“I miss the normalness”: Mother and child perspectives of well-being and effective remote support from primary schools during Covid-19 school closures

Parents/guardians were invited to register interest for the study via advertisements placed in local on-line parenting forums in three local authorities in southern England during July 2020. Recruitment posters included a digital link to a study information sheet and consent form, and parents were informed that they would be contacted within two weeks about whether they had been selected to take part. In total, 43 parents registered to take part between 7 and 11 July 2020, all of whom were mothers. Of these, 21 dyads were selected for interview using stratified random sampling to ensure equal representation of girls and boys, and all eligible school year groups. Selected participants were contacted by phone to schedule the interview via MS Teams and to go through the information sheet and consent form, with opportunities for participants to ask questions. Parents who were not selected for interview were contacted via email to thank them for their interest. All interviews took place during July 2020; four months after schools closed to most pupils in the UK. Interviews were conducted by one of two researchers [AL and LD] using a semi-structured interview guide. To ensure consistency, both interviewers met to discuss interview approach before data collection, and LD observed a pilot interview with a volunteer parent/child dyad that was led by AL.

Child interviews were approximately 15–20 min long, and parents were invited to stay to support their child if desired. In total, 16 mothers opted to be present and five left the room. Children were asked to reflect on their experiences at home during lockdown, including impact on friendships, and to describe any support they had received from school. They were also asked about their feelings and expectations about going back to school in September 2020. Mothers were asked to consider the impact of school closures on their child’s social and emotional well-being and to evaluate their school’s response to supporting families at home. Finally, mothers were asked to describe their feelings about schools reopening in September 2020 and to highlight any issues they felt should be prioritised to support successful reintegration. Parent interviews were approximately 45 min long.

All 21 families consented to take part in a second interview during December 2020 and January 2021, at which point all schools in the UK had been reopen since September 2020. Interviews took place between 14 December 2020 and 6 February 2021. During this period the UK Government announced a second period of national school closures. Interview topic guides were adapted to include additional questions about the impact of this change on children and parents. The 10 families who had completed the interview prior to the Government announcement were invited to provide responses to the additional questions in writing via email. Of these families, seven provided email responses.

All dyads were interviewed by the same interviewer as at Time 1. Semi-structured interview guides were developed to elicit responses about the ways in which schools had supported pupil reintegration during the Autumn term. Questions were based on an established whole-school approaches conceptual framework identifying four levels at which schools structure support for children’s social and emotional well-being: individual pupil, small groups, class, and whole school [16]. Mothers and children were asked to reflect on how children had adjusted to going back to school, including describing any significant changes. Participants were also asked to describe ways in which class teachers and the wider school community had helped children to settle in at each of the four levels in the conceptual WSA model [16]. Dyads interviewed after the announcement of the second period of closures were asked to describe their thoughts and feelings about this, including any changes to the support and home learning materials offered by schools.

Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. All identifying information was removed during transcription and each child was given an alias. Aliases are used to identify individuals throughout this report, followed by Y3-6 to indicate school year group.

Transcribed interviews were analysed using reflexive inductive thematic analysis using a critical realist approach [29]. To ensure that the perspectives and experiences of each dyad were accorded equal priority, each transcript was analysed inductively using non-hierarchical initial codes. Patterns were then synthesised across the dataset in a recursive process that included frequent checking back to the original data to ensure that identified themes provided an accurate and meaningful account of the data [30].

Inductive thematic analysis is an active interpretative process and, as such, it is important to recognise the position of the researcher in the context of data analysis. Two authors (AL and KL) are parents of primary school aged children who were themselves directly impacted by school closures. While this personal experience supported the building of rapport, we were mindful of the potential of these experiences to impact data collection and analysis. To minimise the risk of researcher bias, throughout analysis the research team met fortnightly to discuss our own assumptions and experiences and to interrogate analysis in the context of those experiences. Final themes were reviewed and agreed jointly by the main research team (AL, RB and KL).

