Creating a digital culture of care: COVID-19 and digital teaching

Abstract

In this summer program, preservice teachers are recruited to work with children from the community and are mentored closely by two faculty members who are literacy education professors. This allows the candidates to learn from faculty mentors and their peers, a proven model for effective field experiences. Despite the research being done on remote learning due to COVID-19, the factors dictating the necessity of caring classrooms—such as systemic inequities and mental health’s impact on student achievement—are more prevalent than ever and missing from the literature. The findings of the qualitative case study indicate the need for intentional work in preservice programs on creating caring digital classrooms. The findings also indicate the immediacy of the mental health concerns for children learning digitally due to COVID-19.

Keywords:

• supplemental field experience
• mental health
• caring digital classrooms

1. Introduction

Due to the COVID pandemic, most schooling in the United States moved to a digital format in March 2020. As summer approached, summer programs that were normally held face-to-face were evaluated to determine if they would be held in traditional face-to-face formats. In suburban Georgia, one such program provided a unique opportunity for education majors to work on their college campus with K-8 grade students receiving free or reduced-priced lunch who perform below grade level in reading (Authors, 2016, 2017; —, 2017; —, 2020). Following guidance from the university where the program is held, the program was moved to a digital platform for the summer of 2020. This program serves children who are economically and culturally marginalized and moving to a digital platform created the following questions. Was there enough time to create a sound digital curriculum? Would students benefit from social interactions in a digital environment? Would the asset-based approach focusing on a community of care be possible digitally? The researchers felt strongly that the program should occur, but it was clear that research was needed to determine if the primary focus of the 2020 program, creating a caring classroom, would be possible digitally.

While there is a body of literature dedicated to integrating technology into learning in the public-school classroom (Kress, 2010; Obi et al., 2016; Prensky, 2013; Tarbutton, 2018), there is less literature on technology being the vehicle through which all learning occurs for young learners. Similarly, while there is ample research on the importance of caring classrooms (Ellerbrock et al., 2015; Sitzman & Watson, 2017), there is less on creating a caring digital classroom. According to Sitzman and Watson (2017), “caring in the digital world – CyberCaring – unveils dynamics and relationship between transpersonal caring and advanced technologies” (p. 8). Some of the dynamics that impacted this research project were hypotheses that it is difficult to remain focused on the other people involved when technology is the vehicle for learning; it is difficult to feel a personal connection to others in the digital space for some of us; it is difficult for some of us to assess the engagement of participants in a digital space. The relationship between technology and caring was questioned by both the researchers and participants. We wondered if there would be tension when using technology as the classroom space for the children and/or if that tension would be felt by the adults.

The purpose of this qualitative case study is to determine the extent to which caring classrooms were created in a digital summer program. The data indicate discrepancies between what the researchers saw enacted and what the participants believed about their caring online classrooms. However, the data also indicate that caring classrooms were created and that children received much-needed mental health benefits from the program. The specific research questions driving the study were:

1. How do preservice teachers create a digital culture of care?

2. How do preservice teachers enact a caring classroom digitally?

3. Do preservice teachers note mental health as a priority in their digital teaching?

1.1. Background

Teacher education programs vary widely in their choices for field experiences (Authors, 2017). Some programs choose a co-teaching model, others prefer mentoring approaches (, Authors, 2017). Even within mentoring models, there is wide variation in how the mentoring is accomplished—there may be one mentor for multiple preservice teachers (PSTs); there may be a close relationship between PSTs and a faculty member; there may be a team working with all PSTs—and this makes it difficult to determine which models are best. In this summer program, PSTs are recruited to work with children from the community and are mentored closely by two faculty members who are literacy education professors. This is a four-week summer program on a college campus. In the summer of 2020, it was not part of a field experience for PSTs. The children participated in direct phonics instruction and reading was the primary focus of all instructional strategies; this is in part because funding comes from the university’s America Reads funding. Faculty act as mentors and partners in the teaching process alongside PSTs. This allows the candidates to learn from faculty mentors and their peers, a proven model for effective field experiences (Authors, 2020; Carney, 2020).

In summer 2020, the researchers were concerned about the mental health of both the K-12 children and the PSTs due to COVID. Thus, it seemed more important than ever to focus on creating caring classrooms. Millions of children in the US experience a disorder each year, either behavioral, emotional, or mental (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2014). Since 2014 schools have been identified as the sites for most mental health treatment and prevention for children in the US (Cammack et al., 2014). There are now commonly health professionals available in schools—school nurses, social workers, psychologists, and/or counselors (Weist et al., 2014). However, in a digital environment, who is available to students? The caring classroom allows children to voice concerns about their daily lives (Sitzman & Watson, 2017). A caring digital classroom, when children are otherwise isolated, is imperative. Social and emotional learning (SEL) has received much attention in public schools in the past decade (Greenberg et al., 2017), but it has not yet been well explored in a digital format.

