliance measures in 14
days. We can’t even respond to 2 or 1 in 14 days. Change our systems, change how we
provide. And some of the guidance you’re like, that’s not even possible for schools.
Assistant Superintendent E shared their frustrations surrounding the inconsistent
guidelines from the various agencies:
There was a point where OCEA also provided guidance, and OCEA and CDC were not
on the same page. While some would say student needs to be out for 10 days for
quarantine, by day 5, they test on day 6; they could return on day 8. They had very
precise guidelines, but they didn’t match in two different places. So depending on what
you’re falling for, it gave very different information, which was honestly very frustrating
because parents also follow whatever is to their advantage. So if you want your child to
return, they’d say, well, “CDC says they can.” We were very scattered and felt like we
were misinforming ourselves and the public until we said, “we are going to follow what
CDC says.” We decided to stop following OCEA.
Assistant Superintendent C relayed similar concerns about the inconsistency across the
various agencies:
53
Frankly, the agencies did not do a very good job. It felt like there was no alignment
whatsoever. The CDC, Cal OCEA, and Department of Health are all unaligned. There
was also another issue: there were different roles for students compared to adults. It was
too confusing.
Principal A shared how their specific site has had to adapt to meet the needs of their
community quickly:
Our site is a hub for testing in the city and the community. Most recently, our district
partnered up with the city and our site to have testing hours during the week and
weekend, from 9:30-4:30. We organized this support with the local government. First, we
were only a testing site, and then we became a vaccine and testing site…Sometimes I
wonder if having our own health department causes challenges.
Effective Strategies for Implementing Health Guidelines
Although school districts faced the challenging task of interpreting ever-changing
guidelines from local, state, and federal agencies, some positive, effective strategies arose that
supported leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.
Superintendent A stated the benefits of being a city with its own department for health:
Not only does our city have its own department for health. We are the only district, to my
knowledge, with our own health department. As such, our deputy talks to the health
department on a daily…The best part was when vaccines were newly distributed; we
were able to partner with teachers and were essentially one of the first people in the state
to receive vaccinations, first for teachers than classified staff.
Superintendent B discussed how the leadership from the county health department in
54
providing information to their district was one of the biggest assets when thinking of effective
strategies:
Our county’s health department has been a leader and is willing to supply information
and protocols to the public and districts. I believe that has been the biggest asset has been
the information and assistance. It allowed us to have some expertise in putting together
policy and procedures. Our staff, on their own, felt untrained or inexperienced regarding
how to run a school during a pandemic. Having the county health department was the
biggest asset.
Superintendent C shared how the guidance they received allowed for strong safety and
health protocols within their district:
Through the guidance we received from the various agencies, it was clear that wearing
masks and hand sanitizing stations were two critical points in keeping our students safe.
We taught kids how to be healthy and stay clean. Everyone was masked at work, at board
meetings, and we ensured we stayed 6 feet away from each other. We have been doing all
the rules and regulations for the last 18 months. We have had to reinforce these items,
specifically mask responsibility continuously.
Assistant Superintendent B discussed the power of clear communication within their
district:
Good communication is the best strategy. We knew we needed to internally agree as an
executive team regarding what guidance wanted to give. We realized we needed to have
one answer as a collective; Let’s unify. We had our public information officer send out
our collective message so that every parent heard the same thing at the same time. We
55
probably overinform our public, but they wouldn’t say we don’t communicate.
Assistant Superintendent C also mentioned the importance of communication,
specifically stating how updating information rapidly was necessary for success:
The most important strategy is that communication is updated frequently. Our district
reads everything that comes through. We engage with unions often and communicate
frequently. We have a Facebook page that we did utilize more often to support
communication, especially with the community.
Principal A shared:
What I think was most effective is we had a district-wide message. Everything was rolled
out district-wide. There was no variation between sites, so it’s been effective in terms of
there’s no push-back when it comes to what the policies and guidelines are. No one sees
it as my decision. They see it as there are bigger structures way above my level. When
they see what we’re doing here is the same at the middle school and elementary school,
the push-back is, “this is what we’re doing here at A.” They know it’s the health
department. I feel like that’s been really effective as a practice to have a consistent
message across the entire district.
Research Question #3: How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in the K-12
district’s response to the COVID-19 Pandemic?
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, an estimated 37.2% of public sector
employees, including teachers, are covered by a union or an employee association collective
bargaining agreement (Fay & Ghadimi, 2020). Due to the significant number of teachers
involved within a union or collective bargaining committee, understanding the relationship
56
between union negotiations and K-12 districts’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were
critical in identifying strengths and areas for improvement to ensure educational leaders are
meeting the varied needs of students and stakeholders.
The third research question focused on understanding how union negotations played a
role in leadership decision-making and influenced educational leaders’ responses related to
COVID-19. As seen in Table 5, most superintendent respondents (66.67%) believed negotiations
with certificated unions influenced how their district effectively responded to the COVID-19
pandemic for students and families. However, most superintendent respondents (66.67%) neither
agreed nor disagreed that negotiations with classified unions influenced how their district
effectively responded to the COVID-19 pandemic for students and families. A majority of
superintendents (66.67) agreed that negotiations with the teacher’s union impacted the quality of
instruction offered to students during distance learning.
Four interview questions aimed to answer the third research question. They were created
to gain insight of participating superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals related
to the impact of union negotiations on districts’ response to COVID-19.
57
Table 5
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ Perception of the Impact of Union Negotiations
Element
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neither Agree
nor Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Negotiations with certificated
unions influenced the way my
district effectively responded
to the COVID-19 pandemic for
students and families.
0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 66.67% 0.00%
Negotiations with classified
unions influenced the way my
district effectively responded
to the COVID-19 pandemic for
students and families.
0.00% 0.00% 66.67% 33.33% 0.00%
Negotiations with the teacher’s
union impacted the quality of
instruction offered to students
during distance learning.
