The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic brought major disruptions to the traditional education structure as schools quickly transitioned to online education programs in the spring of 2020 in an effort to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. During this time, schools adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic with changes to instruction; real-time interactions between teachers and students; computer distribution to students; and internet access for students. These data were collected in the National Teacher and Principal Survey.¹⁵

Figure 11. Percentage of schools reporting that all or some classes were moved to distance-learning formatting using online resources or paper materials by control of institution, Spring 2020

• During the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020, a higher percentage of public schools than of private schools (77% versus 73%) reported moving classes to online distance-learning formats. Conversely, a lower percentage of public schools than of private schools (41% versus 48%) reported moving classes to a distance-learning format using paper materials. There was no measurable difference in the rates of cancelling classes between public and private schools (9% and 10%).
• Eighty-four percent each of public schools in cities and suburban areas moved classes to online distance-learning formats. These were higher than the rates in towns and rural areas (70% and 67%). A similar pattern was observed for private schools, where private schools located in cities and suburban areas (both 79%) had higher rates of moving classes to online distance-learning formats than did private schools in towns and rural areas (64% and 59%).
• Among public schools, both middle schools and high schools (80% and 81%) had higher rates of moving classes to online distance-learning formats than primary schools (76%). Among private schools, no measurable difference in the rates of moving classes to online distance-learning formats was observed by school level.¹⁶
• About 32% of public schools with less than 35% of students who were approved for Free or Reduced Price Lunch (FRPL) reported moving classes to a distance-learning format using paper materials. This rate was lower than public schools with higher percentages of students who were approved for FRPL. For example, 48% of public schools with 75% or more of students who were approved for FRPL reported moving classes to a distance-learning format using paper materials.

Figure 12. Percentage of school teachers who taught real-time lessons to classes who could ask questions during the lesson through a video or audio call by community type and control of institution, Spring 2020

• During the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020, public school teachers (47%) reported that they taught real-time lessons to classes who could ask questions through a video or audio call at a lower rate than private school teachers (63%).
• The percentage of school teachers who taught real-time lessons to classes who could ask questions through a video varied by community type. The rate for public school teachers was higher for those in city schools (54%) than those in suburban schools (50%), rural schools (39%), and schools located within towns (36%).
• Among private schools, the rate was lower for teachers in towns (38%) than those teaching at suburban schools (67%), city schools (65%), and rural schools (58%).

Figure 13. Percentage of school principals who reported their school distributed computers or digital devices to students who did not have access to one at home by community type and control of institution, Spring 2020

• In the spring of 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a lower percentage of public school principals than of private school principals (39% versus 47%) reported distributing computers to students who did not have access to computers or digital devices at home.¹⁷
• About 42% and 45% of public school principals in city and suburban schools, respectively, reported that their school distributed computers to students who did not have access to computers or digital devices at home. These percentages were higher than the percentages for public school principals in town and rural schools (33% and 32%). Private school principals reported a similar pattern. Private school principals in city and suburban schools (50% and 52%) reported higher rates of their school distributing computers to students who did not have access to one at home than did private school principals in rural schools only (34%).
• Among principals of smaller public schools (those with less than 200 students enrolled), 33% reported that their school distributed computers to students who did not have access to computers or digital devices at home. This was lower than the percentages for principals of larger public schools (ranging from 38% to 42%).¹⁸

Figure 14. Percentage of school principals who reported that their schools worked with internet providers to help students access internet at home, sent home hotspots or other devices, and offered spaces where students could safely access free Wi-Fi internet by control of institution, Spring 2020

• During the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020, internet access at home varied across students attending public and private schools. Public school principals reported 4% of students at their school already had internet access at home. Private school principals reported 58% of students at their schools already had internet access at home.
• School principals reported taking various steps to help students access the internet at home at higher rates than private school principals.¹⁹ For example, 61% of public school principals responded that their school sent hotspots or other devices to students at home, compared to 9% of private school principals. Public school principals also reported working with internet providers to help students access the internet at home and offering spaces where students could safely access free Wi-Fi at higher rates than private school principals.
• About 52% of public school principals in city schools and 49% in suburban schools reported that their school worked with internet providers to help students access the internet at home. These percentages were higher than the percentages for public school principals in town and rural schools (42% and 36%).
• Public school principals in city and suburban schools (75% and 69%) also reported that their school sent home hotspots or other internet devices at higher rates than those in town and rural schools (both 49%). Public school principals in town and rural schools reported offering spaces where students could access free Wi-Fi at higher rates (47% and 46%) than those in city and suburban schools (30% and 27%).

 BRIEF5.A HTML Table | BRIEF5.B HTML Table