Recent studies such as Kelly, Astor, Benbenishty, Capp, & Watson (2020) show that mental health is now a concern for all American schools due to COVID-19. Their report is a call to arms after finding that 3 in 4 social workers surveyed across the U.S. reported mental health needs for students as urgent (Kelly et al., 2020). Additionally, creating a caring classroom is imperative to help alleviate some mental health concerns, such as student anxiety (Perry & Conners-Burrow, 2016), and thus the focus of summer 2020 was primarily on how to create a caring digital classroom. Other work says that “traditional aspects of trauma-informed instruction … had already started to gain traction among schools before the pandemic. But the new and disparate contexts for learning this fall make it both more challenging and more critical for teachers” (Sparks, 2020, p. 2).

In addition to the concerns about students’ mental health, the researchers understood the vulnerable populations who are served through this program (low-income and mostly emergent bilingual students) would potentially lose the most ground in learning with school closures due to COVID. Early data based on MAP scores indicated that students were doing relatively well with learning loss. However, students were only losing more ground in the area of mathematics than in reading (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). The same study indicated that students from marginalized backgrounds (low SES, special education) had the largest losses in all grade levels. However, other studies indicated that children in K-12 grade would lose anywhere from three months to a full year of learning in the 2020 school year due to COVID (Collerd, 2020).

2. Review of relevant literature

The research questions driving this study, questioning how teachers create a caring digital classroom, respond to students in caring ways digitally, and focus on mental health digitally, require a review of literature on cultures of care (including social-emotional learning tenants), digital learning, and caring digital classrooms.

2.1. Social emotional learning and cultures of care

Social-emotional learning’s (SEL) 3 main tenets are to teach and support children in the process of developing a better understanding of emotions, establish healthier relationships, and set positive goals (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, 2020). Developing these skills in children has been deemed essential in almost every corner of the social services sector to improve the social and emotional responses of children and youth. Nationally in the United States, 17.4% of children ages 2 to 8 years have been diagnosed with either a mental, behavioral, or developmental disorder (Data and Statistics on Children’s Mental Health, 2019). While these statistics are staggering, the state of Georgia is experiencing its own mental health crisis. In 2015, more than 100,000 children in Georgia were experiencing mental illness (Oyedele, 2015). In contrast, in 2020, approximately 220,000 children in Georgia reported struggling with anxiety or depression (Georgia Family Connection Partnership, 2022).

Mental and physical development have the potential to be hindered by the presence of mental illness. It can affect a child’s educational success, result in struggles with negative stigmas, and can restrict their ability to live a healthy and fulfilling life (undefined). Roughly 247 billion dollars is spent on mental illness annually, making it the most expensive ailment to treat compared to all chronic illnesses (Children’s Mental Health Report, 2019). Before the COVID-19 pandemic, research had already noted that public health emergencies take a toll on physical as well as mental health and that children are particularly vulnerable to their effects (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2022; American Red Cross, 2022; National Institute of Mental Health, 2022). Research shows that even children as young as 2 years are aware of the changes around them (Dalton et al., 2019) and are particularly vulnerable because of their limited understanding of the event. As Imran et al. highlighted in 2020, children are unable to escape the harms of the situation physically and mentally as they have limited coping strategies and often are not able to communicate their feelings like adults. Furthermore, the closure of schools and separation from friends can cause stress and anxiety (Centre for Disease Control, 2022; Dalton et al., 2019; Imran et al., 2020)

Furthermore, exposure to mass media coverage and unverified information circulating on social media may aggravate mental distress (Imran et al., 2020). Logically, children who were already living in distressing situations such as poverty, cultural discrimination, racial oppression, societal disenfranchisement, and family separation, among many others, are at a higher risk of being deeply and negatively affected by the traumatic experience that COVID pandemic has been to the country and the world (Gabrielli & Lund, 2020; Van Lancker & Parolin, 2020; Vargas & Sanchez, 2020). As a response, and considering this year’s goal of developing caring classrooms, the summer program focused on providing a safe and caring learning experience for children living in marginalized situations by following SEL tenets and trauma-informed guidelines. Considering research-based concerns related to how SEL and trauma-informed practices (TIP) have become commodified and packaged in ways that can lead practitioners away from some important original intentions, such as supporting the whole child through building skills in emotional intelligence and conflict resolution, strengths-based and cultural competence perspectives were included in the program design and implementation as well (Boldt et al., 2020).

2.2. Digital learning

Digital learning continues to reshape education. Overall, there has been an increase in digital learning for elementary students in and out of school (Rideout, 2017). Even before COVID, school districts were already looking for ways to incorporate digital learning as a part of learning in schools (Lauricella et al., 2020). This is in part due to issues regarding access, but it is also due to increased pressure for children to utilize technology to complete required content standards (Darling-Hammond, 2015). Digital literacy and media literacy have been used as terms that detail the skills that children need to access and use technology in effective ways (Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015; Gilster, 1997). In part due to that push, elementary schools and English/Language Arts classrooms have increased demand to incorporate “new literacies” into their frameworks (Reynolds, 2016). In creating a framework for digital learning, Reynolds (2016) identifies six practices that define digital learning: (a) create, (b) manage, (c) publish, (d) socialize, (e) research, and (f) surf/play.