0.00% 33.3% 0.00% 66.67% 0.00%
Two themes surfaced as a result of the superintendent, assistant superintendent, and
principal responses:
Certificated and Classified Union Negotiations Focus on Safety
Superintendent A discussed being at a standstill with negotiations and still in the process
of reaching an agreement with the classified staff union:
We are still at the table with our classified union. It’s been over 2 years now. They asked for an
MOU for the opening of this past school year. One of the biggest points of contention is their
want of hazard pay, given they were on school grounds when teachers had the option to
teach virtually. There are a lot of resolved and tentative agreements in place with the
classified union.
Superintendent B relayed similar sentiments related to classified staff’s need for safety:
58
The largest issue for classified staff fell around health and safety protocols. The difficulty with
classified unions was how they could safely interact with the public. Some members tend to be at
the front of offices for schools, so that’s an obvious safety issue. Also, how we keep the
custodial staff safe and healthy was another point that we continued to work through.
Superintendent C also stated how many issues are still under negotiation:
Flexibility and having to cover for one another frequently were some issues discussed with the
classified union. They continue to change with each COVID spike…We are continuously
meeting with the union to continue negotiations to discuss how COVID has affected us—not
having enough IAs and custodians. We have tried to be flexible in how easy it is to get a
job as a custodian and IA. We still have not been able to solve the problem completely.
Assistant Superintendent A:
A few things came out of negotiations. All our volunteer parents, which we call “VIPs,” that our
campus was so used to having, the union said, “nope, you can’t bring them on campus. That’s a
bringing COVID to campus risk.” So “VIPs” were actually banned through union negotiations. In
the end, of course, there were a lot of complaints with people saying they didn’t have enough
support. Some of the requirements for external contractors to come on, in terms of their
vaccination cards and negative COVID test on the same day, were all done through union
negotiations, so you had some very interesting protocols for everyone.
Assistant Superintendent B:
We agreed on a certain number of times during the day that our custodians would use these
sprayers and misters throughout the room. This was actually negotiated with the union because a
teacher’s room would be fogged at the end of every day. After the fogger had been used, no one
else would be allowed in that room by the end of the day. So we ended up with a system of green
dots. A custodian would put a green dot on the door, signaling the room had been deep cleaned.
59
A teacher could come to her room the next day, see the green dot, and know the room had
been cleaned. High use areas, like door handles, would be cleaned at least twice a day.
That was something we agreed upon during union negotiations.
Assistant Superintendent C regarded safety as the most important concern for their district:
Employee safety was the biggest concern. “What kind of PPE are we going to receive?
What happens if a kid comes sick to the classroom? The only other caveat for classified is
that they wanted additional pay for being on the ground when teachers were home.”
Principal A:
The return, on how and when people would return. There was a moratorium on having any
visitors or guest speakers on campus. There were no volunteers on campus. That literally just
ended this past Friday and has been in place since last year. In-person meetings were also a part
of union negotiations… When thinking of classified, I’m not sure if you follow what’s going
on, but they are still in negotiations…One of the main components is hazard pay since
they were not able to work from home like teachers. At this point, we are, I believe, at an
impasse, and there is talk of striking.
Focus on Instructional Models and Independent Study Programs
Superintendent A discussed how teacher’s voices influenced instruction programs in their
district:
We informally and formally asked teachers about what they needed in their classrooms. During
the summer of 2020, each level: elementary, middle, and high school, held task force meetings
with teachers around the instructional schedule. That is where the informal development of those
instructional models came from. These were presented in negotiations, and we had to formally
establish they were the “instructional models”.. Technically, our contract does not require
that we agree on an “instructional model.” For the first time in a long time, that
60
instructional model was a part of the contract.
Superintendent B honed in on scheduling of instruction when thinking of union
negotiations and instructional programs:
We were pretty collaborative with me coming up with schedules to meet the needs in distance
learning. Scheduling comes to mind when thinking of creating synchronous/asynchronous
instruction. Distance learning turned out to be quite complex because we are trying to give kids
an equal opportunity to have synchronous and asynchronous instruction of an equal amount
during distance learning... Turned out to be a puzzle-solving problem rather than tied to the
negotiation process. Just a complicated problem we had to solve.
Superintendent C discussed the collaboration that took place with the union to ensure the
independent study was strengthened:
The union worked with us to develop 3 weeks of independent study lessons for all schools, which
we had available if teachers needed them. In case they were needed, they could use the lesson
plans. They were developed by teachers for students—lots of independent studies going on
in relation to absences.
Assistant Superintendent B:
I think the biggest one would be the creation of our Distance learning Program. That was non-
existent to us. We have our KMA (Independent study program), but the independent study is very
different than doing what we’re doing now with distance learning. That impact and that program
did become very different. We ended up hiring any of our own teachers who were willing to
teach remotely with our students for the entire time. You’d have to commit for the entire
year, and you’d have to teach like that. We hired over 30 teachers who were not internal
since we only had like 10 interested. Many teachers wanted to be back in the classroom
with kids, not teaching online…We gave them Canvas as a tool and a curriculum to use,
61
but it’s not the same as being within the classroom. We had to adapt the curriculum for
students who were a part of our distance learning program.
Assistant Superintendent A:
I think the big thing was: Can they teach from home or not? And then once we verified,
they could teach from home, you had a huge change to instructional programs to modify
them to allow them to be virtually administered, and the adoption of intended study
programs. We have far more kids using APEX than ever before. Our independent study
school is 1,700 students using APEX, plus our normal usage solely. So that’s 1,700 more
kids using that modality. It was a wake-up call to our district. We were behind on the
times related to learning management platforms. Our teachers were not adept at using
Canvas to deliver assignments, let alone the content. Our curriculum office has a lot of
work to rehash unit guides and revamp instructional support for the zoom delivery to
kids. The on-and-off of you’re going to be working on camera, and you’re going to be
working on your own…Without kids being back, despite the best efforts of teachers,
nothing felt like it would be good enough.
