









































THE USE OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN ONLINE ADULT EDUCATION: THEORY AND APPLICATION


 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 46 

DESIGNING SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN ONLINE EDUCATION: 

LESSONS FROM AN ADULT ESL PROGRAM IN FLORIDA DURING 

THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC 

 

 
1Susan E. Baerand 2 George R. Larkin 

1School of Public Affairs and Administration, The University of Kansas 
2School of Public Policy and Administration, Walden University 

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of social components in online 

education, particularly as learners confront mental health challenges due to the loss of social interaction 

associated with the shift to virtual learning. This paper examines the concept of social infrastructure in 

online education, focusing on an adult English as a Second Language (ESL) program in Walton County, 

Florida, that was compelled to rapidly transition to online learning during the pandemic. The authors adopt 

Bielaczyc’s social infrastructure framework, which identifies the dimensions of social infrastructure required 

to integrate technology-based learning tools into online classrooms. These dimensions involve cultural 

beliefs, practices, socio-techno-spatial relations, and interaction with the outside world. The paper applies 

the framework to the adult ESL program in Walton County by analyzing student-teacher-cyberspace 

configurations, student interaction with the outside world, and bridging on-tool and off-tool learning 

activities. The authors assert that thriving online learning environments with technology-based tools must 

broaden beyond just the tools themselves and encompass the development of social infrastructure, which 

shapes the manner in which learners and instructors interact and acquire knowledge. 

Keywords: COVID-19, online education, social infrastructure, adult education, English as a Second 

Language (ESL), technology-based learning tools. 

 

1.INTRODUCTION 

The COVID-19 pandemic harshly affected many areas including in-person and online education. Although 

many educational institutions at all levels offered online learning programs prior to the COVID-19 

pandemic, the pandemic illuminated the need for an enhanced social component in online education [1,2]. 

During the pandemic, many students experienced mental health concerns such as depression and anxiety as a 

result of undergoing an abrupt transition from in-person learning to online learning and the loss of social 

contact this transition entailed [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. These mental health concerns raise the question of 

whether and how the internet and related technology can also serve as an effective form of social 

infrastructure for students and instructors participating in online education.   

Social infrastructure is generally defined as the physical places and organizations that shape the way people 

interact [11]. Social infrastructure does not equate to social capital but instead consists of the physical 

conditions that determine whether social capital develops. Social infrastructure may be discussed more 

specifically in relationship to education and technology.[12] find that online learning is not only a cognitive 



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 47 

process but is also situated within a social context. [13] contend that technologies for learning have 

considerable social infrastructures. [14] defines social infrastructure as the social structures that support 

learning with a technology-based learning tool.   

Bielaczyc developed the social infrastructure framework to make instructors’ decisions affecting social 

structures clear and to organize them into a methodical framework that highlights key classroom design 

elements. The framework explores dimensions of social infrastructure needed  

to integrate technology-based learning tools into classroom practice, because successful learning 

environments with technology-based learning tools extend beyond the tools themselves to include the design 

of social infrastructure. The four dimensions of the social infrastructure framework include the cultural 

beliefs dimension, practices dimension, socio-techno-spatial relations dimension, and interaction with the 

outside world dimension. Although defined separately, the four dimensions of the framework operate 

interdependently [15].   

This paper adds to the existing literature surrounding Bielaczyc’s social infrastructure framework by 

applying the framework to an adult education program during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the 

purpose of this paper is to describe Bielaczyc’s social infrastructure framework and to apply the framework 

to an adult English as a Second Language (ESL) program in Walton County, Florida that was forced to 

quickly implement online learning because of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we examine the 

internet and Zoom more specifically as the technologybased learning tool used in the online ESL program. 

In the first section of this paper, we describe the four dimensions of the social infrastructure framework.   