Despite assertions that children are digital natives (Prensky, 2009), many children lack the basic skills necessary to access and use technology, in particular in these multifaceted ways (Bennett & Maton, 2010; Reynolds, 2016). Studies have documented how the use of technology can contribute to better reading, mathematics, and other skills (Suhr et al., 2010; Wachira & Keengwe, 2011). However, there is literature suggesting that how technology is used is as important as if it is used (Tarbutton, 2018). Despite the documented benefits of incorporating technology in the classroom, schools that serve marginalized populations of students lack the resources to provide access to technology for students (Banister & Reinhart, 2011; Ertmer & Ottenbreit Leftwich, 2010; Wachira & Keengwe, 2011). This impacts students whether they are in the classroom or utilizing technology provided by the school in their homes.

2.3. Caring digital classrooms

Technology has been widely cited as a potential for creating caring, inclusive diverse classrooms (Obi et al., 2016; Prensky, 2013; Tarbutton, 2018; Wadmany & Kliachko, 2014). However, most of that research has been on utilizing technology within a face-to-face classroom setting. Utilizing technology as the delivery method in k-12, and creating a digital caring classroom, has not been studied as widely (Sawchuck & Sparks, 2020). However, the arrival of COVID-19 (a global pandemic) in 2020 has changed the research landscape. As one researcher noted, “it is clear that the shift to e-learning provided important opportunities that conventional ‘business-as-usual’ teaching models could not. I had to reassess my course material as well as my mode of teaching and learning” (Hutchinson, 2020). The studies of individual teaching practices, caring digital classrooms, and transitioning to digital learning have been increasing dramatically (Burgess & Sivertsen, 2020; Dhawan, 2020; Jaeger & Blaabaek, 2020).

Despite the research on remote learning due to COVID-19, the factors dictating the necessity of caring classrooms—such as systemic inequities and mental health’s impact on student achievement—are more prevalent than ever (Dorn et al., 2020). “Most studies have found that full-time online learning does not deliver the academic results of in-class instruction” (Dorn et al., 2020, p. 3). Dorn et al. (2020) warn that in all three scenarios run in their study (1: return to in-class schooling fall 2020; return to in-class schooling January 2021; return to in-class schooling fall 2021) students lose four months of learning at a minimum even when participating fully online. The warning is that racially and economically marginalized students are going to be most impacted by these gaps. “Only 60 percent of low-income students are regularly logging into online instruction … . [and] engagement rates are also lagging in schools serving predominantly black and Hispanic students; just 60 to 70 percent are logging in regularly” (Dorn et al., 2020, p. 5). This points to the additional difficulty for teachers; even when a caring classroom is created, will students be able to participate?

Additionally, gaps exist in teachers’ knowledge of trauma-informed pedagogy (Van der Kolk, 2014). Trauma can, of course, be related to emotional or physical neglect or abuse and household inequities. Increasingly, research notes the trauma of a pandemic on children (Pate, 2020). Pate notes that “even when teaching students remotely, teachers can engender safe and supportive environments that improve students’ ability to engage and learn” (Pate, 2020, p. 1). There are now multiple briefs, including Pate (2020), offering specific tips for teachers’ trauma-informed pedagogy in the digital environment. Trauma-informed pedagogy shares many characteristics with culturally relevant pedagogy—it requires a focus on the needs of the individual, it requires student choice, and it requires a reframing of how teachers evaluate student behavior (Paris, 2012; Pate, 2020). Thus, the increase in publications on trauma-informed pedagogy will assist teachers in creating caring classrooms—digital or in-person—(Collerd, 2020; Sawchuck & Sparks, 2020).

3. Materials and methods

The purpose of the established summer program is to tackle the historic inequities students from economically disadvantaged homes experience. Students from economically disadvantaged homes lose more ground in learning in what has come to be known as a “summer slide” (Allington et al., 2010; McCombs et al., 2015). This summer slide occurs when there is no access to formal summer academic learning. The current pandemic compounds this reality for students who will experience a disproportionate widening of the existing opportunity gap (Allington & McGill-Franzen, 2018; Allington et al., 2010). Thus, this summer research project investigated how moving an established summer program to an online setting allowed for the creation of caring digital spaces. This was a qualitative case study utilizing the summer digital program as the bounded system (Stake, 1995).