Principal B:
Instructional programs were influenced by the union to provide a financial incentive for
PD on-demand or more technology. So, like in our district, if you want an IGTV, 65
inches, you’d have to take two trainings, which you get $500 for, and then you get on the
list for the IGTV, and then you get an IGTV. So those are things that I think are an
incentive for instruction, and I know that COVID funding contributed to it. We also had
additional funding for intervention and our after-school program.
Research Question #4: How, if at all, has your district addressed the concerns of the parent
62
community regarding safety, nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, academic
standing, and how and when to open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic?
With the pandemic forcing individuals to stay isolated and distant from others, an
increased number of mental health issues have arisen. A study in India, which focused on the
psychological impacts of COVID and quarantining, found that over 60% of children respondents
between the ages of 9-18 indicated worsening symptoms [RS1]. 68.59% felt worried, (66.11%)
felt helpless, and 61.98% felt fear (Saurabh & Ranjan, 2020). Additionally, when considering
over 30 million students nationwide rely on school for free or reduced meals, school district
officials commented on the difficulties of feeding a multitude of students in a system created as it
is being implemented (Turner & Kamenetz, 2020). Outside of the extra mental [RS1], and
physical and socioemotional support needed for students, educational leaders need to decide how
they will assist with the learning loss associated with the pandemic (States News Service, 2021).
With our students’ increased learning needs, especially given a year of learning loss, [RS2]
district leaders will need to decide how to invest money received to assist with extended learning
time (Zhou et al., 2021).
Two interview questions aimed to answer the fourth research question. They provided
participating superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals with an opportunity to
discuss their experiences about how school sites and districts met the needs of community
members during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses to the two questions provided the
researcher with information about community members’ perceptions of school districts meeting
their needs during the COVID-19 Pandemic. The research questions explicitly mentioned safety,
nutrition, distance learning, lack of technology, and academic standing. Two themes surfaced
from the interviews: prioritizing safety and academic concerns.
63
Table 6
Quantitative Survey: Superintendents’ 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.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00%
My district met the needs of
students and families in the area
of nutrition.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 66.67% 33.33%
My district met the needs of
students and families in the area
of technology
(computers/devices).
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00%
My district met the needs of
students and families in the area
of technology (internet service).
0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 66.67% 0.00%
My district met the needs of
students and families in the area
of social-emotional well-being.
0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00%
My district met the needs of
students and families in the area
of health & safety.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00%
My district met the academic
needs of students.
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00%
The Prioritization of Safety
Superintendent A described how different feelings and sentiments depend on the phase of
the pandemic:
There have been a lot of safety concerns expressed. Oftentimes, 50% of community members
64
agree with our approach, and 50% don’t. Most people would agree on masking. But a small
contingent of our community would not agree. A lot around health and safety. And a lot of
concern about children’s well-being.
Superintendent C also discussed the different concerns of having students wearing a mask
at all times:
One of the biggest concerns was having students wear masks. People to this day still complain
about having students wear a mask. There is still a community of people who disagree with state
and government and don’t feel their children should be wearing masks. Still fighting as of today.
People are still there at the last board meeting, yelling/screaming, “why are you doing this to
our students?!.”
Assistant Superintendent A relayed how the timing of the pandemic depicted different
conversations:
In the beginning, it was safety. How can you guarantee the safety of my child? Once we were
back, it morphed. How are you not requiring x, y, and z about masks? And the other group would
say, “how are you having kids wear masks? How dare you require all teachers to
vaccinate. How dare you don’t require teachers to be vaccinated. Also, conversations
about testing protocols and gate entry. How are we screening students at the gate?
Assistant Superintendent B:
I’d say the biggest concern is about the masks. There’s been a constant debate, almost from the
beginning, of people who don’t believe in the masks and think they’re useless and refuse to have
their children wear the masks, and we’ve not given up on if they’re going to come to
school they have to wear a mask…The new concern is vaccination. There’s been a lot of
talk about July, with the possibility of the mandate coming down, where students will
need to be vaccinated…you also have a whole faction of people who say they will just
65
homeschool their students and not get them vaccinated.
Principal C also relayed a division among community members related to their priorities
surrounding safety:
For people who think COVID is not a big deal, their biggest concerns were about not
trampolining what they believed to be their individual rights. The idea of “we should have a
choice.” On the other hand, for those who are very COVID cautious, there was a lot of wanting
explanations about what we were going to do to keep their child safe and wanting
absolute reassurance that their child was going to be safe. Being able to provide those
folks on that side of the spectrum was challenging because there is no 100% guarantee
we can stop even with our safety in factors in place.
Academic Concerns
Superintendent A:
The second concern that comes to mind is academics and families seeing their children struggle,
especially our most fragile students, who are students with disabilities. And their inability
to get services in the way they had been accustomed to. A speech class is very different
for our most fragile students across the screen.
Principal A shared her concerns about the high number of “fails” during the pandemic:
For academics, our Ds and Fs. And how are we going to get our kids out of those holes
because they were just so credit deficient, they are credit deficient, from just not passing
those classes this last year? In like 10 days, we’re going to know what our first semester
data looks like. It’s definitely a higher fail rate than before. We are still dealing with the
effects of that.
Assistant Superintendent A was struck by the lack of concern regarding academics within their
66
district:
Surprisingly very little concern about ‘What’s my kid learning? How’s my kid progressing
academically? And again, a shocking little concern surrounding, “how is my kid’s mental
health?” Or at least little voice their concerns.
Assistant Superintendent C shared their concerns surrounding learning loss and a
highlight for their school sites:
Our academic concern? Learning loss. Also, ensuring teachers are teaching during distance
learning. We also hired counselors at the elementary level. We put counselors at all school sites.
