Learning online in schools after COVID: a systematic review of research aligned to the science of learning and development

Abstract

This systematic review examines how K-12 online learning has evolved in the post-COVID era, using the Science of Learning and Development (SoLD) framework to analyze whole-child development across five guiding principles. We searched ERIC, Google Scholar, and top educational technology journals for peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2024. After a multi-stage screening process, we identified 27 studies that focused on K-12 online student learning in the post-COVID context. We then coded these studies using the SoLD framework to identify which principles and practices appeared most often and which were most often overlooked. The findings showed that research concentrated on four of the five SoLD principles: Positive Developmental Relationships; Environments Filled with Safety and Belonging; Rich Learning Experiences and Knowledge Development; and Development of Skills, Habits, and Mindsets. However, no studies examined Integrated Support Systems, and several important components of each principle were not captured in the corpus of research. Overall, the evidence suggests that online student learning post-COVID has led to meaningful changes in how teachers design online instruction, how families engage with schools in online settings, and how students develop necessary skills while engaging in online education. However, research has not yet examined how these elements work together as an integrated system to improve student learning.

Introduction

Almost overnight, the COVID pandemic forced schools to switch to online learning. In the Spring of 2020, approximately 77% of public schools and 73% of private schools in the United States shifted to online learning because of school closures (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022). This sudden shift became known as emergency remote learning, and schools were left with little time to plan for this disruption. The scale and suddenness of this disruption placed unprecedented challenges in front of k-12 leaders, teachers, and students. However, the current literature lacks a synthesis of post-COVID, K-12 online learning research through a framework that considers integrated supports and whole-child development. As such, this systematic review synthesizes 27 peer-reviewed studies identified through ERIC, Google Scholar, and searches of top educational technology journals, published between 2020 and 2024, to examine post-COVID, K-12 online learning through the Science of Learning and Development (SoLD) framework (Science of Learning and Development Alliance, 2020).

In this study, we use the term online learning to refer to any instruction in which students and teachers do not interact in person for most of the learning process; this includes virtual, blended, and emergency remote learning. During the pandemic, most schools moved their lessons online almost immediately, often without the tools, training, or support (DiFrancesca and Spencer, 2022). The effectiveness of online learning varied widely, and many students and teachers struggled to adjust (Johnson et al., 2023). Based on a national survey of 107 K-12 teachers from 25 U.S. states, An et al. (2021) found that approximately 60% of teachers found online teaching stressful, and only 19% preferred it to traditional classroom teaching. Teachers mentioned challenges such as a lack of student engagement, work-life imbalance, and unfamiliarity with technology as key sources of stress during the rapid shift to online teaching, underscoring the difficulties posed by the transition.

While in-person teaching resumed post-COVID, online learning has not disappeared; instead, it has become a permanent and crucial component of the K-12 education system. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2022), by the Fall of 2021, 98% of public schools had reopened for full-time in-person learning. However, online learning has become integrated into the K-12 system as a more permanent component of instruction even within traditional face-to-face structures. Nonetheless, shifting learning modalities calls for more research that aligns online learning research with established best practices.

Conceptual framework

The SoLD framework, developed by the Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021, emphasizes that children can learn and thrive when provided with the necessary support and opportunities (Science of Learning and Development Alliance, 2020). A consortium of educational organizations and universities brought together evidence across disparate disciplines indicating that children's experiences, environments, and cultural contexts have a greater influence on their development than genetic factors. The framework highlights that learning does not follow the same well-worn patterns so familiar during the era of standardized testing. Instead, SoLD articulates a research-based argument that each student has their own developmental pathway; with all students capable of deep learning when immersed in the right conditions. Key to these conditions are supportive relationships and positive interactions in the classroom, such as a sense of belonging that triggers brain chemicals associated with feelings of safety. These underlying conditions for learning and development are critical precursors to the more complex brain functions associated with learning and retention (Cantor et al., 2019; Osher et al., 2020; Pellegrino, 2018). SoLD stresses that these conditions are equally important across all learning contexts, including classrooms (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).

As the classroom shifted online during emergency remote learning, these deeply human components of school were particularly tested. As online learning persists as a permanent part of students’ schooling experiences, an important question is whether it can create the conditions necessary for deeper learning development. Key to this inquiry is whether research is emerging that online learning can replicate some of these critical components (Shonkoff, 2020). This systematic review was designed to explore this question.

The SoLD framework outlines five research-based principles that support whole-child development: (1) Integrated Support Systems, (2) Positive Developmental Relationships, (3) Environments Filled With Safety and Belonging, (4) Rich Learning Experiences and Knowledge Development, and (5) Development of Skills, Habits, and Mindset. Each of these principles has multiple subcomponents; we used them as we reviewed the literature and coded the results. By juxtaposing online learning with the SoLD framework, we aimed to understand whether evidence-based practices for student learning in online environments post-COVID are being implemented.

Methods

The review began with a focused literature search of the ERIC database to identify relevant studies on online learning in K-12 settings, limited to post-COVID studies. ERIC was chosen because it is a comprehensive database that captures most education studies and is freely available to the public. The search terms were as follows: (“online learning” OR “e-learning” OR “distance learning” OR “remote learning” OR “virtual learning” OR “online education”) AND (“post COVID*” OR “after COVID*” OR “post coronavirus” OR “after coronavirus” AND “schools*”). An exclusion filter was applied to eliminate studies focused on higher education contexts, using the NOT operator: (“higher education” OR “college” OR “university” OR “post-secondary” OR “postsecondary”). This combination of terms captured studies specifically addressing K-12 online learning in the post-COVID context. The team selected only peer-reviewed articles to ensure consistent quality of the evidence reviewed. We located 60 articles through this initial process.

The systematic screening process involved multiple review stages. In Stage 1, the titles and abstracts of the 60 articles were examined to assess general relevance. For articles that met the preliminary criteria, the full texts were thoroughly reviewed to ensure alignment with the study's focus on K-12 online learning in the post-COVID context. Articles were excluded if they focused on online K-12 learning during COVID without addressing the post-pandemic adaptations. After carefully reviewing the papers, 48 results were excluded as out of scope, leaving 12 articles retained.

For Stage 2, Google Scholar was used to conduct a broader search. Google Scholar was selected as it contains research beyond the mainstream that might not be captured in ERIC. Search terms such as “online learning” and “post-COVID,” combined with “school,” were filtered to include publications from 2020 to 2024 to capture the period most relevant to post-pandemic educational adaptations. Given the large number of results, we focused on screening the first 300 results sorted by relevance. Through this broad search, we successfully identified 14 articles that met the inclusion criteria.

To further enhance the comprehensiveness of the search, we conducted a Stage 3 search targeting the 50 top-tier educational technology journals listed on the Scimago website. This approach aimed to identify additional studies on K-12 online learning in the post-COVID context that might not have appeared in the initial database searches. By accessing each journal's website and searching specific keywords such as “online learning,” “post-COVID,” “after COVID”, and “K-12,” a further 26 articles were identified. Upon closer review at the full paper, 25 articles were excluded because they did not align with the review's focus on post-COVID contexts in K-12 online learning.

This systematic review included 27 studies that met the inclusion criteria for research on K-12 online learning following the initial pandemic crisis. Twelve articles were found in the ERIC database, and 14 studies were identified through Google Scholar. Finally, one article was sourced from a targeted review of top-tier educational technology journals. The selected process is presented in the PRISMA found in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Data analysis

We conducted our analysis of 27 articles guided by the SoLD framework. To structure the inductive coding process, we built a hierarchical codebook in Dedoose, creating grandparent, parent, and child codes based on the multi-tiered SoLD framework. By applying the apriori framework this way, we could consistently link each study's findings to the unique components of the SoLD framework.

Findings

The findings from this review were organized around the five guiding principles of the SoLD framework to describe how post-COVID K-12 online learning supported students’ learning and development. Across the studies, evidence was unevenly distributed, with strong attention paid to Positive Developmental Relationships, Environments Filled With Safety and Belonging, Rich Learning Experiences and Knowledge Development, and Development of Skills, Habits, and Mindsets, but very limited attention to Integrated Support Systems. As noted in Table 1, these findings reveal not only which aspects of whole-child learning were supported in online settings, but also which areas remain underexamined.