3.1. Context of the study

To integrally address the needs of the students in the summer program, the preservice teachers’ training included sessions on both trauma-informed care and cultural competency from a clinical social work perspective. SEL programming, as a universal approach in schools, is a helpful strategy, but sometimes it is simply not enough. There is a need for a more integrated approach that holds both SEL and trauma-informed care (TIC) approaches to address the needs of youths struggling with trauma (Collin-Vézina et al., 2020; Owens et al., 2022). Consequently, the recruited PSTs had the opportunity to understand what trauma is from a psychological perspective, why trauma-informed practices have proven to be effective, how to honor the impact of trauma and potential for recovery, and how to avoid re-traumatization when working with the kids and their parents (Báez et al., 2019).

Social work’s strengths perspective added the importance of recognizing positive aspects in every child and opening-up the cultural dialogue. By social work values, the importance of finding worth, embracing and respecting individuals, their relationships, and the environment was the training’s underline (Kratt, 2018). The United States is more racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse than ever before. Estimates report by 2060, more than half of all Americans will belong to a minority group with the most significant growth projected for bi- and multi-racial, Asian, and Hispanic groups (Colby & Ortman, 2015). Consequently, the program’s teacher preparation training addressed cultural awareness, sensitivity, and best evidence-based practices among PSTs, so they could better support and teach students who come from cultures other than their own (Szucs et al., 2019).

Practices deriving from both these perspectives are by definition what a caring classroom is. Therefore, not only teachers, but every person involved in the summer program, along with its content and activities were aiming to develop, enhance, and strengthen each child as a whole. The program directors made it possible by not only including these relevant topics in the training. They also developed consistent policies for the staff to appropriately interact with both the families and the children, an emergency plan, and best practices guidelines were also designed and shared with the PSTs to ensure a safe and contained development of activities.

3.2. Participants

The PSTs who worked as a part of the summer program were all hired as Federal Work Study students through the America Reads program.

Table

Tutor Name	Ethnicity	Age
Anna	Multi-racial	23
Krystal	African American	20
Cam	African American	21
Violet	Latinx	19
Dina	Latinx	20
Jacqueline	Latinx	21
Jamie	African American	20
Jessica	Latinx	20

Approximately 30 elementary-age students signed up to be a part of the summer literacy program. An average of 20 students attended the program on any given day. Many of the students attended the traditional face-to-face program in previous years. As in those previous face-to-face versions of the program, the majority of the students were from Latinx households.

3.2.1. Caring classroom checklist

The researchers used a caring classroom checklist commonly used in the field of social work (Appendix A). Each preservice teacher and researcher completed the checklist using the instructions included. Those indicators were also used to create an interview protocol, approved by the Institutional Review Board. The interview was therefore another powerful data point where each preservice teacher provided his/her perception of how s/he created a caring digital classroom. This allowed for initial analysis to determine places where there were gaps in what each person experienced and perceived.

3.2.2. Other data sources

The researchers kept logs of weekly email communications between the PSTs. The researchers also kept observation journals and observed at a minimum four times per week in each digital classroom. Those journals were compared and contrasted with the information included in the interviews; the observations were also compared to the caring classroom checklist. Finally, the researchers used orientation and debrief conversation recordings as supplemental data and compared them to the caring classroom checklist data during analysis.

3.3. Creating codes

The very first step in data analysis was to read through each of the interview transcripts for a general sense of what the PSTs experienced. Following this, one researcher created an Excel sheet where each PST’s responses to the caring classroom checklist were entered without names. Each category of the checklist was numbered according to the checklist directions (Appendix A). Then, each researcher went in individually and added her responses. Each researcher then went into the Excel document and looked for places where there were differences that should be explored—say the researchers observed something occurring at a level 2 or 3 and all PSTs rated it a 1 or n/a. Another highlighted emphasis was added when there were obvious discrepancies—the PSTs all listed 1 and the researchers both listed a 4. This allowed for codes to exist immediately in those documents; the interview transcripts had notes from researchers and the Excel sheet with responses to the caring classroom checklist had places of congruence and dissonance.

In addition to the codes created by utilizing the checklist, codes were also created utilizing components of caring in a digital environment by Sitzman and Watson (2017). The text includes evidence of care in digital environments for teachers and students (Sitzman & Watson, 2017). In the caring classroom checklist, several discrepancies between the lived experiences of the PSTs and the observations of the researchers emerged immediately (Appendix B). These were places that needed further exploration or where there were notable differences in opinions. The categories of the caring classroom checklist were grouped with appropriate sections from Sitzman and Watson (2017). Thus, the final piece of data analysis was a document showing which areas of the caring classroom checklist—children need to feel they can be successful; children need to feel a sense of belonging and where have a sense of dignity; children need recognition; and children need power, structure, and positivity—aligned with the caring classroom checklist. When overlaid with the correlating pieces of Sitzman & Watson’s caring digital classroom (Sitzman & Watson, 2017), several themes emerged as important.