To allow a nuanced consideration of change over time we employed a hybrid approach to analysis at time 2 incorporating both inductive and deductive thematic coding [24, 31, 32]. The thematic structure from Time 1 was imported as a flexible deductive framework from which to analyse transcripts at Time 2. New codes were incorporated where appropriate to represent inductively coded new or emerging themes. This approach ensured our interpretative analysis had a central focus on change over time (within person narratives) as well as on between subject comparisons at each time point [31].

Finally, identified themes across timepoints were organised into four super-ordinate latent themes. Throughout analysis the research team met fortnightly to consider, and reach agreement on, identified themes.

Most children experienced mood and behavioural decline during the first phase of closures. For many this decline was described as significant and prolonged with lockdown associated with feelings of listlessness and ennui, as well as anger and frustration. One child described lockdown as “empty time” [when] “I sit on my bed and I get angry with my sisters” (Seb, Y4). Feelings of loneliness and isolation were particularly acute for children whose parents and siblings were unavailable for long periods due to work and school commitments: “At school you get to talk to your friends…but at home my parents are working, my sister is doing her own thing, so I’m kind of like on my own” (Evie, Y6).

Lack of contact with friends and teachers was identified as a leading cause of distress by all children we interviewed, along with missing normal school routines and activities: “I miss the normalness and I miss the fun of being with my friends and my teacher” (Peter, Y4). Mothers also attributed children’s mood decline to disrupted social networks and routines, as well as describing increased pressure on family relationships caused by being “intensely together” (Mabel’s mum, Y3) in an environment of elevated stress: “Families have been through a really difficult time…at times our home has been like a pressure cooker” (Frank’s mum, Y6).

For some children, mood decline was so significant that parents negotiated an early return to school under vulnerable and/or keyworker provision. “It just went downhill quite quickly… It was quite frightening and if she hadn’t been able to go back to school, I don’t know what we would have done.” (Evie’s mum, Y6). “My kid was depressed! He was ten years old with symptoms of a quite serious depression. It was heart breaking. I had to email the school and say I really needed him to come in” (Frank’s mum, Y6).

Children with less severe symptoms were described as more “up and down” (Peter’s mum, Y4) than usual with increased frequency of tantrums and emotional meltdowns, “lots more extreme crying – seemingly about nothing” (Nicole’s mum Y4) or who developed new anxiety symptoms that parents associated with not being able to take part in normal social activities: “He’s developed this swallowing tic that he didn’t have before…because…you know, he has big ideas and feels like we’re pouring cold water on them all the time” (Seb’s mum, Y4).

Of the children who experienced mood and behavioural decline at Time 1, most experienced a full recovery following the reopening of schools, including the children whose symptoms were severe enough to warrant an early return to school. Children described feeling joy at being with their friends again and being back in a stimulating, familiar routine: “The first day back I was thinking, ‘This is back to school! This is back to school, and it’s great because I don’t have to be in that annoying old lockdown’” (Seb, Y4). For some parents, the change in mood was so marked it felt like having a different child in the house: “It’s like somebody came and lived here for lockdown and now I have my Ada back” (Ada’s mum, Y5).

Like children, mothers attributed mood and behavioural improvements to reconnecting with friends and being back in a structured, stimulating learning environment: “It’s so much better. He needs to be out. He should be with his friends. He’s not designed to be locked up!” (Toby’s mum. Y3).

Partial well-being improvements were reported for the remaining children who experienced mood and behavioural decline at Time 1. While these children enjoyed many aspects of returning to school, some residual anxiety or behaviour issues remained with some children finding it more of a challenge to re-establish positive friendships, particularly within the context of ongoing Covid restrictions in school: “…it started to dawn on her that it was far from normal. The novelty and the excitement of it wore off, combined with the exhaustion of having to readjust to the structure” (Mabel’s mum, Y3).

Overall, we found that school closures were associated with mood and behavioural decline which, for most children, resolved without the need for additional intervention following school reopening. The spontaneous nature of this recovery supports the attributions of both parents and children that a decline in well-being over this period was in large part related to the disruption to important social systems, including social relationships and access to enriched activities and routines.