2.THE SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK: THEORY 

2.1. The Cultural Beliefs Dimension  

The cultural beliefs dimension serves as the first element of the social infrastructure framework and refers to 

the mindset that shapes classroom life. When one designs an online adult education classroom, the 

framework calls for the consideration of four areas of cultural beliefs. The first area involves how learning 

and knowledge are conceptualized, and this conceptualization concerns how students and instructors view 

the process of learning. An appropriate online learning environment involves students as generators of 

knowledge rather than an environment where knowledge is considered fixed or owned by the instructor [16].  

The second and third areas of cultural beliefs include consideration of how a student’s social identity is 

understood and consideration of how an instructor’s social identity is understood. The conceptualization of a 

student’s social identity refers to how students view themselves as learners as well as how they view other 

students in the class and others in their social network with regard to their own learning. For example, 

students might see other students as learning resources, team members, or competitors. An instructor’s 

social identity involves the way instructors view themselves and the way students view the role of 

instructors in the learning process. Introducing a technology-based learning tool such as the internet into the 

classroom has been shown to move an instructor’s role from a central authority figure to a facilitator [17].  

The fourth area of cultural beliefs involves how students and instructors view the purposes and uses of a 

particular technology-based learning tool which is the internet and Zoom in the case of this paper. Cultural 

beliefs concern questions about how students are meant to use the tool to carry out learning objectives. 

Another question involves how the tool will fit into the overall workings of the classroom [18].  



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 48 

2.2.The Practices Dimension  

The practices dimension of the social infrastructure framework involves the ways that instructors and 

students participate in both online and offline learning activities relating to the technologybased learning 

tool. When instructors explore this dimension of classroom design for online adult learners, they need to 

consider four areas that include student activities, participant structures of students, participant structures of 

teachers, and coordinating on-tool and off-tool activities. In selecting student activities, instructors need to 

determine whether student activity selection will be left open to students or whether it will be semistructured 

or tightly controlled. When they design student participant structures, instructors need to decide if students 

will work individually or in groups and how the work will be organized. Instructors also need to consider 

their own participant structures. For example, teachers might observe or intervene in student learning 

activities. Teachers might also serve as a coach, role model, or discussion leader. Finally, instructors need to 

coordinate on-tool activities that use the technology-based learning tool and off-tool learning activities that 

take place away from the tool. Blending on-tool and off-tool learning activities allows students to appreciate 

how what they are learning with the technologybased tool transfers to the real world. This type of blending 

also provides multiple forms for learning [19]. Although participant structures in the online classroom vary, 

the social infrastructure framework’s practices dimension proves consistent with the claim that instructors 

serve as initiators of interpersonal or social processes in the classroom [20].   

2.3.The Socio-Techno-Spatial Relations Dimension  

The socio-techno-spatial relations dimension refers to how the organization of physical space and 

cyberspace support student interaction with the technology-based learning tool. This paper focuses on 

student-teacher-cyberspace configuration sand cyberspace-physical-space relations as the design 

considerations for this dimension. The student-teacher-cyberspace configurations design consideration 

proves relevant when students are able to interact online. Instructors should consider whether students work 

separately or collaboratively in cyberspace, how student products are organized in cyberspace, and whether 

student online work is visible to all or whether students have private work areas in cyberspace. Instructors 

also need to consider their own use of the technology-based learning tool and their own configuration in 

cyberspace. A question to be answered includes whether instructors should be online and use the learning 

tool themselves. The cyberspace-physical-space relations design consideration focuses on the ways that 

students’ physical world is brought into cyberspace and vice versa. Aspects of students’ physical world may 

be brought into cyberspace for a number of reasons including giving students more ownership and 

deepening their relationship to their online work [21].  

2.4.The Interaction with the “Outside World” Dimension  

The interaction with the outside world dimension involves how students interact, both online and offline, 

with people outside their immediate classroom context. Key aspects of student interaction with the outside 

world include bringing in knowledge from the outside, extending the audience for student work, and 

interacting with others. Instructors might bring in knowledge from the outside by having experts in a chosen 

field visit the virtual classroom. Extending the audience for student work might involve students making 

virtual presentations to an outside audience. Interacting with others involves students engaging in 

bidirectional interactions with the outside world such as virtually exchanging ideas with peers in other 

locations [22].  