4. Results

A process of triangulation was used to extrapolate results from the data. First, observations were conducted by each researcher individually, and all observation notes were put together as one larger unit of data. Additionally, each PST was interviewed, and the answers were compared to the observations of the researchers. This allowed places of alignment and disconnect to appear in the data immediately. Finally, each researcher coded individually across the interviews and observations and created themes that were discussed and finalized. The trustworthiness of the study is clear from the rigorous method of analysis combined with the multiple data points.

4.1. Findings

The findings were two areas where things went relatively well, and two areas identified for growth for the digital program in future iterations. The first two are that there is ongoing engagement for the children in the digital classroom and a high level of accessibility of the teachers and content. The second two are [lack of] design to promote sharing and personal connections and creating a professional digital persona as a teacher. Each of the four themes is included here with data from the observations and interviews. The first two research questions asked how teachers create and enact a digital caring classroom. “Ongoing engagement for children” and “high level of accessibility” are the themes that address those research questions. Additionally, “lack of design to promote sharing” answers that teachers do not always enact a caring digital classroom. The third research question asks if PSTs note mental health as a priority in their digital teaching. A few of the PSTs did indicate the mental health needs of children in their work, but most of them were not aware—or not teaching with skills to show the awareness—that mental health was a priority.

4.1.1. Ongoing engagement for children

Ongoing engagement with students is a category from Sitzman and Watson’s (2017) caring digital classroom text. It most closely relates to the category on the caring classroom checklist of success. “Students need to feel they can be successful” (Bluestein, 2001). In this category, there are six sub-categories. There should be opportunities for each child; there should be an effort to assess ability and address instruction by the teacher; there should be multiple ways to demonstrate proficiency; there should be interpersonal relationships developed; there should be an effort to accommodate all interests; and all learning modalities should be included in lesson planning (Bluestein, 2001). Each sub-category was assessed using a scale of n/a through four. In this section, researchers agreed with PSTs on nearly every sub-category. This was an area where the PSTs did quite well, and children were observed engaging and seeing success. One PST noted that children “loved the video and read aloud done together each morning” and that children saw the PSTs as a “playmate since [they] were alone with a babysitter all the time”.

However, there was one category where there was a disconnect. Researchers did not observe PSTs assess children’s abilities and adjust instruction accordingly. One researcher noted that PSTs “needed more resources where we could do our own thing” (interview). She said she needed help on “how to make sure we can move into something else if we finish the day’s work”. The discrepancy in scores is noted in Table A below.

4.1.2. High level of accessibility

Providing a high level of accessibility in a digital environment is a category in Sitzman and Watson’s (2017) caring digital classroom text. It most closely relates to the category on the caring classroom checklist of “giving students a sense of belonging and providing a space where students keep their dignity” (Bluestein, 2001). In this category, there are five sub-categories. They are to allow children to avoid humiliation; to honor children’s need for respect; to model standards of behavior; to work to eliminate prejudice; and teachers are aware of any put-downs made among students (Bluestein, 2001). In this category, the researchers and PSTs were aligned in three out of five sub-categories. There was a disconnect in two; researchers did not observe PSTs “work to eliminate prejudice” or remain “aware of put-downs”.

4.1.3. Design to promote sharing

Sitzman & Watson’s (Sitzman & Watson, 2017) text suggests that digital classrooms must include course design to promote sharing and personal conversations among participants. This is tied to students’ need for recognition in a caring classroom (Bluestein, 2001). There are six sub-categories in this category: teachers should meet children’s need for attention positively; teachers should reinforce positive behaviors; teachers should communicate positively and regularly with parents; teachers should respect students’ affective needs; teachers should respect confidentiality; and teachers should immediately respond to bullying. The researchers only saw one of these sub-categories as being done consistently by the PSTs; the PSTs did a great job with parent communication. Thus, this category showed researchers a lack of design to promote sharing and personal connection with participants.

4.1.4. Creating a professional digital persona

Sitzman & Watson’s (Sitzman & Watson, 2017) text says that teachers should give feedback individually to each student, convey the belief that each student can succeed in a digital setting, explain online challenges and solutions (and indicate that students are not alone in those challenges), and create clear expectations through netiquette and clear rubrics (p. 65). These structures are aligned with the caring classroom checklists category for students experiencing power, structure, and positivity (Bluestein, 2001). The sub-categories on the checklist for this category are students assist in decisions about learning; students create assignments or choose them; students see positive outcomes; teachers anticipate students’ needs; teachers follow through on requests and demands; teachers are clear on what changes in behavior could impact student promotion, and teachers utilize parents and staff for support. The researchers and PSTs agreed on five out of seven of the sub-categories. The PSTs did indicate that they believed they allowed students to see positive outcomes and that they (PSTs) follow through on requests and demands. The researchers did not see any of the seven sub-categories described or enacted through observations or interviews.