Principle 1: integrated support systems

According to the SoLD framework, Integrated Support Systems is essential for helping students learn and develop across academic, social, emotional, and physical domains. Integrated support systems are designed to connect school and community resources to holistically meet students’ diverse needs. The framework emphasizes that human development depends on nurturing relationships and creating responsive environments. The framework also explains that chronic stress can harm students’ attention and memory, while strong relationships and positive emotions protect the brain and promote resilience. Therefore, trust, cultural responsiveness, and equitable access to resources are critical for ensuring healthy learning and development (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021).

None of the studies included in this review directly examined integrated support systems. Although some studies discussed teacher-student relationships or the importance of collaboration, there was no evidence showing how schools connected academic, social, and community support into a unified structure. This absence suggests that, while the SoLD framework highlights the importance of integrating multiple supports, empirical studies have not yet explored how to implement such integration in practice. This lack of research on overall system coherence (Fullan and Quinn, 2016) is a major missing component, as without research in this domain, the field is unable to determine whether post-COVID online learning is linking together strong, evidence-based structures in support of overall student learning and development.

Principle 2: positive developmental relationships

Positive Developmental Relationships is the second guiding principle in the SoLD framework. These relationships not only help children and adolescents manage stress and activate brain processes for complex skill development, but also foster well-being, positive identity, and students’ confidence in their own abilities (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021). As noted in Table 1, the most frequently mentioned components were shared learning and decision-making (n = 9), personalized structures (n = 7), family engagement (n = 7), and teacher collaboration (n = 5). By contrast, family conferences (n = 0) and home visits (n = 0) were not mentioned in the included studies.

Shared learning and decision making

The most common norm was shared learning and decision making. We identified nine studies that examined how online learning environments involved shared learning processes and collaborative decision-making among students, teachers, parents, and schools during the post-COVID period. Across these nine studies, three themes emerged: student agency, stakeholder collaboration, and institutional partnerships.

The first topic under this norm focused on increasing student agency and shared ownership over learning decisions. Zhao and Watterson, 2021 argued that students should have opportunities to co-develop parts of the school curriculum, which allows them to propose new learning content, make informed choices, and take responsibility for their own learning pathways. In this policy position paper, published in Educational Change, Zhao and Watterson noted that learning through COVID made it clear that students should be active members and co-owners of the school community. In addition Panskyi and Korzeniewska (2023), examined how Polish schools addressed online security challenges during the pandemic. Some schools implemented a digital safety plan as a formal contract signed by all members of the school community, including students, parents, teachers, and staff. It covered acceptable online behavior, digital citizenship responsibilities, and security protocols. The key was that students helped create these rules rather than simply follow those made by adults. This approach developed students’ sense of shared responsibility and helped them treat themselves as equal partners in school communities. The findings showed how schools turned a crisis into an opportunity to give students more authentic voices.

The second topic in the data set focused on collaboration across different stakeholder groups, including schools, parents, communities, teachers, and policymakers. We identified three studies focused on school-family collaboration (Afrilyasanti and Basthomi, 2022; Gharti, 2023; Han et al., 2022) and two studies on teacher collaboration that enhanced professional growth and community support (Jain, 2020; Moser and Wei, 2023). For instance, Han et al. (2022) conducted a mixed-methods study in China to examine factors shaping parents’ decisions about their children's online learning during and after the pandemic. The findings emphasized that effective blended learning requires parents, students, and teachers to interact as active participants in both physical and virtual learning spaces. This collaborative approach, in which parents, students, and teachers were seamlessly connected, was essential for maintaining educational engagement during the pandemic and for promoting sustainable learning in the post-pandemic era.

Similarly, Afrilyasanti and Basthomi (2022) conducted a qualitative case study in Indonesia to analyze students’, teachers’, and parents’ perceptions of learning during and after the pandemic. The authors found that parents and teachers often took responsibility for providing students with the technical readiness, such as devices, internet access, and learning materials. This shared responsibility demonstrated the importance of shared support structures for students’ online learning Moser and Wei (2023) examined teachers’ experiences in online professional development. The findings showed that participants not only improved their digital and pedagogical skills but also developed a strong sense of responsibility to share what they had learned. Teachers stated that they would return to their schools and districts to train colleagues, and several noted they had already shared new strategies with coworkers. Overall, these studies highlighted how collaboration among parents, teachers, and schools sustained student learning during disrupted contexts through shared resources, communication, and professional development.

The third topic under this norm was broader institutional partnerships and coordination, which also facilitated shared decision-making on infrastructure and resource issues. We identified two articles focused on this norm (Lin et al., 2023; Nongko et al., 2024). For example, Nongko et al. (2024) conducted a descriptive qualitative study with teachers and parents in Indonesia. The researchers explored how teachers and parents implemented and adapted to online learning after the pandemic and found that, despite the overall effectiveness of online learning, schools still faced infrastructural barriers. The authors emphasized that these challenges could not be solved by schools or families alone. The authors suggested that joint efforts among institutions (e.g., government, schools, and communities) were essential for improving internet infrastructure and ensuring affordable access to online resources, particularly for early childhood education. Lin et al. (2023) offered a related perspective, showing that a dual scaffolding-embedded mobile augmented reality learning approach improved students’ learning achievement, higher-order cognition, and self-efficacy while also reducing the urban-rural digital divide. The researchers noted that the findings offer practical insights for school administrators seeking to support online learning more equitably.

Personalized structures

Within the SoLD component of personalized structures, we identified seven articles that addressed how online learning environments were adjusted to support students’ diverse needs. Personalized structures were the second-most-often cited component in the literature reviewed. Across these studies, three main topics emerged: (1) more student autonomy, (2) the easing of teacher–student interaction, and (3) tailored scaffolding to individual learning needs.

The first topic under the personalized structures norm centered on student autonomy. For this topic, we located three articles. For example, Zhao and Watterston (2021) emphasized in their policy essay that the pandemic should not be seen merely as a disruption but as an opportunity to reimagine schooling. Zhao and Watterston identified three changes after the pandemic, including designing curricula that are developmental and personalized, adopting a student-centered, inquiry-based pedagogy, and delivering instruction that combines the strengths of both synchronous and asynchronous learning. The authors noted that “when students are no longer required to attend class at the same time in the same place, they can have much more autonomy over their own learning” (p. 9). Idris et al. (2023) conducted a case study of online learning in high schools in Indonesia, involving 26 teachers from diverse cultural backgrounds. In the post-COVID context, the authors found that teachers adopted blended online and offline formats, allowing students to complete assignments at their own pace and manage their schedules independently. This flexibility helped students reinforce their autonomy in their learning process. In the third study, Tang and Mo (2024) conducted a mixed-methods case study with 17 middle school students in Northern Taiwan who were using an interactive online platform designed to simulate classroom space and support collaboration. Their findings suggested that the platform offered greater flexibility for students than conventional video-based online teaching. The authors noted that the design of this virtual platform allowed students to decide whether to collaborate, seek assistance, or work independently, demonstrating that flexible learning structures can reinforce students’ sense of agency and autonomy in online learning.

The second topic was that online learning can make the interaction between teachers and students easier. We located four articles on this topic. Jain (2020) examined the impact of COVID on education by synthesizing global reports from organizations and prior published research. Jain found that online learning enabled one-to-one interaction between teachers and students in online classrooms, helping build confidence on both sides. The findings indicated that maintaining strong connections and building confidence between teachers and learners is possible in online learning. Alenezi (2024) conducted a mixed-methods study with 315 teachers in Saudi Arabia about their perceptions of e-learning during the pandemic. The researchers found that the shift to online learning increased opportunities for teacher-student interaction and made online learning more engaging. Similarly, Agarwal et al. (2021) surveyed 134 secondary school students enrolled in online coaching classes in India to examine students’ satisfaction with online education in the post-COVID period. Findings showed that students valued exclusive interaction time with faculty, opportunities for individualized monitoring and guidance, and the ability for teachers to track learning progress, which contributed to higher satisfaction with online learning formats. Moser and Wei (2023) used a parallel mixed-methods study to explore the benefits of an online professional development program for rural language teachers during the post-COVID period. The authors found that although many teachers still preferred in-person teaching, their experiences in the professional development workshop helped them to rethink their roles as “architects of student learning” (p. 14). Teachers in this study described how they would modify their teaching by personalizing instruction, using captivating videos, and actively engaging students.

