





































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


 Global Journal of Education and Allied  

Research (GJEAR) 
Volume.14, Number 7; July-2023; 

ISSN: 2837-3707 | Impact Factor: 7.80 

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

Published By: Zendo Academic Publishing 

 

 

pg. 1 

FOSTERING SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT IN ONLINE LEARNING: LESSONS FROM AN 

ADULT ESL PROGRAM IN FLORIDA 

 

 
1Emily Grace Thompson, 2Benjamin Michael Carter 
 

Article Info  Abstract 

Keywords:  
Online Education, Social 

Infrastructure, Covid-19 

Pandemic, Technology-Based 

Learning Tools, Adult Esl 

Program 

 

 The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a significant shift in education, 

highlighting the necessity of enriched social aspects within online 

learning environments. This study investigates the potential of the 

internet and related technology to function as effective social 

infrastructure in online education. During the pandemic, students 

encountered mental health challenges due to the abrupt transition from 

in-person to online learning, emphasizing the importance of social 

connections. This research applies Bielaczyc's social infrastructure 

framework to an adult English as a Second Language (ESL) program 

in Walton County, Florida, which swiftly adopted online learning amid 

the pandemic. The framework comprises four interconnected 

dimensions: cultural beliefs, practices, socio-techno-spatial relations, 

and interaction with the outside world. We explore the application of 

this framework to the online ESL program, wherein Zoom and the 

internet serve as the primary technology-based learning tools. By 

investigating how these dimensions operate collectively, the study 

sheds light on effective strategies to integrate technology-based 

learning tools while nurturing a conducive social infrastructure. This 

research contributes to the existing literature by offering a practical 

perspective on employing Bielaczyc's framework in the context of 

pandemic-induced online education. 
 

 

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 

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

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


Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 2 

[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 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].  

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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 3 

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  

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 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 4 

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.  

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.  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 5 

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 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.  

 

 

 



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 6 

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  

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.  



Global Research Journal of Management and Social Sciences (GRJMSS) Vol. 14 (7) 
 

pg. 7 

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.  

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.  

  

  

  