5. Discussion

The first category, “ongoing engagement for children”, may not appear as critical to the research questions. However, when analyzing the sub-components of this category, several things should be highlighted. Children should demonstrate proficiency in multiple ways, and children should develop interpersonal relationships. As noted, the pandemic not only forced children indoors but also created intense feelings of isolation and increased stress (Loades et al., 2020). The mental health of children was included as the third research question, “do PSTs note mental health as a priority in their digital teaching” because of its importance in this digital summer program. Mental health can be addressed, in part, by high levels of engagement.

5.1. Lack of engagement

The disconnects noted in the “high level of accessibility” category are important not only from the interviews with PSTs but they are also noted multiple times in the observation notes of the researchers. The digital environment had many disadvantages. A few of the primary concerns of the PSTs and researchers were that when students disengaged, for example talking with younger siblings and turning off the camera, the PSTs had no way to get them to re-engage until the child returned to the screen. Setting norms was important, but there is very little control over the teacher. Additionally, it was very difficult to engage children in open conversation, which meant that the chat box was the primary form of communication for children during class time.

This is problematic in that while it avoids put-downs, as evidence of a caring classroom it is quite limited. There is no opportunity for a PST to plan a socially just lesson where all voices are equally valued if the children are not speaking only because they must use the chat. This could mean they type slowly; they are not paying attention, they are afraid to speak, etc. This limitation meant that the critical component listed in the caring classroom checklist of working to eliminate prejudice was only truly possible through the activities led by the teacher. The researchers believe that this may be the single most important finding of the study. A caring and just classroom can only be truly possible digitally if the children are able to lead the work and engage the way they would in a classroom. This is well-documented two years post-lockdown (Guzzo et al., 2022).

5.2. Teacher dispositions and professional digital personas

The final theme that was evident in the data was “creating a professional digital persona”. While the PSTs did a beautiful job of literally following the Sitzman and Watson (2017) definition (by providing feedback on assignments and setting expectations), there were critical components of a “digital persona” not observed or evident in the interview data. For example, a professional digital persona also requires “expressing enthusiasm for online teaching and learning” (Sitzman & Watson, 2017, p. 66). For teachers, dispositions are assessed throughout PST programs (Darling-Hammond, 2015; Simons, Baten, & Vanhees, 2020). These dispositions go beyond the technical requirements of teaching (i.e. assessing and providing feedback) and require teachers to show that they are prepared to be effective (Darling-Hammond, 2015; Simons, Baten, & Vanhees, 2020).

The connection to the caring classroom checklist for this theme is tied to children making decisions about their learning, feeling engaged in the process of learning, and seeing teachers follow through on assignments and requests. The data indicates that the PSTs believed they provided appropriate follow-through and allowed for students to see positive outcomes. One PST noted “we [the two PSTs] gave lots of positive feedback, and we questioned them all the time”. However, another noted “There is a lot of opportunity in a camp like this to have deep conversations, and kids had a LOT to say. I feel like we just didn’t use up the dead space well at all. I wanted to ask more about what went well academically, and I wanted to help the kids with things they would need when school does start back”. When taken together with the lack of observation of allowing children to make decisions about assignments or learning platforms, this appeared to equate to a lack of engagement for many of the children. It is unclear from the data if this is a limitation due to the inexperience of the PSTs with the digital environment or general inexperience with allowing children to have feedback in the learning process.

5.3. Mental health during lockdown

While a few PSTs noted areas that could impact mental health, none of them explicitly noted mental health as a concern. Considering what the world learned soon after the COVID-19 lockdown, this is disappointing. Panchal et al. (2021) report that “quarantines and lockdowns are states of isolation that are psychologically distressing. Young people, who are at higher risk of developing mental health problems … may be particularly vulnerable” (p. 2). While mental health needs were not noted specifically, PSTs did pay attention to the needs of children. “I learned so much—for example, that we have to be careful to think of how the kids will take each thing we say. I didn’t know that about teaching—you have to think so much before you speak”. Another noted that “3 hours was too little time with the kids. They just needed a little extra time with us and we didn’t know what to do”. In both cases, without explicitly stating it, the PST is taking the mental health of the child in his/her care into consideration and describing that as important. As early as 2011, researchers found that teachers must support children’s mental health needs in school for academic achievement (Reinke et al., 2011).

Creating a course design to promote sharing, tied to students’ need to feel heard and have their affective needs met, was a particular area of weakness. The promotion of sharing, a tool for empathy, was critical for mental health. However, the technological tools proved quite difficult for PSTs, children, and families to navigate. One tutor noted that “Zoom went really well once there was only one access link. The parents were upset and confused that first week, so it was helpful to have them all on one link”. The parent component is critical; “parents report[ed] they spent much more time engaged in learning with their students while they were in an online school than they spent when students were enrolled in a traditional school” (Curtis & Werth, 2015, p. 179; Kelly et al., 2020). Another PST found that “there were some individual internet problems and some tech difficulties—especially SeeSaw, but we were able to kind of roll with it”. While the PSTs stated wanting personal connections, the design of the course did not facilitate deeply meaningful conversations that would lead to those connections. The researchers believe this can be alleviated in future iterations of the program by choosing the platforms and technologies to be utilized for the PSTs prior to the program.