The third topic under personalized structures focused on tailored scaffolding aligned with learners’ needs, which could strengthen personalized learning experiences. Lin et al. (2023) conducted a quasi-experimental study with 173 sixth-grade students from both urban and rural schools in southern China. Over a five-week intervention, the experimental group used a dual scaffolding-embedded mobile augmented reality approach, while the control group received conventional augmented reality instruction. Results showed that the experimental group made greater progress in achievement, higher-order thinking, and self-efficacy. This finding suggested that scaffolded supports tailored to learners’ contexts and needs can make online learning more responsive and effective.

Family engagement

Researchers of seven studies explored how parents’ roles and responsibilities evolved in post-COVID online learning. Across the studies, there were three topics: (1) parents’ increased responsibility, (2) disparities in families’ capacity to support students, and (3) transformation of parent-school relationship. The first topic focused on parents’ increased responsibility in supporting children's online learning. For example, Nanda et al. (2023) examined the learning outcomes of 27 fifth-grade students in Indonesia before and after the pandemic. The researchers found that students’ learning outcomes improved when parents closely monitored their study routine, assisted during assessments by offering guidance and supervision, and provided facilities such as smartphones and internet access. Similarly, Han et al. (2022) reported that parental participation in organizing learning spaces, guiding homework, and managing devices had a positive effect on students’ academic performance and learning motivation in China.

The second topic highlighted the disparities in families’ capacity to support students’ online learning. Han et al. (2022) found that parents who had more time and resources to guide homework, organize learning spaces, and monitor their children's progress were able to support learning more effectively. Gharti (2023) studied Nepalese teachers’ challenges and strategies in managing online learning after the pandemic. Teachers noted that many parents were unaware of their children's learning activities and failed to coordinate with schools, which highlighted weak coordination between home and school. However, teachers mentioned that parents who were more attentive and created supportive home environments saw better learning outcomes. Similarly, Nongko et al. (2024) found that many parents lacked understanding of instructional content, methods, and the use of internet applications, which made it difficult for them to explain lessons or assist their children. Afrilyasanti and Basthomi (2022) found that parents faced significant challenges in physical readiness, including access to learning spaces, stable internet connections, and devices to support online lessons. One parent described this process as a “compulsion,” and said she was “trapped” into preparing a room with a good connection and learning devices (p. 146), reflecting the heavy burden that online learning placed on some families, especially when support from schools or systems was limited. Overall, these studies reflected the uneven capacity of families to support online learning.

The third topic was the shift in parent-school relationships in online and blended learning contexts. In these settings, families were no longer positioned as passive helpers but as active partners in supporting online learning. Han et al. (2022) emphasized that in the post-pandemic era, parents played an essential role as co-educators, supporting their children's online learning and communication with teachers. Similarly, Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) explored whether online learning during the pandemic could evolve into a long-term model in the post-COVID era. They found that parental engagement was an important element in maintaining the effectiveness of online learning. These studies showed that effective online and blended learning depended on an active partnership between schools and families, in which both partners shared responsibility for supporting students’ learning and well-being.

Teacher collaboration

We identified five studies that examined how educators engaged with one another to support their practice and professional learning in post-COVID online environments. Three topics emerged under this norm: (1) collaboration reduced isolation and built teachers’ capacity, (2) institutional support played a key role in teachers’ collaboration, (3) collaboration was necessary to address challenges that individual teachers could not handle alone.

The first topic was that teacher collaboration reduced isolation and built teachers’ capacity. For example, Moser and Wei (2023) found that teacher collaboration reduced teachers’ feelings of isolation and increased their sense of connection to one another. Collaboration also strengthens teachers’ capacity by helping them gain new skills and strategies. Similarly, Gharti (2023) conducted a qualitative, interpretive study with 13 teachers in rural Nepal to explore their challenges and strategies for managing online learning after the pandemic. Participants reported feeling anxious and scared at the beginning of online teaching when using unfamiliar platforms. However, over time, they collaborated with more skilled colleagues, which increased their confidence and improved their practices. The findings indicated that peer support may be necessary to reduce isolation and build teachers’ professional capacity.

Another topic under the norm of teacher collaboration was the role of institutional support. For example, Panskyi and Korzeniewska (2023) conducted a non-experimental study with 243 primary school students in Poland across three school years (2019–2022). While many teachers had low digital skills and felt unprepared and overloaded, workshops and training funded by schools or external projects helped teachers build their digital capacity and create opportunities for professional collaboration.

The third topic focuses on challenges that individual teachers cannot solve alone and that require collaboration in online education contexts. We identified two studies that highlighted the importance of teacher collaboration in online education contexts. For example, Naidu (2022) reflected on how many schools adopted online learning as an emergency response during the pandemic. Naidu noted that teachers were often unprepared, and many of them lacked both the tools to record lectures and the skills to use video effectively in teaching. As a result, students’ learning could not be effectively supported in online learning environments. Naidu argued that such challenges could not be solved by individual teachers alone but required collaboration and institutional support to develop practices for online environments. Similarly, Korkmaz and Toraman (2020) conducted a quantitative survey with 1,016 educators in Turkey. The authors reported that educators expected major changes in post-COVID, including a shift from teaching to facilitating and stronger competencies in online teaching. This finding suggested that no individual teacher could manage those systemic changes alone. Instead, collective training and collaboration would be necessary to help educators acquire new competencies. These findings both pointed to teacher collaboration as critical for building new skills, sharing resources, and adapting to post-COVID online learning demands.

Summary of principle 2: positive developmental relationships

According to the SoLD framework, Positive Developmental Relationships are essential in any effective learning environment. Across the studies reviewed under this principle, the strongest evidence emerged for shared learning and decision-making, personalized structures, and family engagement. Fewer studies focused on teacher collaboration. The evidence showed that teachers designed lessons with more flexibility, giving students greater ownership of their learning, while also collaborating with colleagues to share ideas and manage challenges together. Families also took on a more active role at home, although not all families had the same ability or time to support their children. However, no studies provided evidence of family conferences or home visits as strategies for sustaining relationships in post-COVID online learning. This absence highlights a gap in understanding how schools connect with families beyond online classroom interactions.

Principle 3: environments filled with safety and belonging

Creating environments where students feel safe and experience a sense of belonging helps them engage more fully in learning. When classrooms are calm and predictable, students can focus and take risks in their thinking. The way schools organize space, time, and relationships communicates whether students are valued and supported. In such settings, students are better able to manage stress, build trust, and participate confidently in the learning process (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2020).

Inclusive learning environment

The most common norm under Principle 3 was an inclusive learning environment. We located 20 articles under this norm. While online learning created new opportunities for students, it also raised questions about how to ensure that learning environments remain inclusive for all students. Across the studies we reviewed, four topics were prevalent: (1) the availability of affordable technology access, (2) online learning design that enhanced the students'sense of belonging and engagement, (3) multi-stakeholder collaboration support, and (4) attention to students’ emotional well-being.

The first topic was the availability of infrastructure and access to technology, which affects whether online learning can be inclusive. We located seven studies, including affordable internet and government support (Agrawal et al., 2021), limited infrastructure and connectivity (Gharti, 2023; Jamilah and Fahyuni, 2022; Korkmaz and Toraman, 2021; Molotsi, 2023; Nongko et al., 2024), and economic inequality and digital divide (Jain, 2020). For example, Agrawal et al. (2021) used an interpretive structural modeling approach to analyze the drivers of online learning in India. The researchers found that affordable internet service was the most important factor enabling online learning. In South Africa, Molotsi (2023) conducted a qualitative multiple-case study with seven secondary school teachers to examine how teachers implemented the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) after the COVID pandemic and found that teachers faced challenges in delivering lessons due to limited Internet connectivity. Similarly, Gharti (2023) reported that students in Nepal from wealthier families had access to better devices and stable connections, while students from poorer families often had to share devices or borrow from friends.