3.THE SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK:APPLICATION 



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 49 

3.1. Background  

In this section, we describe the application of the social infrastructure framework to an online adult ESL 

program in Walton County, Florida. The population in Walton County is growing quickly, and the county is 

one of the top ten counties in the United States in percentage growth from 2017 to 2018 [23]. A faith-based 

organization operates Walton County’s ESL program to help immigrants obtain the language skills 

necessary to function in their new home and become citizens of the United States. Walton County attracts 

students in the ESL program due to the county’s economic opportunities. Many immigrants, mostly Spanish 

speaking, have come to Walton County to take service sector jobs created by increased tourism and 

population growth. Immigrants often learn about potential job opportunities in Walton County from family 

members or friends already living there.  

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Walton County ESL program offered in-person classes on Tuesday 

mornings and evenings. The ESL program offered courses from beginning to advanced levels and placed 

students based on pre-enrollment assessments. The program scheduled and coordinated holidays, seasonal 

breaks, and summer vacation with the local school system calendar. Once students completed the ESL 

courses, they also were offered a course to help them prepare for the United States Citizenship Examination. 

The logistics of the courses changed drastically with the COVID-19 lockdown in mid-March 2020.    

By late summer 2020, the organizers of the Walton County ESL program began to make plans to resume 

instruction in the fall. The program leadership and a vast majority of the instructors preferred an online 

rather than in-person format due to continued threats from COVID-19. With some limited assistance from a 

statewide faith-based ESL coordinating organization, the Walton County group decided to use Zoom as the 

primary technology-based learning tool for online instruction. The remainder of this section will illustrate 

how the various dimensions of the social infrastructure framework outlined at the beginning of this paper 

have or have not guided the development of the program’s online ESL instruction.   

3.2.The Cultural Beliefs Dimension  

The learning process for Walton County’s ESL program prior to the onset of COVID-19 was conducted as 

part of a larger education and socialization process. The weekly in-person instruction began with food, 

songs, and fellowship. Childcare services were provided, and class members were encouraged to bring their 

children. Participants who had reached an advanced degree of knowledge in the program would often serve 

as mentors to new students. Instructors designed learning activities to encourage interactions within 

individual classrooms in order for students to learn from one another. As a result, students served as 

generators of knowledge and learning resources for each other in the ESL program’s in-person learning 

format.   

The first task in the ESL program’s move to an online environment was to ensure that students would 

participate in the program. To this end, the Walton County ESL group developed an extensive outreach 

program to encourage student participation. The retention of existing students was given priority over the 

recruitment of new students. In addition, to enhance teachers’ use of the Zoom learning tool in the online 

classroom, the sponsoring organization gave them Zoom subscriptions and instruction in its use. It also 

encouraged teachers to attend statewide workshops on remote instruction via Zoom. Instructors encouraged 

students to view the purpose and use of the Zoom learning tool as the means that would allow instruction to 

continue and friendships to flourish even in the absence of in-person contacts.  



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 50 

Despite these efforts, the abrupt move to online instruction negatively impacted the social identity of both 

students and teachers. Students who previously viewed their instructors as knowledgeable friends and 

facilitators who helped with the learning process in the in-person program now saw them only as remote 

faces appearing via Zoom on a computer screen or tablet device. In the Walton County ESL program’s 

online setting, instructors were deprived of the informal interactions with students that allow them to form 

strong personal relationships and tailor instruction to individual needs. In the case of this program, the 

introduction of technology threatened rather than enhanced the favorable social identities of both students 

and instructors that served as the foundation of the in-person ESL program.  