The feedback from the community is that they felt it was helpful. We also hired 2 intervention
teachers for most schools and instructional assistants to try and catch students up. We feel like
we have identified a model that works for each of our school sites: at least one counselor,
two intervention teachers, aids, and a multi-tiered system support specialist.
Principal B discussed her district’s academic concerns, which were, fortunately,
minimized given the passing of Assembly Bill 104:
Our academic concerns were minimized because of AB-104 with the DS pass and the graduation
requirement of 130. Hoping that AB-104 gets extended for next year’s students in July since
they were just as severely impacted. Feels like next year’s class might be the more
“normal” year in terms of a 4 year. So I’m hoping that AB-104 will come for the
academic concern of our parents. The only other graduation requirement about
“community service,” but we know that’s just off the table right now.
Summary
Chapter four reported the findings from three participating K-12 Southern California
public school districts, comprising three superintendents, three assistant superintendents, and
three principals, each surveyed and interviewed. This study indicated some positives and
67
challenges from the pandemic when thinking of health guidance, school academics during
distance learning, and a reprioritization of health and safety at school sites and districts.
The researcher examined the perspectives of principals, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents of leading sites and districts during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically
thinking about funding, union negotiations, health and safety, academic concerns, and
community/parent needs and support. Additionally, the findings provide strategies and
roadblocks when considering leading a K-12 Southern California school and district during a
crisis.
The researcher found common themes that arose from the three districts. Spending
flexibility was seen as both positive and challenging for districts, specifically when allocating
particular expenses that did not align with the stipulations laid out by the CARES Act.
Inconsistent guidance from multiple local and state agencies proved challenging for schools and
districts when thinking of safely reopening schools for in-person instruction. Yet, some districts
identified new problem-solving techniques for handling the situation. The need for safety among
certificated and classified personnel and community members was apparent within union
negotiations, agency guidelines, and funding priorities. Academic concerns were also a point of
interest, specifically independent study programs, increased failing grades, and best strategies to
combat learning loss.
In chapter five, there will be a discussion of the research, further conclusions, and
implications. Finally, recommendations for future research will be reported.
68
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Implications
Introduction
The COVID-19 Pandemic disrupted K-12 school districts, causing unforeseen
consequences within the education system and highlighting financial implications, the impact of
local, state, and federal agencies, negotiations with unions, and the impact on students and the
community. COVID-19 shifted the roles and scope of schools and school leaders beyond
instructional leaders and transformed them into “crisis managers” who were tasked with meeting
several challenges at the school and district levels. Superintendents, assistant superintendents,
and principals face obstacles when meeting students’ and faculty’s various mental,
socioemotional, and physical needs (Cowie & Myers, 2021). The persistent changes regarding
the expectations of educational leadership continue to test the virtual/distance learning efforts of
our site and district school leaders.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on
Southern California K-12 public 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 respond to the COVID-19 crisis.
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-
69
12 public school districts in Southern California, and how have district superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these implications?
2. What, if any, has 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?
Methodology
Quantitative data was collected from a survey using electronic questionnaires distributed
to three superintendents, three assistant superintendents, and three principals of three Southern
California K-12 public school districts. Each participating leader must have served a minimum of
1 year to be surveyed. Qualitative data was gathered using one-on-one interviews of the nine
educational leaders: superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals in Southern
California with the same criteria as those surveyed. All respondents who completed the survey
were selected to interview. The researcher made sure that the confidentiality of each
superintendent was preserved throughout the entire process.
When conducting this research, a semi-structured approach was used during the
70
interviews, which consisted of 14 questions on the interview protocol. The semi-structured
protocol allowed the researcher the flexibility to probe and ask additional follow-up questions as
needed. The established interview protocol captured the behaviors and feelings that could not be
observed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013).
A mixed-method data approach was conducted using data from the surveys and
interviews. The data was then interpreted and analyzed using the process of triangulation, where
multiple sources of information were applied to support the findings. All of the data collected
was maintained and protected for confidentiality, especially age, race/ethnicity, marital status,
and the number of children for each of the principals, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents surveyed and/or interviewed.
Results and Findings
The findings in this study were based on the collected and analyzed data. This section
will interpret the combined quantitative and qualitative data results and link the findings back to
the literature. The findings are from three participating Southern California public K-12 school
districts, each comprised of one superintendent, an assistant superintendent, and one principal.
Research Question #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?
Spending Flexibility Amidst Staffing Shortages
One theme that surfaced when thinking of the financial implications of the COVID-19
pandemic on K-12 public school districts is the need for more spending flexibility, especially
when considering staffing shortages.
Superintendent A noted that their entire superintendency had taken place during the
71
pandemic. Though they were grateful for spending flexibility within their district, they did note
that other funds had strict accountability, such as Title 1 and LCAP. As a result, they needed to
pull from their general funds, which was less than desirable. Additionally, they needed to submit
a financial plan this year for how funds would be used in 2024, which feels problematic with so
many uncertainties related to the pandemic. Assistant Superintendent B described their
understanding of “COVID money” as a large amount of money but called it restricted and
questioned if the government felt apprehensive about giving districts funds without restrictions.
Assistant Superintendent B felt the funds were not reflective of staffing and personnel shortages
that districts currently face. Similarly, Superintendent C wishes there was a little more ease in
spending COVID-related funding, as much of the funding could not be spent on what needs to be
presented from the pandemic. Superintendent C stated they were back filled with the federal and
state government’s money; however, they wanted to use more funds to pay and recruit
employees.
Combatting Learning Loss
All three participating districts discussed the challenges associated with “learning loss”
but were grateful for funds to assist students with academic achievement. Superintendent A
shared how their district created a “Learning Acceleration and Support Plan” consisting of four
pillars: academic acceleration and support, social-emotional support and well-being, student
voice and engagement, and infrastructure. Over the next 3 years, each classroom will be
“outfitted” with new furniture to easily group students for discussion and academic discourse.