The second topic focused on the design of online learning environments that fostered belonging and engagement. We located six studies in this norm, including the creation of interactive spaces (Macur, 2024; Tang and Mo, 2024), social connectedness in online classrooms (Ben-Amram and Davidovitch, 2021; Naidu, 2022), inclusion of learners from diverse backgrounds (Idris et al., 2023), and opportunities for students to have voice and autonomy in curriculum design (Zhao and Watterston, 2021). For example, Macur (2024) conducted a mixed-methods study with 113 teachers at a bilingual school in China to explore teachers’ perspectives on the use of breakout rooms during online teaching. The findings indicated that the breakout rooms made online learning more interactive and allowed students to express themselves. Tang and Mo (2024) found that students were more willing to participate when online classrooms resembled physical classrooms because “they can shape their avatar images; similar space symbols with a physical classroom; and their avatar can move freely” (p. 1513). Similarly, Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) reported that online learning created a safe space where they could communicate freely, receive more attention from teachers, and express themselves without pressure. These aspects affected their sense of visibility and belonging, thereby helping sustain students’ engagement and motivation during online learning. These findings suggested that inclusive online environments rely not only on instruction delivery but also on creating virtual spaces where students feel connected and recognized.

The third topic focused on the collaborative support from teachers, parents, and institutions in creating inclusive learning environments. We located six studies on this topic, including teacher support and collaboration (Alibrahim, 2024; Cahyono et al., 2024; Panskyi and Korzeniewska, 2023), school-parent partnership (Han et al., 2022), and institutional coordination and policy support (Afrilyasanti and Basthomi, 2022; Guanfu, 2023). For example, in Saudi Arabia, Alibrahim (2024) conducted a qualitative case study with 15 teachers to see how online learning was used after the pandemic. In the study, teachers used the national online platform to communicate with students and parents, share materials, and join professional development communities. The researchers found that collaboration was not simply about efficiency, but about ensuring that students remained included rather than excluded from learning opportunities. These findings showed that inclusive learning environments were built when teachers, parents, and schools shared responsibility for sustaining students’ access, engagement, and well-being.

The fourth topic emphasized that inclusive learning environments must also support students’ emotional well-being. Nuryana et al. (2023) found that many students experienced high levels of stress, anxiety, and loneliness due to isolation and difficulties adjusting to online learning. This finding underscored that inclusion in online learning is not limited to access to technology or instructional design, but also fosters empathy, emotional safety, and care.

Healing and calming practices

The second most common norm was healing and calming practices. Four studies examined student stress, anxiety, or emotional strain after online learning. The first topic was that online learning amplified students’ psychological stress, highlighting the need for school-based mental health support. For example, Nuryana et al. (2023) examined global research on student stress and mental health during online learning. The authors found that a large number of students experienced high levels of anxiety and depression related to uncertainty, isolation, and difficulty adapting to online learning environments. The authors therefore suggested that schools should incorporate mental health support into the curriculum, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction, to help students manage stress and maintain psychological well-being in post-COVID online education.

The second topic emphasized that emotional monitoring and consistent communication helped maintain students’ well-being and engagement in online learning. Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) explored Israeli students’ attitudes toward online learning during the pandemic. The results showed that maintaining interpersonal interaction and a sense of connection with teachers and peers was the most meaningful aspect of students’ online learning experience. Similarly, Guanfu (2023) examined factors influencing students’ behavioral intention to use online learning in the post-COVID context and found that students’ desire to use online learning is strongly tied to their attitude (i.e., how much they like it) and their perceived behavioral control (i.e., how confident they are in their ability to use it). The authors noted that proper guidance and timely support from teachers can build students’ confidence and help them feel more comfortable managing online learning tasks.

The third topic was that, for some students, online learning created conditions that felt emotionally safer or less socially intimidating. In a conceptual paper, Jain (2020) provided a broad overview of both opportunities and challenges that emerged during online learning. The author noted that although online learning limited face-to-face interaction, it created private and less intimidating spaces for introverted or shy students to share their personal experiences and emotions more comfortably. Therefore, in some cases, online learning can support healing and calming practices by lowering social pressure and helping build a safe environment.

Safe and caring environments

The third most common norm under Principle 3 was the creation of safe and caring environments that supported students’ emotional well-being during online learning. Researchers across three studies highlighted three key areas: the need for structured school-based mental health support, concerns about students’ physical and emotional health due to prolonged screen use, and the critical role of parental involvement in creating supportive home learning environments. These three studies showed that student well-being depended on coordinated support from schools, families, and digital learning structures.

The first topic focused on creating structured, supportive school environments to promote student mental health. Nuryana et al. (2023) conducted a bibliometric study on student stress and mental health during online learning and emphasized the importance of connecting students with institutional and community mental health resources, particularly noting that students living alone during the pandemic were more vulnerable to depression.

The second topic focused on the health and learning challenges associated with long hours of screen time during online learning. Han et al. (2022) examined factors influencing parents’ intention to support online learning in China and found that parents were concerned about their children's physical and mental health, particularly eye strain and reduced attention after prolonged use of electronic devices. The authors therefore suggested that schools improve online lesson design and guide parents in monitoring students’ screen use to better balance learning and well-being.

The third topic examined how parental involvement contributed to the creation of safe and supportive learning environments at home. Gharti (2023) found that effective online learning required coordination among various stakeholders, including schools, teachers, students, and parents. However, the findings revealed a significant gap in parental support during online learning. Teachers reported that most parents were unaware of their children's learning activities and failed to create supportive online learning environments at home. Students whose parents took an active role in their studies tended to achieve better academically.

Classroom rituals

Only one study indirectly mentioned classroom rituals in the context of post-COVID online learning. Han et al. (2022) found that prolonged online learning led to decreased interest and inattention, a concern that grew as online learning continued after COVID. Parents worried about health concerns, especially eye strain caused by long screen time. Although the study did not examine rituals directly, the authors emphasized the need for establishing consistent routines and habit-building practices to help students maintain focus and regulate learning in online environments.

Trauma-informed supports

One study was relevant to trauma-informed support. Nuryana et al. (2023), in a bibliometric analysis of global research on student mental health, found that online learning environments often increased students’ anxiety, depression, and psychological distress, largely due to isolation, uncertainty about the future, and difficulties adjusting to online learning. The authors emphasized that schools should not treat these mental health issues as temporary but instead integrate mental health support into post-COVID curriculum, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction techniques, which might help students manage stress and improve overall well-being.

Inclusive extra activities

Beyond classroom instructions, inclusive learning also depends on the extra support that teachers provide to meet students’ diverse needs. We located only one study under this norm. Moser and Wei (2023) examined how online professional development supported teachers’ instructional practices after the pandemic. The findings revealed that teachers’ professional roles expanded beyond classroom teaching. For example, teachers “drove to students’ homes,” “prepared paper packets,” “worked in the school parking lot,” and “called families a lot because otherwise I would know nothing about how they are doing” (p. 18). These actions illustrated how teachers actively responded to inequitable access by extending their support beyond the online classroom and into the students’ community. Through these additional efforts, rural teachers worked to help students from under-resourced areas remain connected and engaged in their learning.

Summary of principle 3: environments filled with safety and belonging

According to the SoLD framework, students learn best in environments that make them feel safe, valued, and connected. Calm and predictable classrooms help students focus, take risks, and manage stress. When schools build trust and show care through consistent routines and supportive relationships, students develop confidence and engagement. Practices like mindfulness, community meetings, and restorative conversations help strengthen relationships and promote healing. Inclusive and culturally responsive classrooms, where all students’ identities are respected, allow every learner to feel a sense of belonging and thrive both academically and emotionally (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021).

Across the studies reviewed under this principle, the strongest evidence centered on inclusive learning environments, where teachers, parents, and institutions worked together to support students’ equitable access, engagement, and well-being. However, the review revealed several notable gaps. None of the reviewed studies examined restorative discipline, community circles, conflict resolution, or culturally affirming practices, all of which are often important for sustaining equity and belonging in schools. This absence suggests that, while access, inclusion and emotional well-being were widely discussed, the deeper relational and cultural dimensions of safety remain underexplored in post-COVID online learning contexts.