6. Conclusions

Writing this article two years following this summer experience provides an opportunity to connect our own conclusions to what the literature tells us post-COVID. With the return of face-to-face schooling, our summer program has also returned to face-to-face. The most important tenets included in this study’s findings—engagement for learners, high levels of accessibility of content, designing curriculum to promote sharing, and professionalism of teachers are all as critical for face-to-face learning as online. Post-COVID, the mental health components in each of these requirements (i.e. engaging students to keep them involved in learning; making sure all content is designed for all children and all abilities; designing curriculum to promote community and sharing of children of both personal and professional personas; and professionalism of teachers including taking care of selves, community, and family while caring for what Delpit (2006) calls other people’s children) are more important than ever before.

Unfortunately, the researchers do not have a better design for if we ever pivot to digital summer programming in the future; this is also now common in the literature (Guzzo et al., 2022; Ladson-Billings, 2021). However, we consider our program fortunate that the online version deepened our commitment to addressing inequities in education (Ladson-Billings, 2021). Further, post-COVID, our work has been deeply integrated into two local school districts and several local communities based upon the findings in this study. Finally, there is now global recognition of the mental health impacts of COVID-19 (Samji et al., 2021). This study showed us those impacts prior to the widespread observations that all children have now experienced PTSD due to an Adverse Childhood Experience. This study adds to that literature by emphasizing the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 on children from marginalized communities and ways that a caring community can be enacted.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Appendix A:

Caring Classroom Checklist (adapted from Bluefield, 2001)

On my very first day as a teacher, one of my new students approached me, looked me squarely in the eye, and announced: “I don’t do reading.” Only a few hours into my career, and here was a child telling me that I need not bother teaching her reading — she’d tried it and had enough.

Like this child, all of my students had experienced various degrees of failure and frustration in their school careers, and all had devised a variety of techniques to insulate themselves from further stress and discomfort. Some shrank into seats in the back, making themselves as small as possible. Others appeared unapproachable and intimidating. I had students who already knew everything, and others who professed helplessness in the face of even the most uncomplicated tasks. For each, the goal was the same: safety. So much energy and instructional time are diverted to dealing with these “survival” behaviors in the course of a teaching day. Wouldn’t it be more efficient to establish classrooms that are caring and emotionally safe places, where these self-protective measures are unnecessary?

The following checklist can help you determine the degree to which your classroom (or school) practices the kinds of beliefs and behavior that contribute to an emotionally safe community. Increase the level of agreement with any item and you are likely to see improvements in achievement, learning, on-task behavior, commitment, cooperation, and student responsibility.

Use the following scale to rate each item:

1. Always Do

2. Sometimes Do

3. Rarely Do

4. Never Do

Please Note: The complete checklist is available here.

The Need for SuccessEvery child has the right to experience success in school. And yet, given the range of abilities, intelligences, and learning preferences we encounter with any group of children, this goal can become quite a challenge. The “success” dimension of safety means that we assess the students that come to us and reach out to them, wherever they are, instructionally. We back up, revise, regroup, and move ahead, depending on student needs. We set the bar at just the right height to challenge each student at a level at which success is, indeed, a possibility.

• I provide opportunities for success to each child in the classroom, encouraging growth from wherever they start.

• I assess student ability and adjust instruction to maintain an appropriate level of challenge for each.

• I offer students a variety of ways to demonstrate their knowledge, intelligence, and mastery.

• I attempt to build interpersonal skills, positive social behaviors, character skills, and resistance to failure.

• I attempt to accommodate a variety of interests, motivators, modality strengths, and learning preferences in my directions, instructions, and assignments.

• I attempt to accommodate tactile, kinesthetic, visual, verbal, and auditory learners.

• I make sure kids have ample opportunities to move around and help them learn to maintain an appropriate level of alertness without disturbing others.

The Need for Belonging, Dignity, and RespectHow many conflicts and outbursts that we see in school are the result of our students’ inability to meet their needs for identity, belonging, respect, or dignity in healthy ways? This component means eliminating double standards, being conscious of how our students are treated, and holding kids accountable for their behavior without violating their dignity or sense of self-worth.

• I avoid using humiliation, sarcasm, ridicule, anger, impatience, or manifestations of disappointment in dealing with students.

• I honor students’ needs for respect, dignity, purpose, success, acceptance, attention, and motivation.

• I model standards of behavior, language, and tone of voice that I expect from my students.

• I work to eliminate prejudice toward students based on racial or cultural background; physical appearance; sexual orientation; academic, artistic, or athletic competence.

• I strive to stay aware of put-downs or slurs expressed by students or staff, responding immediately.