Like Superintendent A, Superintendent B also presented a multi-year plan to help address the
learning loss by having smaller class sizes, intercession classes, and after-school and evening
programs. Superintendent B shared their commitment to class size reductions, specifically Tk-3,
72
for the next three years. Another positive accomplishment was that the district had a robust
Summer Literacy camp, as they plan to have over 5,000 students this coming summer.
Superintendent C talked about how they used COVID-related funds to hire multi-tiered systems
of supports specialists and intervention coordinators to support students who appear behind
academically.
Research Question #2: What, if any, has 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?
Inconsistent Multi-Agency Guidance
Inconsistent guidance from various agencies presented several challenges for
superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals alike. All three districts described
frustrations with receiving conflicting messages from state and local agencies, such as the
California Department of public health and the County Department of Health. District A
discussed the issue of having their health department within their district. The main challenge is
that they are tasked with translating the county guidelines and CA Department of public health
guidelines into the local context, so that it could be confusing. Assistant superintendent A called
the “guidance” received “an absolute disaster.” They stated they would not call it guidance, as
districts were left “out to dry.” Superintendent B mirrored similar sentiments, calling all the
“different information” a “constant distraction” being surmised during the pandemic. Though
Superintendent B worked closely with the County Department of Public Health twice a week in
relation to protocols, quarantines, and how to run schools in a COVID environment, the
guidelines were constantly changed and updated. Assistant Superintendent C was frank with
their response about the ever-changing guidelines, stating, “Frankly, the agencies did not do a
73
very good job. It felt like there was no alignment whatsoever.” Superintendent C added that the
different guidelines for both students and adults were “too confusing.”
Effective Strategies for Implementing Health Guidelines
Though the inconsistent messages between various government agencies presented
several problems, some positive effective strategies for implementing health guidelines surfaced.
All three participating districts uncovered helpful techniques and strategies to best support health
guidelines within their districts. Principal A discussed how they believed the most effective
strategy they learned was the power of a district-wide message. Since there was no variation
between sites, there was rarely public pushback at the school sites. Principal A reiterated how
they believe it is an effective practice to sustain, even post-pandemic, the idea of having a
consistent message across the entire district. Superintendent B shared how the leadership of their
county’s health department was pivotal in supplying information and protocols to the public and
districts, calling it the “biggest asset: the information and the assistance.” Superintendent C
acknowledged the efforts from the various agencies, stating that wearing masks and hand
sanitizing stations were critical points in keeping students safe. Additionally, Superintendent C
believed it taught students to remain healthy and stay clean.
Research Question #3: How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in the K-12
district’s response to the COVID-19 Pandemic?
Certificated and Classified Union Negotiations Focus on Safety
Districts A, B, and C discussed how both certificated and classified unions focused on
safety when meeting at the table for union negotiations. Superintendent A discussed how they
were still at the table with the union, citing one point of contention as they want hazard pay from
the classified union. They were on school grounds when teachers had the option to teach
74
virtually. Assistant Superintendent B relayed how their union negotiations focused on cleaning
practices, specifically how many times a teacher’s room would be fogged throughout the school
day and how to ensure the classroom remains untouched until the teacher enters the next day.
Similarly, Assistant Superintendent C discussed the questions asked during certificated and
classified union negotiations, such as “What kind of PPE are we going to receive?” and “What
happens if a kid comes sick to the classroom?”
Focus on Instructional Models and Independent Study Programs
With instruction drastically changing from in-school to distance learning, modifications
to instructional models and independent study programs came to fruition. All three participating
school districts relayed how the pandemic forced conversations related to instructional models
and strengthening independent study programs. Superintendent A shared how in Summer 2020,
task force meetings were held by a group of teachers surrounding the instructional schedule.
During these meetings, the idea of instructional models arose, which were later formally
presented at union negotiations. Superintendent A mentioned it was the first time that
instructional models were included within the contract in a long time. Assistant superintendent A
mentioned how the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their district was a huge wake-up call
as it relates to their learning management platforms. They stated they were “behind on the times”
when supporting instructional students via distance learning. Principal B shared how
instructional programs were influenced by the union negotiations, resulting in some financial
incentives for participating teachers. For example, if a teacher wanted an IGTV, also known as a
“Smart TV,” they would have to participate in two trainings and receive $500 for their work.
Superintendent C discussed how the union worked closely with the district to develop three
weeks of independent study lessons for all their school sites, considering the high absences due
to the pandemic.
75
Research Question #4: 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?
The Prioritization of Safety
Prioritizing safety for all school stakeholders was one of the most important points that
arose from the conversations with superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals from
all three participating school districts. All school leader respondents shared how masks were
usually the focal point of conversations. However, masks were supported and demonized by
polarizing forces within community members. Assistant superintendent A shared how some
community members asked, “how are you ensuring my child’s safety?” while others would say,
“How are you having kids wear masks?” The contrasting viewpoints were also a struggle for
Superintendent C, who discussed that there were people still yelling and screaming at the most
recent board meeting, “why are you doing this to our students?” Assistant Superintendent B said
that the concern was masking initially, and now the new concern is related to vaccination.
Nowadays, the conversations about safety are geared toward the vaccination mandate coming
expected this summer.
Academic Concerns
With the pandemic yielding learning challenges across the country, superintendents,
assistant superintendents, and principals expressed their experience with academic concerns from
families, students, and community members. Superintendent A noted the challenges associated
with struggling students, specifically students with disabilities. They depicted how a speech class
looked very different through distance learning than in person, and it provided problems for
learning. On a positive note, Assistant Superintendent C shared how they identified a new
76
system for success due to academic concerns. They discussed that they identified a model that
works for each of their school sites: at least one counselor, two intervention teachers, aids, and a
multi-tiered system support specialist. Principal B was grateful for the passing of AB-104,
minimizing graduation requirements for students during a pandemic. There was some question
about the community service requirement, but the assumption is it is not applicable given the
challenges of the pandemic.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study surveyed three participating K-12 Southern California public school districts.