Principle 4: rich learning experiences and knowledge development

To promote deep understanding and long-term retention, schools should design learning environments that help students link new ideas with their existing knowledge, experiences, and cultural backgrounds. This approach involves setting clear and challenging expectations so that all learners can access high-quality instruction. Lessons should be meaningful and engaging, connecting academic content to students’ interests, everyday lives, and real-world issues. Instruction should also encourage critical thinking, problem-solving, and the application of knowledge across different contexts. By creating opportunities for students to transfer and extend their learning, schools can nurture lifelong learners who think flexibly and can apply their knowledge beyond the classroom (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021).

Universal design for learning

Universal design for learning (UDL) was the most frequently discussed norm under the principle of rich learning experiences and knowledge development. We identified nine articles that addressed this norm. Across these studies, three topics emerged: flexible and inclusive instructional formats; sustainable models of online learning; and teacher training support for UDL-related practices.

One of the shifts after COVID was the redefinition of when, where, and how learning could happen. Zhao and Watterston (2021) found that moving teaching online challenged traditional assumptions that constrained education to a single classroom and a single schedule. The authors argued that the experience of online learning opened new possibilities, and the ideal model might be one that combined in-person and online learning, offering greater flexibility and effectiveness in teaching. Similarly, Han et al. (2022) found that the continuity of online learning and the suitability of the home learning environment had a significant positive impact on parents’ evaluation of their children's learning performance. Idris et al. (2023) reported that Indonesian teachers adjusted their teaching media based on students’ internet stability and family situations, for example, switching to simpler apps when students lacked stable internet connections. These thoughtful strategies ensured that technological and socioeconomic factors did not prevent students from accessing learning opportunities.

The second topic was sustainable models of online learning in the post-COVID era. Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) examined students’ attitudes toward online learning. Students reported that online learning offered convenience and comfort, including more freedom at home and more control over their own schedules, while lessons became more organized. The authors suggested that schools adopt a blended learning model by combining one day of online classes with in-person classes each week, which could retain flexibility while also supporting engagement and attention. Jamilah and Fahyuni (2022) conducted a systematic literature review to examine how online learning continued in Indonesia after COVID and found that blended learning was considered the best alternative across the studies they reviewed, as it combined the accessibility of online learning with the engagement of in-person teaching. Tang and Mo (2024) explored how a virtual online classroom platform influenced student engagement in Taiwan. The authors found that virtual environments simulated a physical classroom by allowing students to customize avatars, move freely, and enhance their engagement. Together, these findings highlight that while online learning offers flexibility and convenience, current learning models should be improved to be more sustainable.

The third topic focused on teacher training and institutional support for UDL practices. Despite the potential of online learning, researchers also noted the challenges teachers faced in practice. Korkmaz and Toraman (2020) analyzed the problems educators experienced in online learning in Turkey. Teachers recommended providing regular training on learning management systems and online pedagogies for all teachers, not just technical staff, to support managing complex instructional processes. Moser and Wei (2023) found that after teacher training, teachers demonstrated a clearer understanding of lesson structure, selected tools effectively, and built stronger relationships with students. As a result, teachers began personalizing instruction and integrating more engaging materials to support learner participation. In contrast, a South African study by Molotsi (2023) found that teachers rarely used digital devices for instruction due to insufficient training. The findings of this study underscore the need for continuous professional development and stronger institutional support to help teachers implement UDL practices in online learning.

Inquiry-based learning

Inquiry-based learning was the second most frequent norm under Principle 4 of Rich Learning Experiences and Knowledge Development. Post-COVID, many educators explored ways to encourage students to investigate, solve problems, and construct understanding based on what they already knew, especially through technologies that made learning more interactive. We located six studies in this norm and noticed two main topics: (1) the use of digital tools to support student-driven inquiry; and (2) shifts toward more student-active instructional approaches.

The first topic was the use of digital tools to facilitate student-driven inquiry. Tang and Mo (2024) found that the design of the virtual learning platform increased dialogue between teachers and students, encouraged peer discussion of learning tasks, and promoted more active exploration of materials. Lin et al. (2023) demonstrated that a mobile augmented reality learning approach supported more active inquiry by helping students solve scientific problems, reflect on experimental failures, and design new experiments. The researchers also suggested such an approach could help reduce the urban-rural digital divide. Macur (2024) found that teachers in China viewed breakout rooms as a space that allowed students to share ideas, engage in group discussions, and increase their speaking time, all of which align with inquiry-based learning. These findings indicate that, with structured guidance, online learning can effectively foster inquiry-based thinking and support student exploration.

The second topic highlighted how online learning prompted educators to adopt more student-facing, active inquiry instructional approach. Zhao and Watterston (2021) explained that an effective online learning model combines synchronous and asynchronous sessions, allowing students to take more responsibility for inquiry and collaboration. In this model, teachers introduced key concepts through online resources or live meetings, while students investigated questions, worked in small groups to create projects, and presented their findings in virtual class discussions. In this process, teachers acted as facilitators, providing guidance and feedback rather than continuous lecturing. Panskyi and Korzeniewska (2023) analyzed data from Polish primary schools and found that COVID had a limited effect on learning outcomes, but they also argued that stronger digital security education was needed. To make learning more engaging and interactive, the author suggested complementing current programs with active teaching methods, including case studies, flipped classrooms, problem-based tasks, and game-based learning, to enhance students’ online security education. In Saudi Arabia, Alenezi (2024) found a shift toward learner-centered strategies. The results indicated that about 80% of teachers reported combining teacher- and student-centered methods, while 40.3% used game-based teaching and 24.8% adopted learning-by-doing activities, which marked a significant shift away from Saudi Arabia's traditionally lecture-heavy teaching approach.

Scaffolded learning

Scaffolding learning was the second-most-frequently discussed norm under Principle 4. We located six studies that examined how teachers and learning environments provided both academic and emotional support to guide students’ learning. Three topics emerged: technology-based scaffolding; teacher-designed scaffolding strategies; and the importance of ongoing teacher guidance and presence.

Two studies showed that technology served as an important scaffold for students’ exploration, problem-solving, and interaction. Lin et al. (2023) focused on elementary students in China. The authors found that students who engaged in a scaffolded mobile augmented reality approach achieved higher academic performance and stronger higher-order cognitive skills such as problem-solving, metacognitive awareness, and creativity. Similarly, Tang and Mo (2024) found that when guided by the teacher, students interacted with digital objects in the virtual learning space, activated built-in learning materials, received feedback, and then continued to explore related content independently. These interactions demonstrated how the virtual design could be utilized to scaffold continuous exploration and communication among students, teachers, and learning materials, leading to more dynamic engagement.

The second topic highlighted how teachers became active designers of scaffolding strategies through more student-centered approaches. For example, Zhao and Watterston (2021) argued that teachers should move away from direct instruction toward student-centered and inquiry-based approaches. The authors illustrated that teachers could combine synchronous and asynchronous sessions, in which students receive online instruction, conduct small-group inquiries, and share their work in large meetings, while teachers provided targeted support and feedback. Alenezi (2024) found a clear shift from traditional lecturing toward more scaffolded and learner-centered strategies in Saudi Arabia. This evidence reflected that teachers adapted their instructional strategies to support students’ active construction of knowledge.

Finally, the third topic emphasized that ongoing teacher guidance was essential for sustaining students’ engagement, motivation, and clarity in online learning. Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) found that secondary students perceived online classes as more organized and efficient because teachers clearly shared materials and links, lessons followed a tighter sequence, and communication channels made it easier to keep up, suggesting that online learning created a stronger organizational scaffold for students’ understanding. However, students mentioned that attention was harder to sustain with long screen time, and it was more difficult for teachers to identify which students needed clarification. The authors further emphasized that technology should reinforce, rather than replace, teachers’ scaffolding role. Teachers needed to act as facilitators, providing emotional, cognitive, and technical support to help students stay focused and overcome learning difficulties. Similarly, Naidu (2022) explained that when teachers carefully designed lessons, guided discussions, and gave direct instruction, they provided the structure that helped students stay connected to the class. The author also noted that using videos creatively, such as for feedback, announcements, or explanations, could make learning feel more personal and interactive. Overall, these findings suggest that strong teacher presence, clear guidance, and intentional instructional structure are essential for supporting students’ online learning.