Parental availability, confidence, and access to financial resources were important indicators of well-being, with families who were able to spend time supporting children with home learning, or those able to provide enriched lockdown activities, less likely to report a marked deterioration.

The requirement for parents to assume the role of teacher reduced time available for parents and children to spend time together having fun and was a significant “source of tension” (Ben’s mum, Y3) for many families, with both parents and children associating the adjustment to normal parent-child relationships with increased stress and conflict. Working parents and those lacking teaching confidence or skills found this change particularly challenging.

Parental availability due to the pressures of working from home was another important factor influencing well-being with both mothers and children describing parents being physically present but emotionally unavailable due to work commitments as particularly emotionally demanding: “I wish that mum and dad would be more with us because they’re usually working” (Peter, Y4).

School closures and lockdown shifted the way families occupied the home with a blurring of boundaries between the domestic sphere and parents’ professional and public roles. Mothers recognised that this shift was often difficult for children whose homes were no longer private spaces but workplaces and schools, and who were often cut off from contact with parents for prolonged periods during the working day: “I might have two or three meetings where they can’t come to the door at all—they’ve found that quite tough, actually, because this is their family home, this is their kitchen, you know” (Lily, Y4). “It was really hard because Daddy was here but not with him…It was easier when Daddy was in the office, than—than him being at home but not being involved” (Toby’s mum, Y3).

In the wider context of reduced play and social opportunities, sibling relationships became increasingly important. Mothers described the play and companionship afforded by sibling relationships as important protective factors and that overall siblings were more bonded and had “been able to enjoy each other more” (Lizzy’s mum, Y3). Conversely, children without siblings were more likely to experience pronounced feelings of loneliness and isolation which put additional pressure on parent and child relationships: “He’s an only child as well—we try to not make him too isolated…It’s been hard being alone and I think he missed a lot the– well the social aspect” (Toby’s mum, Y3).

Finally, children with a family member particularly vulnerable to Covid-19 were more likely to experience feelings of anxiety, especially during the phased reopening of public facilities: “because I haven’t been able to sort of take her out to the parks and go and see her friends and um, that’s kind of made it like an extra level of difficult” (Florence’s mum, Y6).

Ongoing meaningful contact with peers, as well as with extended family and friends, were important predictors of emotional well-being. Children described missing spontaneous, physical play with friends in the playground at school or in the park as a big loss: “[The worst part of lockdown is] missing my friends and then every play—running out into the playground to get there first to play football” (Toby, Y3). Parents noticed improvements in children’s well-being when public play areas reopened and children were permitted to play outdoors: “because lockdown has eased a bit, we’ve now been able to meet up with friends more regularly and go out which has been really good for him” (Theo’s mum, Y5).

All 21 children and mothers cited lack of in-person contact with friends as the primary reason for feelings of loneliness, frustration and lack of motivation, with mothers tending to report more concern about children’s social relationships than educational progress: “I’m not bothered about the schooling aspect. He’s seven. But the, um, the friend aspect is…” (Toby’s mum, Y3).

Mothers were also concerned about the longer-term impact of social isolation on children’s social competence and emotional well-being, with several noticing a decline in social skills which they attributed to disrupted peer contact: “It was very obvious, like the first time he met up with people that they were kind of like a bit ‘Ahh! You know, what do we do?” (Theo’s mum, Y5).

Opportunities to meet up with friends took on a new significance during lockdown, with parents describing an enhanced appreciation of the value of play for children’s development.

While online platforms like Zoom or FaceTime were commonly used by parents to try and maintain friendships, these tended to be less meaningful for younger children or for children whose friendships are primarily based on physical play. Children tended to agree that while virtual contact was better than nothing it was not a good substitute for in-person interactions: “I just felt it was nice to see her again…I didn’t really get to play with her, but it was better than not seeing her at all” (Wes, Y4).

The most successful remote social interactions were between children with good conversational abilities and who had a strong existing friendship. Shy children, and those with low social competence, were less likely to be able to successfully manage remote interactions with friends. Online contact was also less successful for new or emerging friendships, or between children who found extended conversations difficult or boring.