The Need for Power, Structure, and PositivityWe all need a combination of structure (limits) and autonomy (power and control) in our lives. Much of the defiance, rebelliousness, and acting out I see in the classroom reflects our students’ struggle to survive. When teachers use their authority to set limits and offer choices, and follow through consistently and immediately when limits have been violated, this win-win approach can reduce conflict and increase commitment and cooperation.

• I sometimes allow and encourage students to make decisions about their learning (what, where, with whom, how, or how much).

• I sometimes allow students to create, design, or renegotiate assignments to make them personally meaningful.

• I motivate through access to positive outcomes, rather than avoidance or fear of negative outcomes. I emphasize the positive consequences of cooperation.

• I consciously anticipate what students, teachers, and parents will need in various situations in order to prevent problems from occurring.

• I follow through immediately, avoiding warnings and threats.

• I make students and their parents aware of changes in behavior or performance that could affect grades or promotion.

• I utilize parents, administration, and support staff for feedback and support (not for punishing students).

The Need for Recognition, Attention, and Emotional SafetyAre your students unable to function effectively when they get angry, frustrated, or sad? Have you ever had a student explode after holding in feelings about an upsetting experience? In an emotionally safe environment, teachers stay on top of the emotional energy in the classroom. They listen to (or refer) students in need and support kids in their ability to solve their problems peacefully.

• I attempt to meet students’ needs for attention in positive, constructive, and proactive ways.

• I reinforce positive behavior with positive outcomes.

• I communicate with parents, regularly and frequently, about what their children are doing well.

• I respect students’ affective needs and am committed to listening and supporting their feelings and problem-solving skills in positive ways.

• I respect confidentiality to the degree that doing so will not put anyone in danger.

• I immediately respond to incidents involving any form of bullying, harassment, or threat to safety.

Each goal statement has immense implications for how we structure our classrooms, our relationships, and our priorities. One hopes this checklist will challenge us all to collaborate in new ways and avail ourselves of resources, disciplines, technologies, and strategies we may previously have not considered, or which may not have been available to us in the past. So many people in the education community stand to benefit when we keep the big picture in mind, working our way through the smaller goals to inaugurate a dramatic and positive change.

Jane Bluestein, Ph.D., is an award-winning author of several books for teachers and parents, including 21st Century Discipline (Frank Schaffer Publishing, 1999), Being a Successful Teacher (Frank Schaffer Publishing, 1992), and Mentors, Masters and Mrs. MacGregor: Stories of Teachers Making a Difference (Health Communications, Inc., 1995). This article is adapted from material for her book, Creating Emotionally Safe Schools (Health Communications, Inc.).

Recovered from: https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/create-caring-classroom/

Table A1. Children need to feel they can be successful. 1 – always occurred; 2 – often occurred; 3 – rarely occurred; 4 – never occurred

A	R	P 1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	Topic	Specific
1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	2	1	need for success	opp for each child
4	3	1	2	1	1	2	1	1	1	*	assess ability and adjust
2	3	2	1	2	2	1	1	1	1	*	offer ways to demonstrate
1	2	4	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	build interpersonal
1	1	1	1	2	1	1	2	4	1	*	accommodate interests
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	1	4	2	*	modalities

Appendix B:

Ratings/Codes for Interviews

Table

A	R	P 1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8	Topic	Specific
1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	2	1	need for success	opp for each child
4	3	1	2	1	1	2	1	1	1	*	assess ability and adjust
2	3	2	1	2	2	1	1	1	1	*	offer ways to demonstrate
1	2	4	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	build interpersonal
1	1	1	1	2	1	1	2	4	1	*	accommodate interests
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	1	4	2	*	modalities
n/a	n/a	3	n/a	1	n/a	3	2	4	1	*	movement
1	1	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	belonging, dignity, respect	avoid humiliation
1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	honor need for respect
1	2	2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	model standards of behavior
4	4	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	work to eliminate prejudice
4	3	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	aware of put-downs
4	4	1	1	1	1	1	2	4	1	need for power, structure, positivity	decisions about learning
4	2	2	2	2	4	1	2	4	2	*	create assignments
3	2	n/a	1	2	1	1	1	1	1	*	positive outcomes
4	4	n/a	2	1	n/a	2	1	4	1	*	anticipate needs
n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	2	2	2	1	n/a	1	*	follow through
3	n/a	2	n/a	3	n/a	2	1	n/a	1	*	changes in behavior impacting promotion
3	2	1	1	2	2	2	1	n/a	1	*	utilize parents, staff, for support
4	3	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	need for recognition, attention, and emotional safety	meet needs for attention positively
4	4	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	reinforce positive behaviors
2	2	3	n/a	3	4	2	2	4	2	*	communicate positively regularly w/parents
4	3	1	2	1	1	1	1	2	1	*	respect students’ affective needs
n/a	n/a	2	n/a	1	1	1	1	1	1	*	respect confidentiality
n/a	n/a	1	n/a	1	n/a	1	1	1	1	*	immediately respond to bullying
	worth interrogating with other data
	discrepancy in what I saw with what they saw