Summary of principle 4: rich learning experiences and knowledge development

Across the reviewed articles, most of the evidence focused on universal design for learning, inquiry-based learning, and scaffolded learning. In contrast, none of the reviewed studies examined culturally responsive teaching and performance assessment, both of which are essential for connecting learning to students’ cultural and community contexts. This absence indicates that current studies are centered on engagement and knowledge application, while more contextualized and culturally grounded approaches to learning and assessment remain underexplored in online learning settings.

Principle 5: development of skills, habits, and mindsets

The SoLD framework highlights that success in school and life depends not only on academics but also on the development of essential skills, habits, and mindset. Capacities such as self-management, social awareness, and a growth mindset are not fixed traits but can be intentionally cultivated through purposeful instruction and practice. When educators help students strengthen executive functions, manage emotions, build healthy relationships, and believe in their ability to grow, they support learning that extends beyond academics. These capacities help students to focus attention, persist through challenges, and apply knowledge in meaningful ways across different settings (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021).

Executive function development

Executive function development was the most frequently mentioned norm. We located nine articles in this norm. Across the studies, three main topics emerged: teachers’ planning, monitoring, and adaptive control; students’ self-regulation and persistence; and the development of creativity and problem-solving skills.

The first topic highlighted how teachers’ executive functions, such as planning, monitoring, and adapting, became central to effective online education during and after COVID. For example, Moser and Wei (2023) found that online professional development improved teachers’ ability to plan lessons, design interactive tasks, and meet instructional goals, strengthening both their confidence and instructional judgment. Macurs's (2024) work on breakout rooms revealed the importance of teachers’ situational judgment and reflection. In contrast, Gharti (2023) reported that teachers in remote Nepal struggled with a lack of basic technical and online pedagogical skills. This lack of preparation limited their capacity to plan and deliver online lessons effectively, illustrating how weak executive functions could constrain effective online teaching. Jain (2020) similarly found that teachers were unprepared for online education; therefore, careful planning and organized implementation helped ensure that classes remained purposeful and result-oriented. Reflection was equally important, as it enabled teachers to see how their lessons contributed to students’ personal growth and prepared them to meet global needs.

The second topic was students’ executive functions, especially self-regulation and persistence in online learning. For example, in a qualitative study of online learning in early childhood education, Nongko et al. (2024) found that independent learning was rated as very effective across schools, indicating that online environments supported children's self-regulation and autonomy. Lin et al. (2023) found that rural students benefited more from scaffolding with digital tools, showing higher gains in learning achievement, higher-order thinking, and self-efficacy. However, Spitzer et al. (2021) evidenced reduced perseverance and poor self-regulation when external structure and motivation were lacking. In addition, Guanfu (2023) found that students who believed they could manage online learning (perceived behavioral control) were more likely to continue using it. By contrast, when online learning was treated as something students had to complete instead of something they could manage on their own, their motivation and persistence decreased.

The third topic was the development of creative thinking and problem-solving skills. Zhao and Watterston (2021) conceptually explored the educational changes made by COVID. The authors explained that traditional skills such as pattern recognition and memorization of information are declining as artificial intelligence advances, while creativity, curiosity, critical thinking, and collaboration are becoming increasingly important.

Growth mindset development

Growth mindset development was the second-most-frequently discussed norm under Principle 5. Across six studies, researchers highlighted how the shift to online learning created opportunities for both teachers and students to rethink their roles, adapt to new challenges, and develop greater confidence in their ability to improve. Two common topics emerged: (1) teacher growth and role transformation, and (2) the promotion of student agency and autonomy.

The first topic emphasized that online learning prompted teachers to expand their skills, rethink their instructional roles, and develop stronger growth-oriented mindsets. Moser and Wei (2023) found that online professional development workshops strengthened rural teachers’ confidence and knowledge about online teaching. Alenezi (2024) similarly reported that Saudi Arabian teachers became more confident and flexible after the pandemic, due to their willingness to adjust and try new methods, and showed a shift toward a growth mindset. Jain (2020) also discussed how the pandemic encouraged educators to rethink curriculum design and pedagogy. Finally, Afrilyasanti and Basthomi (2022) found that teachers and students acknowledged that although they initially faced challenges, they eventually adjusted by being open to change and modifying their behaviors to meet new learning conditions. The findings highlighted that flexibility and persistence, key components of a growth mindset, helped teachers and students adapt to uncertainty and improve their learning and teaching performance.

The second topic was that online learning pushed schools and families to reconsider students’ roles as autonomous learners. Han et al. (2022) found that most parents and teachers came to value fostering students’ autonomous learning, skill development, and adaptability, qualities that challenge and reconstruct the traditional fixed mindset. Similarly, Zhao and Watterston (2021) argued that future curricula should build on students’ strengths and passions, while schools promote student autonomy and agency, encouraging students to take more responsibility for their progress and decisions.

Social emotional learning

Social-emotional learning was the third-most frequently referenced norm under Principle 5. Across five studies, researchers examined how online learning environments influenced students’ emotional well-being and sense of social connection. Three topics emerged: (1) emotional challenges and the need for stronger social presence, (2) structured online instructions that supported students’ social-emotional engagement, and (3) the importance of integrating SEL into curriculum design.

Two studies noted the emotional challenges students faced during online learning and the growing need for social connection in online environments. Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) investigated Israeli students’ experiences of online learning during the pandemic. They found that students felt lonely while spending long hours at home, staring at a computer screen, and missing both school and informal social interactions. Similarly, Gharti (2023) reported that teachers viewed online teaching as less learner-friendly than face-to-face teaching because it was harder to interpret students’ emotions, health conditions, and psychological needs without physical gestures or facial expressions.

Second, structured online interactions helped students stay socially and emotionally connected while learning. Macur (2024) found that breakout rooms increased student connectedness, while Cahyono et al. (2024) found that virtual meeting platforms recreated the feeling of a real classroom and helped students interact more naturally Nuryana et al. (2023) emphasized the need to integrate social-emotional learning into curriculum design. The authors found that students experienced increased anxiety, depression, and psychological distress because of unfamiliar digital environments and the uncertainty of remote schooling. Rather than treating social-emotional learning as a supplemental concern, the authors argued that it should become an integral part of post-pandemic education, enabling students to develop lasting skills for emotional well-being and personal growth.

Skills and mindsets development

Skills and mindsets development was the fourth-most-frequently discussed norm under Principle 5. We located four studies in this norm. Across these studies, researchers examined how online learning environments supported the development of students’ self-regulation and adaptability, as well as teachers’ digital and interdisciplinary competencies. Two topics emerged: (1) student self-regulation and adaptability; and (2) teachers’ development of digital and interdisciplinary skills.

The first topic highlighted how online learning environments encouraged students to develop stronger self-regulation, adaptability, and independence in learning. For example, Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) found that Israeli students felt online learning improved their concentration because they faced fewer distractions than in physical classrooms. Students also mentioned that they spoke up more in online classes because each participant had equal visibility and space to express themselves. These experiences indicated that, in some cases, online environments could foster stronger self-regulation and focus, enabling students to manage their learning more independently. Similarly, Afrilyasanti and Basthomi (2022) found that Indonesian students who adapted effectively to online learning attributed their success to openness to change, whereas those who struggled cited rigid habits and a lack of effort to adjust.

The second topic focused on digital and interdisciplinary competencies teachers developed while navigating online teaching. Alibrahim (2024) found that Saudi Arabian teachers’ enhanced digital literacy enabled them to better guide students in the creative and responsible use of technology in their own learning. Nuryana et al. (2023) also emphasized the need for a flexible curriculum that uses digital tools and platforms to enhance learning. The study also highlighted the importance of integrating mental health support and promoting interdisciplinary connections among subjects to align education with real-world challenges. Overall, both studies showed that post-COVID online learning has created opportunities for teachers to develop digital and interdisciplinary skills.