There were three participants for each school district, including a superintendent, an assistant
superintendent, and a principal. Findings from this study revealed additional areas that bode for
further exploration. The following are recommendations for future research:
1) Further exploration into appropriately allocating funds for school districts for a future
pandemic, specifically focusing on flexibility.
2) Gainer provides further insight into union negotiation best practices during a pandemic to
avoid standstills and continue developing and refining plans for the staff shortages
protocols.
3) Further, explore appropriate learning management systems and tools and add-ons that
could best support students choosing distance learning or independent study programs.
4) Expand research on what students and teachers deem safety priorities given the
adjustment back to in-person learning.
5) Reassess effective strategies to create safety within the workplace using literature related
to perspectives of safety within the workplace pre-and-post pandemic.
Concluding Remarks
77
While the pandemic persists, Southern California public school superintendents, assistant
superintendents, and principals continue to feel the impact of COVID-19 on their districts and
sites. Student achievement, financial responsibility, union leadership, and community/parent
support are all areas that require further support and exploration to combat the present and
unavoidable lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Some of the key issues learned from the three school districts were related to spending
flexibility, specifically as it relates to personnel shortages, union negotiation for safety, academic
concerns, and independent study programs and instructional models. Understanding how
spending flexibility was problematic for site and district leaders because money was not
allocated for personnel shortages, and covid-related funds were strictly PPE equipment and other
safety matters. Regarding union negotiations, conversations prioritized safety for both
certificated and classified staff. One district mentioned their classified staff was at a standstill
due to wanting hazard pay when certificated personnel had the option to stay home during the
height of the pandemic. Instructional models and independent study programs were also heavily
discussed. One district discussed how financial incentives were created for teachers to participate
in “Smart TVs” training and how it could help support academic achievement.
Since academic concerns were a prevalent topic, school leaders continue seeking best
practices to support student academic achievement from distance learning and in-school settings.
The pandemic continues to shed light on the current challenge students face toward academic
achievement, especially students with disabilities who may need continuous physical and in-
person support for accommodations. Additionally, school sites and districts transform their
approaches to best support students by strengthening their instructional models and independent
study programs.
78
Though the COVID-19 pandemic challenged public school district leaders across
Southern California, some positive implications arose for supporting our students towards
academic achievement, specifically during a crisis. Effective strategies for maintaining health
and safety practices across school sites and districts arose, including consistent district-wide
messages and communication supported by their schools. Though academic concerns in the form
of “learning loss” and needing appropriate accommodations for our most struggling students
exist, school leaders demonstrate an awareness of strengthening distance learning tools to
support student achievement now and for a future crisis.
79
References
Avila, E. C., Abin, G. J., Bien, G. A., Acasamoso, D. M., & Arenque, D. D. (2021). Students’
perception on online and distance learning and their motivation and learning strategies in
using educational technologies during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Physics.
Conference Series, 1933(1), 12130. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012130
Bishop, W. E., Fifolt, M., Peters, G. B., Gurley, D. K., & 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
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
Jossey-Bass.
CA Safe Schools for All (2021). Definitions. https://schools.covid19.ca.gov/pages/definitions
CA Safe Schools for All. (2020, December 30). State of California safe schools for all hub.
https://schools.covid19.ca.gov/
California Department of Education (2020). https://www.cde.ca.gov/
California Department of Education (2022). Physical education Guidelines middle & high
school. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/peguidemidhi.asp
California Department of Education. (2021). State meal program: School nutrition.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/nu/sn/stm.asp
California Department of Public Health. (2021, June 15). Blueprint for a safer economy.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-
19/COVID19CountyMonitoringOverview.aspx
California Department of Public Health. (2021). About us.
80
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/About.aspx
California Legislative Information. (2019). Bill Text - AB-77 education finance: Education
omnibus budget trailer bill.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB77&fir
stNav=tracking
California School Employees Association. (2021). About us. https://www.csea.com/about-us.
California State Government. (2016). CA safe schools for all. https://schools.covid19.ca.gov/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Mission, role, and pledge.
https://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019). Considerations for school closure.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/considerations-for-school-
closure.pdf
Cowie, H., & Myers, C. (2021). The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the mental health
and well‐being of children and young people. Children & Society, 35(1), 62-74.
https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12430
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4
th
ed.). Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.
de Figueiredo, C. S., Sandre, P. C., Portugal, L. C. L., Mázala-de-Oliveira, T., da Silva Chagas,
L., Raony, Í., ... & Bomfim, P. O. S. (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
81
Edglossary.org (2021). The glossary of education reform: Cohort.
https://www.edglossary.org/cohort/
Edglossary.org (2021). The glossary of education reform: For journalists, parents, and
community members. https://www.edglossary.org/.
EdSource Staff (2021, April 15). Quick guide: California’s plan for getting more kids back to
school. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/quick-guide-how-does-gov-newsoms-safe-
schools-for-all-plan-work/646111.
EdSource staff. (2021, May 18). Quick guide: Where do things stand on in-person instruction in
California? EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/quick-guide-how-does-gov-newsoms-
safe-schools-for-all-plan-work/646111
Education Data Partnership (2021, April 6). Negotiating teachers’ contracts in California.
https://www.ed-data.org/article/Negotiating-Teachers’-Contracts-in-California
Exceptional Lives (2019, September 14). Special education: A glossary of terms and acronyms.
https://exceptionallives.org/blog/special-education-a- glossary-of- terms-and-acronyms
FairTest. (2022). About FairTest. https://www.fairtest.org/about
Fay, D. L., & Ghadimi, A. (2020). Collective bargaining during times of crisis:
Recommendations from the COVID‐19 pandemic. Public Administration Review, 80(5),
815-819. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13233
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. John Wiley & Sons.