3.3. The Practices Dimension  

The internet and a few of the digital tools associated with it have allowed the adult ESL classes to continue 

during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although Zoom conferencing has been the primary technology-based 

learning tool, other learning tools such as email and WhatsApp have proven to be valuable resources. Prior 

to the pandemic, the ESL program mainly used face-to-face contact as the means of outreach to potential 

students. During the pandemic, email allowed instructors and course organizers to contact potential students 

to inform them of available online ESL opportunities. Instructors and students also utilized WhatsApp as a 

means of communication between instructional sessions.   

Moving instruction from in-person classroom sessions to online Zoom sessions required adjustments to 

student activities and the participant structures of students and instructors. Prior to the pandemic much of the 

in-class instruction involved students interacting with one another and the instructor. Instructors teaching via 

Zoom had to adjust course materials to facilitate more individual work. The new format and materials have 

resulted in much less interaction between students. Instructor interaction with students has become more 

formal and individually directed, and informal and spontaneous interactions with groups of students have 

greatly decreased.  

3.4.The Socio-Techno-Spatial Relations Dimension  

The ESL program’s initial move to online instruction occurred due to fears about the spread of the COVID-

19 virus. Many of the students enrolled in the ESL program were at high risk of contracting COVID-19. 

Consequently, one of the major motivations for moving to a virtual classroom was to separate students from 

one another and from the instructor. Planning regarding the socio-techno-spatial relations dimension that 

might have accompanied a more traditional transition to remote learning did not happen due to the unique 

and time-sensitive nature of the transition required during the pandemic.   

The Zoom platform, chosen as the preferred method of instructional delivery, did not allow for extensive 

online interactions among students in the program. Traditional online learning management systems, such as 

Blackboard, have features that allow groups of students to interact in a cyber-classroom setting. The Zoom 

system allows some student interaction. However, instructors were not experts in utilizing it for sub-group 

interactions. Therefore, most of the work in the Zoom classroom involved individual interactions between 

the student and the instructor.   

3.5.The Interaction with the “Outside World” Dimension  

The desire to socially distance during the COVID-19 pandemic served as the primary factor that led the ESL 

program to transition to an online learning environment, and it severely limited any efforts to interact with 

the outside world in an offline setting. Volunteers comprised the entire instructional staff for the ESL 

program, and the logistical challenges in arranging outside interactions in the online classroom substantially 



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 51 

limited these interactions. As a result, students did not engage in bidirectional interactions with the outside 

world in either an online or offline setting throughout their online ESL education during the pandemic.  

4.CONCLUSION 

The purpose of this paper was to describe the social infrastructure framework and explore its application in 

the design and implementation of an online adult education program that abruptly transitioned to the use of 

Zoom for instructional purposes. The framework was retroactively applied to an online adult ESL program 

in Walton County, Florida that was forced to implement online learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Although it was more abrupt, the process of transitioning to an online learning environment in the adult ESL 

program involved a trajectory of change for both students and instructors which is consistent with findings 

in the literature [24].   

The Walton County ESL program case study also proved similar to some efforts at all levels of education 

forced to rapidly implement online learning as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the pandemic, 

the ESL program’s primary concern was to move online quickly without giving much forethought to the 

social infrastructure that would make technology based online learning efforts successful. The results and 

satisfaction levels of the program’s pandemic forced move to online learning are mixed at best. However, 

educators should not use the results of this sudden COVID-19 induced move to online learning as a 

justification to discontinue future attempts to educate students remotely. In addition,[25] noted the 

significance of school administrators during the COVID-19 pandemic, and [26] found that school principals’ 

use of digital technology during the pandemic was considered adequate according to teachers, indicating that 

effective leadership was important in implementing technology during the pandemic. In the case of the 

Walton County ESL program, there was not an identified leader driving the use of technology during the 

pandemic which may have also influenced this study’s results.   

In addition, abruptly designing an online adult education program during a pandemic is specific to a 

particular and hopefully rare time and place [27]. Thoughtfully developing and designing online education 

programs based on a sound social infrastructure framework should improve the online learning experiences 

of adult education students and other students. Future research might examine the social infrastructure 

framework when applied to online adult education programs that have been carefully designed under more 

normal post-pandemic circumstances.  