Interpersonal and communication skills

Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) found that among Israeli secondary students, social presence, which is the quality of interaction between students and teachers and among peers, received the highest mean score, and it was higher than instructional-cognitive and emotional dimensions. Students reported feeling lonely while studying from home and described online interactions as essential for maintaining motivation and connection. The authors also noted that tools such as chat and email helped sustain communication and that teachers should monitor students’ emotional states and find technological ways to strengthen interactions and communications.

Metacognition and self-awareness

Only one study addressed students’ metacognition and self-awareness in online learning. Lin et al. (2023) conducted a quasi-experimental study with Chinese students from both urban and rural schools, using a dual-scaffolding mobile augmented reality learning approach. The results showed that when technology was paired with intentional scaffolds, students were better able to plan, monitor, and reflect on their own learning, which are core components of metacognitive growth and self-awareness.

Summary of principle 5: development of skills, habits, and mindsets

The SoLD principle of Skill, Habit, and Mindset Development emphasizes that learning involves the integrated development of cognitive, social, and emotional skills that support both students’ academic growth and lifelong success. Capacities such as executive function, self-regulation, metacognition, and growth mindset can be intentionally taught, modeled, and strengthened through guided practice and feedback. The principle highlights that positive relationships, supportive environments, and scaffolded learning experiences help students learn how to plan, organize, and manage emotions, and persist through challenges. Schools are therefore encouraged to design learning environments that deliberately cultivate students’ skills, habits, and mindsets across the curriculum so they can become self-directed, adaptable, and resilient learners (Learning Policy Institute and Turnaround for Children, 2021).

Across the 23 studies analyzed under this principle, the strongest evidence centered on executive function development, growth mindset development, social-emotional learning, and skills and mindsets development. These studies illustrated how online learning environments encouraged both teachers and students to strengthen planning, adaptability, self-regulation, and reflective learning. In contrast, interpersonal and communication skills, as well as metacognition and self-awareness, appeared less often. Notably, integrated skills building was not explicitly addressed in any study. This gap suggests that while existing research highlights individual skill domains, the interconnected and holistic nature of skill development remains underexplored in post-pandemic online learning contexts.

Discussion

This systematic review used the SoLD framework to take a broader look at what post-COVID online learning actually supported and what was left untouched. Rather than focusing solely on instructional techniques, the review showed that online learning reshaped how relationships, learning environments, and student skills interacted. In doing so, the research collectively conveys a muddled picture of a field in the early stages of adaptation to new realities in the wake of COVID. There was a mixture of hopeful and concerning findings across the studies when viewed through the SoLD lens.

The new, challenging format of the pandemic seemed to foster new collaborations among educators and families (Afrilyasanti and Basthomi, 2022; Gharti, 2023; Han et al., 2022), as well as among teachers as they grew and adapted together (Jain, 2020; Moser and Wei, 2023). These new pathways to school-community collaboration are driven by technologies persisting even after the pandemic. Even with these new collaborations, many challenges remained, and more systemic supports and coordination with government bodies to provide social services were needed (Lin et al., 2023; Nongko et al., 2024). This is reinforced by disparities in the lack of digital infrastructure needed for students, teachers, and families to participate. The literature found challenges with affordable internet and government support (Agrawal et al., 2021), limited infrastructure and connectivity (Gharti, 2023; Jamilah and Fahyuni, 2022; Korkmaz and Toraman, 2020; Molotsi, 2023; Nongko et al., 2024), and economic inequality and digital divides (Jain, 2020).

A benefit of the new technologies adopted during COVID and persisting thereafter is the emergence of new digital modalities between teachers and students. These changes to online instruction made personalized pacing easier for students (Idris et al., 2023; Tang and Mo, 2024) and strengthened communication channels between teachers and students (Agarwal et al., 2021; Alenezi, 2024; Jain, 2020). These changes were representative of the types of permanent adjustments to teaching reported in a survey of teachers in Turkey on the lasting impacts of the pandemic (Korkmaz and Toraman, 2020). However, Panskyi and Korzeniewska (2023) found that teachers struggled to keep up with these changes, which was also reflected in a lack of technical skills amongst teachers (Gharti, 2023). As Naidu (2022) surmised, the breadth of these technological changes is posing ongoing challenges for teachers requiring new approaches to educator development in online learning, even beyond the initial wave of the pandemic.

A similar story emerged when examining instructional practices. For instance, Alenezi’s (2024) study in Saudi Arabia found that teachers were adapting to the new online learning realities by adopting more ambitious pedagogical approaches than traditional lectures. The study by Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021) in Israel found that students perceived teachers as more organized and prepared in online learning contexts, which certainly seems a positive result. However, critical components of a SoLD-based curriculum and pedagogy were absent. Culturally responsive teaching and performance assessment, foundational components, were not present in the literature but must be developed to make online learning modalities sustainable alternatives to in-person practices.

The studies on relationships, belonging, and socio-emotional supports also offered bright spots. Macurs (2024) study in the Chinese bilingual education context, which found that online breakout rooms can encourage student agency and expression, is particularly hopeful. This is reinforced by the study conducted by Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021), which found that online learning opportunities can create safe student spaces for expression and relationships.

However, the overall picture of student safety, belonging, and socio-emotional support is rather thin in the research. Across students, teachers, and parents, concerns were raised. New work is particularly needed in light of the findings by Nuryana et al. (2023) examining global research to find elevated stress, anxiety, and depression in the isolation and uncertainty of online learning. Students were lonely and missed social interaction in the study in Israel by Ben-Amram and Davidovitch (2021). Teachers, too, were worried. In part because of the lack of data and support for student socio-emotional and psychological needs, Gharti (2023) reported that teachers felt online teaching was less learner-friendly than face-to-face teaching. Parents also expressed concern about their children's well-being in online learning in various ways, even as they value fostering students’ autonomous learning, skill development, and adaptability as online learners (Han et al., 2022).

Research on mental health and psychological supports for students’ online learning outside of school is, sadly, thin at present. Online equivalents to traditionally successful school practices identified in the SoLD literature, such as restorative discipline or culturally affirming practices, were not present in this literature review. This suggests a potential absence of online structures and supports for relationships and belonging that are necessary for student learning and development.

Together, these findings from the post-pandemic literature on online learning implementation offer the promise of personalization, flexibility, adaptability, communication, and other improvements over traditional in-person schools. However, these emergent bright spots must be balanced against ongoing student concerns and the lack of research across domains known to be critical to the Science of Learning and Development (Science of Learning and Development Alliance, 2020).

The findings point to a need for future research for a more coherent, system-level approach to K-12 students studying online learning (Fullan and Quinn, 2016). Future research might be guided by our finding that no studies have examined the SoLD component of Integrated Support Systems, and that few studies addressed the depth of socio-emotional learning, relationships, and belonging. Only one study has considered how online programs are supporting students through trauma-informed practices, for instance. There has been no studies on restorative discipline, community circles, conflict resolution, or culturally affirming practices. Overall, the picture presented in the research represents more attention to inclusivity, access, universal design, parental interactions, and knowledge acquisition. These are valuable studies giving insights into some of the critical questions in online learning, however questions on the development of the whole child in online learning environments need increased attention by scholars.

As schools continue to integrate digital tools into everyday instruction, future research will need to look beyond isolated strategies and consider how relationships, environments, and learning processes interact and support one another. As learning changes in the post COVID-19 world, additional research will also need to examine the various ways that hybrid learning develops through the growing mixing of online and onsite options. Understanding these interactions will be essential for designing online learning that is not only academically effective but also developmentally responsive and equitable for all learners. We invite future researchers to investigate and inform this new, now-permanent component of our learning landscape in the post-pandemic era.