82
Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence the right drivers in action for schools, districts, and
systems. Corwin Press.
Gordon, L. (2020). In historic action, UC moves to drop SAT/ACT and develop a replacement
exam for admissions. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2020/in-historic-action-uc-moves-
to-drop-sat-act-and-develop-a-replacement-exam-for-admissions/632174
Gouwens, J., & Lander, D. (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
Harrington, T. (2021, February 2). Quick Guide: What California’s now defunct color-coded
county tracking system means for schools. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/quick-
guide-what-californias-color-coded-county-tracking-system-means-for-schools/639357
Harris, A. (2020). COVID-19 – school leadership in crisis? Journal of Professional Capital and
Community, 5(3), 321-326. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-06-2020-0045
Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2020). COVID 19 - school leadership in disruptive times. School
Leadership & Management, 40(4), 243-247.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1811479
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
Javed, B., Sarwer, A., Soto, E. B., & Mashwani, Z. (2020). The coronavirus (COVID‐19)
pandemic’s impact on mental health.The International Journal of Health Planning and
Management; Int J Health Plann Manage, 35(5), 993-996.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3008
83
Johnson, N., & Jackson, V. (2021, February 9). House bill to implement Biden COVID-relief
plan includes much-needed k-12 funding. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/house-bill-to-implement-biden-
covid-relief-plan-includes-much-needed
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2019). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches. Sage Publications.
Jones, C. and Freedberg, L. (2021, March 4). California legislature approves plan to encourage
schools to reopen for in-person instruction. EdSource: Highlighting Strategies for
Student Success. https://edsource.org/2021/california-legislature-approves-plan-to-
encourage-schools-to-reopen-for-in-person-instruction/650493
Keegan, D. A., & Bannister, S. L. (2020). More than moving online: Implications of the COVID‐
19 pandemic on curriculum development. Medical Education, 55(1), 101–103.
https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14389
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! the case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159-165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
Lardieri, A. (2019, October 31). Another victim of the California wildfires: Education. US News
& World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2019-10-
31/another-victim-of-the-california-wildfires-education
Los Angeles Times. (2021, April 24). Track the progress of school reopenings in California.
https://www.latimes.com/projects/california-coronavirus-cases-tracking-outbreak/covid-
19-school-reopenings-track-progress/
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Sage
84
Publications.
McGuine, T. A., Biese, K. M., Petrovska, L., Hetzel, S. J., Reardon, C., Kliethermes, S., Bell, D.
R., Brooks, A., & Watson, A. M. (2020). Mental health, physical activity, and quality of
life of US Adolescent Athletes During COVID-19–related school closures and sport
cancellations: A study of 13 000 athletes. Journal of Athletic Training, 56(1), 11–19.
https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0478.20
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). Wiley.
Moody, J. (2020, December 18). Navigating test-optional admissions amid covid-19. US News &
World Report. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-the-
coronavirus-is-pushing-colleges-to-go-test-optional
National Association for College Admission Counseling. (2021). Test-optional means test-
optional. https://www.nacacnet.org/news--publications/newsroom/test-optional-means-
test-optional/
National Conference for State Legislatures (2021). COVID-19: Essential workers in the states.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/covid-19-essential-workers-in-the-
states.aspx
Nieto, G. M. (2021, May 15). University of California will no longer consider SAT and ACT
scores. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/15/us/SAT-scores-uc-
university-of-california.html.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Introduction to leadership concepts and practice (4
th
ed.). Sage.
ProQuest. (2021, March 4). ASM. Robert Rivas applauds plan to start safely reopening
California schools this month. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2496764945
85
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2019). Designing Quality Survey Questions. Sage.
Rundle, A. G., Park, Y., Herbstman, J. B., Kinsey, E. W., & Wang, Y. C. (2020). COVID-19
related school closings and risk of weight gain among children. Obesity (Silver Spring,
Md.), 28(6), 1008-1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.22813
Saurabh, K., & Ranjan, S. (2020). Compliance and psychological impact of quarantine in
children and adolescents due to Covid-19 pandemic. The Indian Journal of
Pediatrics, 87(7), 532-536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-020-03347-3
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. Scientific
reports, 11(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81814-3
Tadayon, A. (2020a, August 31). USDA allows school districts to resume serving free grab-and-
go meals through 2020. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2020/usda-allows-school-
districts-to-resume-serving-free-grab-and-go-meals-through-2020/639431
Tadayon, A. (2021b, January 22). Bay area district plans to offer distance learning in fall even
after campuses reopen. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/bay-area-district-among-
first-in-state-to-keep-distance-learning-even-after-campuses-reopen/647422
Tadayon, A. (2021c, April 4). Quick guide: What California’s color-coded county tracking
system means for schools. EdSource. https://edsource.org/2021/quick-guide-what-
californias-color-coded-county-tracking-system-means-for-schools/639357
Thorell, L., Skoglund, C. B., de la Peña, A. G., Baeyens, D., Fuermaier, A., Groom, M., ... &
Christiansen, H. (2020). Psychosocial effects of homeschooling during the COVID-19
pandemic: differences between seven European countries and between children with and
without mental health conditions. Mental Health Weekly Digest,
86
105. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/68pf
Turner, C., & Kamenetz, A. (2020, March 20). Schools race to feed students amid coronavirus
closures. National Public Ratio. https://www.npr.org/2020/03/20/818300504/schools-
race-to-feed-students-amid-coronavirus-closures2020
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020, January 20). Union members summary.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2020, March 17). USDA announces feeding program
partnership in response to COVID-19. https://www.usda.gov/media/press-
releases/2020/03/17/usda-announces-feeding-program-partnership-response-covid-19
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2022, March 17). Find meals for kids when schools are closed.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/meals4kids
U.S. Department of Education (2021). https://www.ed.gov.
U.S. Department of Education. (2021, April 29). 100 days of the Biden administration: How the
department of education has helped more schools safely reopen and meet students’
needs. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/100-days-biden-administration-how-
department-education-has-helped-more-schools-safely-reopen-and-meet-students-needs
U.S. Department of Labor (2021). Personal protective equipment.
https://www.osha.gov/personal-protective-equipment.
Verlenden, J. V., Pampati, S., Rasberry, C. N., Liddon, N., Hertz, M., Kilmer, G., ... & Ethier, K.
A. (2021). Association of children’s mode of school instruction with child and parent
experiences and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic—COVID experiences
Survey, United States, October 8–November 13, 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 70(11), 369. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7011a1
87
Von Hippel, P. T., & Workman, J. (2016). From kindergarten through second grade, US
children's obesity prevalence grows only during summer vacations. Obesity, 24(11),
2296-2300. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.21613
Westover, J. (2019). Districts on the move: Leading a coherent system of continuous
improvement. Corwin Press.
Wood, A., & Mascarenhas, L. (2021, March 26). Virtual school can be damaging to children’s
mental health, CDC study says. CNN Health.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-
wellness/index.html
World Health Organization (2021). Who we are. www.who.int/about/who-we-are.
World Health Organization Coronavirus Dashboard (2021). World Health Organization
coronavirus dashboard. https://covid19.who.int.
Zhao, Y. (2020). COVID-19 as a catalyst for educational change. Prospects, 49(1), 29-33.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09477-y
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.
https://www.erstrategies.org/cms/files/4699-cost-of-covid-paper-final.pdf.
88
Appendix A: 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
89
district?
4. To what extent, if any, did financial incentives influence your district’s reopening
plan/timeline?
B. What, if any, has 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?
1. In what ways did your district collaborate with federal, state, and local government
agencies and community organizations to support your school district during COVID?
1. PQ - What agencies or organizations?
2. To what degree, if any, did the various agencies align COVID-19 guidance for
schools?
3. What strategies have been effective for your district in implementing health
guidelines/policies?
4. 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 the K-12 district’s response to
the COVID-19 Pandemic?
1. What were the most important issues negotiated with your teacher’s union, and how were
they resolved?
2. What were the most important issues negotiated with your classified union, and how were
they resolved?
3. In what ways, if any, were instructional programs influenced by union negotiations in
your district?
90
4. 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?
1. In what ways did your district gather input from and communicate to the community?
2. What were the biggest concerns from your district’s community, and how were they
addressed?
1. PQ - Were there any safety concerns?
2. PQ - Were there any nutrition concerns?
3. PQ - Were there any academic concerns?
4. PQ - Were there any technology concerns?
5. 0. 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.
91
Appendix B: Superintendent Survey
Introduction
Thank you for participating in this research project. The goal is to understand how the
COVID-19 pandemic affected K-12 school districts and, in doing so, transform the role of
district and school site leaders into crisis managers. You were chosen to participate in this survey
because you demonstrated leadership as a superintendent during the COVID-19 crisis.
Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary. Your identity, position, and any
identifying information about your district will be anonymized to secure confidentiality. Thank
you again for your participation. We also invite you to participate in a virtual 35-minute
interview scheduled at your convenience after the survey.
Table B1
Survey Items
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
92
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
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
1 - Strongly Disagree
2 - Disagree
93
COVID-19 pandemic for students and families. 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree
4 - Agree
5 - Strongly Agree
12. Negotiations with classified 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
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
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
94
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
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
95
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
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 participate in a virtual 35-minute interview to be
scheduled at your convenience.
Thank you for participating in this survey.
96
Appendix C: Superintendent Letter of Invitation
Date:
Dear Superintendent ___________,
My name is Isaac Olvera, 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 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 decision-making responsibilities in managing the crisis.
The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects
Research (IRB) has reviewed and approved this research study. 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 iolvera@usc.edu. Thank you
very much for your time and assistance.
Sincerely,
97
Isaac Olvera
Doctoral Candidate
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Southern California K- 12 public school districts, specifically the responses of educational leaders: superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals. The research questions used to guide the study were: What, if any, are the financial implications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on public school K-12 districts in Southern California, and how have district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals addressed these implications?; What, if any, have been the impacts of Federal, state, and local health agencies on public school K-12 districts in Southern California, and what strategies have district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals followed to address the suggested guidelines?; How, if at all, have union negotiations played a role in public school K-12 Southern California’s responses to the COVID-19 pandemic?; How, if at all, have public school K-12 Southern California 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 open schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic? The methodology for this study was a mixed-method design. There were quantitative and qualitative data collected and analyzed. Surveys and interviews were conducted among 9 K- 12 Southern California public school district educational leaders: three superintendents, three assistant superintendents, and three principals. Findings and implications related to spending flexibility, prioritization of safety, instructional models, and academic concerns arose from the interviews and surveys.
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
Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…
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
Olvera, Isaac
(author)
Core Title
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on K-12 public school districts in southern California: responses of superintendents, assistant superintendents, and principals
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Educational Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2022-05
Publication Date
04/28/2022
Defense Date
04/28/2022
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
CDC,COVID-19 pandemic,crises managers,financial implications,K-12 public school districts,learning loss,local and state health agencies,OAI-PMH Harvest,union negotiations
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Castruita, Rudy (
committee chair
), Cash, David (
committee member
), Roach, John (
committee member
)
Creator Email
iolvera@usc.edu,isaacchristianolvera@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111136625
Unique identifier
UC111136625
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Olvera, Isaac
Type
texts
Source
20220428-usctheses-batch-934
(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
Tags
CDC
COVID-19 pandemic
crises managers
financial implications
K-12 public school districts
learning loss
local and state health agencies
union negotiations