REFERENCES 

MacMahon, S., Leggett, J., & Carroll, A. (2020) Promoting individual and group regulation through social 

connection: Strategies for remote learning. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 353-363. 
DOI 10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0101  

Strauss, V. (2020, March 30) Five concerns about the mass rush to online learning that shouldn’t be ignored. 
The Washington Post.  

Asanov, I., Flores, F., McKenzie, D., Mensmann, M., & Schulte, M. (2021) Remote-learning, timeuse, and 
mental health of Ecuadorian high-school students during the COVID-19 quarantine. World 

Development, 138.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105225  



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 52 

Hamza, C.A., Ewing, L., Heath, N.L., & Goldstein, A.L. (2021) When social isolation is nothing new: A 

longitudinal study on psychological distress during COVID-19 among university students with and 
without preexisting mental health concerns. Canadian Psychology, 62(1), 20-30. 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cap0000255  

Hauge, C. (2020) Agency with virtual learning: Prioritizing children’s social emotional health in the 

pandemic. Childhood Education, 96(6), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2020.1846391  

Koh, Y. (2021, May 14) Lessons from remote school, captured by twin sisters who pulled through. The Wall 

Street Journal.  

Petersen, A. (2021a, June 7) Helping kids manage anxiety and ease back into activities this summer. The 

Wall Street Journal.  

Petersen, A. (2021b, April 9) Loneliness, anxiety, and loss: the Covid pandemic’s terrible toll on kids. The 
Wall Street Journal.   

Shrier, A. (2021, May 14) To be young and pessimistic in America. The Wall Street Journal.  

St. George, D. & Strauss, V. (2021, January 21) Partly hidden by isolation, many of the nation’s 

schoolchildren struggle with mental health. The Washington Post.  

Klinenberg, E. (2018) Palaces for the people: How social infrastructure can help fight inequality, 

polarization, and the decline of civic life. Broadway Books.  

Gunawardena, C., Flor, N., Gomez, D., & Sanchez, D. (2016) Analyzing social construction of knowledge 

online by employing interaction analysis, learning analytics, and social network analysis. The 

Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(3), 35-60.  

Barkhuus, L. &Lecusay, R. (2012) Social infrastructures as barriers and foundation for informal learning: 

Technology integration in an urban after-school center. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 21, 
81-103.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 
technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 301-329.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 
technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 303-304.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 304-307.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3),305-306.  



 

  

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.1, Number 1; March-2023; 

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

https://zapjournals.com/Journals/index.php/gjear 

 14131 Alder St NW, Andover, Minnesota, USA 

zapjournal@gmail.com, editorial@zapjournals.coom  

 
 

Global Journal of Education and Allied Research (GJEAR) 
pg. 53 

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 305.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 307-310.  

Subramaniam, K. (2016) Teachers’ organization of participation structures for teaching science with 

computer technology. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 25, 527-540.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 310-312.  

Bielaczyc, K. (2006) Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with 

technology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 312-313.  

United  States  Census  Bureau  (2019,  April  18) Where  the  population is  changing. 
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2019/estimates-county-metro.html  

Bielaczyc, K. (2013) Informing design research: Learning from teachers’ designs of social infrastructure. 
The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(2), 258-311.  

Karakose, T., Yirci, R., & Papadakis, S. (2021) Exploring the Interrelationship between COVID-19 Phobia, 
Work–Family Conflict, Family–Work Conflict, and Life Satisfaction among School Administrators 

for Advancing Sustainable Management. Sustainability, 13(15), 8654. MDPI AG. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13158654  

Karakose, T., Polat, H., & Papadakis, S. (2021) Examining Teachers’ Perspectives on School Principals’ 

Digital Leadership Roles and Technology Capabilities during the COVID-19 Pandemic. 
Sustainability, 13(23), 13448. MDPI AG. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su132313448  

Hayek, F.A. (1945) The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35(4), 520-530. 