References

• 1

  AfrilyasantiR.BasthomiY. (2022). A sudden shift: students’, teachers’, and parents’ adaptation to learning during and after COVID-19 learning. Pegem J. Educ. Instr.12 (2), 143–150. 10.47750/pegegog.12.02.14

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AgarwalA.BansalK. M.GuptaA.KhuranaR. (2021). Online education: a booming product for institutes post-COVID-19?Mark. Educ. Rev.31 (3), 262–272. 10.1080/10528008.2021.1958346

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AgrawalR.WankhedeV. A.NairR. S. (2021). Analysis of drivers of digital learning in the COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 scenario using an ISM approach. J. Inst. Eng. B102 (6), 1143–1155. 10.1007/s40031-020-00528-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  AleneziF. (2024). Learned lessons and a new normal in education after the COVID-19 pandemic from Saudi K-12 teachers’ perspectives. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res.23, 8. 10.28945/5268

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  AlibrahimA. A. (2024). E-learning after the pandemic from the perspective of digital skills teachers. J. Educ. Learn.13 (2), 149. 10.5539/jel.v13n2p149

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  AnY.Kaplan-RakowskiR.YangJ.ConanJ.KinardW.DaughrityL. (2021). Examining K-12 teachers’ feelings, experiences, and perspectives regarding online teaching during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev.69 (5), 2589–2613. 10.1007/s11423-021-10008-5

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  Ben-AmramM.DavidovitchN. (2021). The COVID-19 period: a crisis for on-site learning or an opportunity for optimal distance learning? Examination of student attitudes. J. Educ. Learn.10 (3), 27. 10.5539/jel.v10n3p27

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  CahyonoB. Y.FauziahH.SantosoD. R.WulandariI. (2024). Revisiting technological tools used in EFL speaking classes during the COVID-19 pandemic: what are the implications for the post-pandemic?JALT CALL J.20 (2), 1–21. 10.29140/jaltcall.v20n2.1054

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  CantorP.OsherD.BergJ.SteyerL.RoseT. (2019). Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: how children learn and develop in context1. Appl. Dev. Sci.23 (4), 307–337. 10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  Darling-HammondL.FlookL.Cook-HarveyC.BarronB.OsherD. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Appl. Dev. Sci.24 (2), 97–140. 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  DiFrancescaD.SpencerD. (2022). The new normal: how virtual learning can benefit K-12 students. Theory. Pract.61 (4), 362–372. 10.1080/00405841.2022.2107345

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  FullanM.QuinnJ. (2016). Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts, and Systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Google Scholar

• 13

  GhartiL. (2023). Challenges of online learning in the post COVID-19 era: lived experiences of teachers in remote Nepal. Engl. Lang. Teach. Perspect.8 (1–2), 80–96. 10.3126/eltp.v8i1-2.57861

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  GuanfuC. (2023). Factors influencing behavioral intention of online learning in the post-COVID pandemic: a case study of a primary school in Chengdu, China. Scholar Hum. Sci.15 (1), 103–113.

  • Google Scholar

• 15

  HanC.LiuL.ChenS. (2022). Factors influencing parents’ intention on primary school students’ choices of online learning during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Sustainability14 (14), 8269. 10.3390/su14148269

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  IdrisH.AdawiyahR.AfandiN. K. (2023). Online learning model implemented in islamic education in post-COVID-19 pandemic: case of multicultural students in Indonesia. Dinamika Ilmu23 (2), 217–229. 10.21093/di.v23i2.6376

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  JainG. (2020). Emerging trends of education during & post COVID-19: a new challenge. Solid State Technol.63, 1.

  • Google Scholar

• 18

  JamilahJ.FahyuniE. F. (2022). The future of online learning in the post-COVID-19 era. KnE Soc. Sci., 497–505. 10.18502/kss.v7i10.11251

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  JohnsonC. C.WaltonJ. B.StricklerL.ElliottJ. B. (2023). Online teaching in K-12 education in the United States: a systematic review. Rev. Educ. Res.93 (3), 353–411. 10.3102/00346543221105550

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  KorkmazG.ToramanÇ (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. Int. J. Technol. Educ. Sci.4 (4), 293–309. 10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.110

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  Learning Policy Institute, & Turnaround for Children. (2021). Design Principles for Schools: Putting the Science of Learning and Development into Action. Washington, DC. Available online at:https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/sold-design-principles-report(Accessed September 2, 2025)

  • Google Scholar

• 22

  LinX.-F.JiangJ.LuoG.HuangX.LiW.ZouJ.et al (2023). Mitigating the urban-rural digital divide: a dual scaffolding-embedded mobile augmented reality learning approach in the post COVID-19 pandemic. Educ. Technol. Soc.26 (4), 108–122. 10.30191/ETS.202310_26(4).0008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  MacurG. (2024). Teacher perspectives on breakout rooms in online education in a K-12 bilingual school in China. J. Educ. Educ. Dev.11 (1), 7–24. 10.22555/joeed.v11i1.931

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  MolotsiA. (2023). Exploring secondary school teachers’ use of the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) model in delivering subject content after the COVID-19 pandemic disruption threat. Int. J. Educ. Dev. Using. Inf. Commun. Technol.19 (3), 214–226.

  • Google Scholar

• 25

  MoserK. M.WeiT. (2023). Professional development in collaborative online spaces: supporting rural language teachers in a post-pandemic era. New Educ.19 (1), 1–32. 10.1080/1547688X.2023.2174279

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  NaiduS. (2022). Threats and tensions for open, flexible, and distance learning post-COVID-19. Dist. Educ.43 (3), 349–352. 10.1080/01587919.2022.2088482(Accessed December 3, 2024)

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  NandaF. A.UribeM.TambunanJ. O.SamosirH. J.SidabutarM. N. A. (2023). The difference in learning outcomes of class V students before and after COVID-19 at public elementary school 095256 pematang bandar. Proceedings of the International Conference on Health Science, Green Economics, Educational Review, and Technology (IHERT 2023). UNEFA Conference, 287–302. Available online at:https://unefaconference.org/

  • Google Scholar

• 28

  National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). U.S. Education in the Time of COVID (NCES 2022-167). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC. Available online at:https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/annualreports/pdf/Education-Covid-time.pdf(Accessed December 3, 2024)

  • Google Scholar

• 29

  NongkoP. A.SaidH.NdiboY. L.DelumaR. J.Paridas (2024). Implementation and challenges of online learning in early childhood education post COVID-19 pandemic. J. Educ. Res.5 (4), 4661–4671. 10.37985/jer.v5i4.983

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  NuryanaZ.XuW.KurniawanL.SutantiN.MakrufS. A.NurcahyatiI. (2023). Student stress and mental health during online learning: potential for post-COVID-19 school curriculum development. Comprehens. Psychoneuroendocrinol.14, 100184. 10.1016/j.cpnec.2023.100184

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  OsherD.CantorP.BergJ.SteyerL.RoseT. (2020). Drivers of human development: how relationships and context shape learning and development1. Appl. Dev. Sci.24 (1), 6–36. 10.1080/10888691.2017.1398650

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  PanskyiT.KorzeniewskaE. (2023). Statistical and clustering validation analysis of primary students’ learning outcomes and self-awareness of information and technical online security problems at a post-pandemic time. Educ. Inf. Technol.28 (6), 6423–6451. 10.1007/s10639-022-11436-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  PellegrinoJ. W. (2018). Sciences of learning and development: some thoughts from the learning sciences. Appl. Dev. Sci.24 (1), 48–56. 10.1080/10888691.2017.1421427

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  Science of Learning & Development Alliance. (2020). How the Science of Learning and Development can Transform Education: Initial Findings. Available online at:https://soldalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/SoLD-Science-Translation_May-2020_FNL.pdf (Accessed March 3, 2025)

  • Google Scholar

• 35

  ShonkoffJ. P. (2020). Making developmental science accessible, usable, and a catalyst for innovation. Appl. Dev. Sci.24 (1), 37–42. 10.1080/10888691.2017.1421430

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  SpitzerM. W. H.GutsfeldR.WirzbergerM.MoellerK. (2021). Evaluating students’ engagement with an online learning environment during and after COVID-19 related school closures: a survival analysis approach. Trends. Neurosci. Educ.25, 100168. 10.1016/j.tine.2021.100168

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  TangJ. T.MoD. (2024). The transactional distance in the space of the distance learning under post-pandemic: a case study of a middle school in northern Taiwan using gather to build an online puzzle-solving activity. Interact. Learn. Environ.32 (4), 1500–1517. 10.1080/10494820.2022.2121731

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  ZhaoY.WatterstonJ. (2021). The changes we need: education post COVID-19. J. Educ. Change22 (1), 3–12. 10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar