How did some education leaders manage to steer their schools through the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic while others struggled to keep pace? The answer lies in a powerful but often underappreciated approach: responsive leadership. As classrooms emptied and students faced not only academic setbacks but also emotional and economic hardship, a number of districts leaders rose to the challenge by listening, adapting, and responding to the evolving needs of their communities.
Responsive leadership in crisis means staying attuned to the evolving needs of students and families, engaging communities in decision-making, and flexibly adapting policies and practices to meet those needs. It’s a model that goes beyond academics, recognizing that learning cannot happen when basic needs—like food, health care, and emotional support—are unmet.
In recent years, my research has revealed how responsive leadership can help schools support the whole child during sudden crises. Through case studies of districts in Michigan and North Carolina that either outperformed expectations during the pandemic or led national recovery efforts, I witnessed how education leaders responded to evolving student and community needs. These insights offer more than a retrospective; they serve as a blueprint for navigating future challenges and a call to action for today’s education leaders.
Listening first: The power of stakeholder engagement
One of the defining features of responsive leadership is deep engagement with stakeholders. In my research, I found district leaders conducted surveys, held town halls, and met with families, teachers, and health officials to understand the challenges their communities were facing during the pandemic. Through frequent outreach and sometimes difficult conversations, district leaders brought different people together to do what was best for all students.
This kind of listening wasn’t just symbolic—it shaped consequential decisions such as if, and when, schools should re-open for in-person instruction. In one district, hearing from low-income parents who needed to return to work prompted leaders to bring students back to school. In another, rising COVID infection rates and community concerns led to a shift toward remote learning. Leaders didn’t impose top-down solutions; they responded to the lived realities of their communities.
Meeting non-academic needs: Schools as resource hubs
The pandemic made clear that schools are more than places of learning—they are lifelines. In Guilford County, North Carolina, district leaders used federal ESSER funds to create learning hubs that offered tutoring, meals, transportation, and mental health support. These hubs weren’t just academic interventions; they were holistic support systems.
Students who attended learning hubs regularly had significantly fewer absences and reported improved grades and motivation. Students shared that the hubs helped them take more ownership and responsibility for their learning. The district also provided meals as incentives, recognizing that for many students, a hot meal could be the difference between showing up or staying home.
Transportation was another critical barrier. Guilford addressed this by purchasing buses, adjusting routes, and partnering with public transit to offer free passes. These efforts ensured that students could physically get to school and after-school programs, an often-overlooked but essential component of equity.
Health and wellness: Telehealth and mental health services
Responsive leadership also means recognizing that health is foundational to learning. District leaders emphasized prioritizing student physical health and emotional well-being as critical first steps to academic recovery. In referencing Maslow’s hierarchy, district leaders often framed student wellness as a basic student need that had to be fulfilled before they could begin to work on academics.
To meet this need, districts piloted and scaled a telehealth program that connected students with pediatricians while at school. They also hired full-time clinicians and partnered with providers to offer students therapy and counseling. Districts encouraged and supported school staff to reacclimate students to school routines, reestablish expectations and norms for positive behavior, and rebuild community and relationships between staff and students.
Family partnerships: Trust as a cornerstone
Responsive leadership also requires strong school–family relationships. Initially during the pandemic, districts leveraged existing ties with families to identify needs and deliver support. Staff conducted home visits, distributed food and technology, and helped parents and guardians navigate remote learning.
These relationships weren’t just logistical—they were emotional anchors for educators and motivated their efforts to continue educating students. Educators regularly shared that they survived the pandemic because they “became a family” with students. Relationships and trust with students and families became the foundation for educator resilience.
Equity at the center: Tailoring support to individual needs
Across states and districts, leaders emphasized equity as a guiding principle. This didn’t always mean sweeping policy reforms; it often meant tailoring support to individual student needs. Districts prioritized services for English learners, students with disabilities, and those living in poverty. Rather than approaching a one-size-fits-all solution, leaders endeavored to think differently about education systems and personalize policies and solutions where possible.
Districts with prior success in meeting diverse student needs often had extensive experience and established systems to adapt to pandemic-related demands. District leaders also encouraged collaboration between general education and specialized staff to tailor instruction to individual student needs and reengage students who were absent or not participating in class. Leaders emphasized the value of distributing responsibility for student learning across multiple roles, rather than relying solely on core content teachers. Teachers, in turn, shared that this whole-group approach helped them feel less isolated from their colleagues and reduced their workloads.
The human cost: Burnout and the need for sustainable support
While these stories highlight innovation and compassion, they also reveal the toll on leaders and educators. Navigating the relentless uncertainty and challenges of the pandemic left district leaders emotionally exhausted. Oftentimes, leaders were so focused on supporting others that they did not have time to attend to their own social-emotional well-being. These stresses also reverberated at the school level among school principals and teaching staff.
Leaders argued that providing individual support and self-care are Band-Aid solutions for a deeper issue of system stress. Leaders need to grapple with unsustainable work conditions and job stresses in schools as part of their learning and efforts to rebuild school systems that are more robust and resilient to crisis.
Looking ahead: A call to action
The pandemic exposed deep inequities and tested the limits of our education systems. But it also revealed what’s possible when leaders respond with empathy, flexibility, and a commitment to equity.
Responsive leadership in crisis is not a temporary strategy—it’s a mindset. It means treating schools as resource hubs, listening to communities, and meeting students where they are. It means recognizing that learning is intertwined with health, safety, and belonging for students, families, and educators.
As we prepare for future challenges—whether pandemics, climate disasters, or social upheaval—these lessons must guide our path forward.
Want to read further? Explore these research articles:
- “Leading during crisis: State and local education leaders’ equity-focused approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic”
- “How state education leaders supported students’ access to education amidst the COVID-19 crisis: Lessons for policy”
- “Re-engaging students in the post-pandemic era”
- “Partnering through pandemic recovery: An examination of a research-practice partnership in Guilford County Schools”
- “Responding to crisis: A multiple case study of district approaches for supporting student learning in the COVID-19 pandemic”