Group interactions were also very challenging online, with most families reporting abandoning attempts at whole class, or large group meetups, because they were too difficult for children to manage. Parents felt that initiating online interactions required a level of social confidence that often excluded reticent or younger children.

Maintaining a predictable and varied daily routine was important for children’s well-being, with parents commenting that being outside in nature, engaging in sport and exercise, and having something meaningful to do were essential for maintaining motivation and a positive outlook: “It’s worse, I think, emotionally, if you just let them do nothing all day” (Lily’s mum, Y4). Families with the time and resources to go out for regular walks, or who were able to plan a range of enhanced activities were more likely to report benefits of lockdown for children: “Even when the lockdown was really strict, we could still walk somewhere and, you know, be out for half the day and not—not come in contact with many people” (Theo’s mum, Y5). Parents felt that being outdoors had therapeutic value for children experiencing low mood or poor motivation and described prioritising getting children outside despite work commitments because of the impact on mood and behaviour. “It was just reminding him that there was an outside world…we were looking at the colours of the rainbow and trying to find flowers every colour of the rainbow, um he really picked up” (Daniel’s mum, Y5).

Children’s temperament, resilience and social competence were identified as important factors influencing children’s well-being during closures. Children described as emotionally articulate were more likely to regulate their feelings and emotions and communicate their well-being needs to parents: “…she’s quite mature and she’s quite articulate so she’s been able to express how she’s been feeling” (Lily’s mum, Y4). In contrast, children with less developed emotional intelligence had more difficulty understanding their own feelings, and positively framing their experiences: “It’s quite hard for him to process it or articulate it because I think when you ask him those questions, he doesn’t necessarily even know how it has affected him but observing him…I would say that it really, really has” (Frank’s mum, Y6).

Children who coped best with lockdown were described as self-motivated and able to make the most of the sudden increase in unstructured free time. The ability to respond creatively to boredom and the enforced slowing down were also indicators of positive adjustment: “He’s been pottering around finding things to do on his own and actually he’s not found it very difficult” (Ben’s mum, Y3).

Overall, risk and protective factors tended to mirror existing indicators of social disadvantage. Children who thrived were more likely to have families with access to financial and practical resources to scaffold lockdown activities to help children adjust to their changed environment. The only family-level risk factor that did not fit this pattern of existing disadvantage was parent availability, highlighting the significant additional pressures experienced by working parents during this time, and the complex challenge of balancing work, childcare, and school responsibilities for parents working from home. Maintaining relationships with friends, and connections with teachers was also important, with children’s temperament, age, and social competence influencing the extent that this was possible within the limitations imposed on social interactions.

Irregular or inadequate contact with families at home was a leading concern with parents feeling that lack of contact with a known teacher prevented meaningful assessment and monitoring of child well-being. Overall, parents felt that schools had been slow to respond to the needs of children at home at the cost of essential safe-guarding responsibilities: “After a month of being in lockdown they don’t know who their vulnerable children are any more” (Ada’s mum, Y5).

Where regular contact was in place, parents did not feel this was always delivered in the most meaningful or appropriate way, with mothers frustrated by generic communication strategies or a one-size fits all approach. Direct contact between children and a known teacher was felt to be the most valuable strategy overall.

Families who described having predictable and regular contact with teachers felt that it had contributed significantly to children’s motivation and engagement, particularly if contact included the facilitation of peer interactions: “She’s had a weekly Zoom with her class. It felt like she was still part of something” (Nicole’s mum, Y4). “He really perked up after [speaking to the teacher]…and her giving some motivational…praise…I would see him smiling and he was full of beans after that” (Daniel’s mum, Y5).

The quality of home learning provision also varied widely. Parents were most satisfied with schools that provided manageable and accessible resources with regular teacher feedback and some opportunity for peer learning via live online teaching, commenting that this connection made activities feel less monotonous and isolating: “they’re logging on, you can actually see their faces which has been really great and it’s like, nice to see more groups and Sophie can then see her classmates and catch up with her teacher which is—she’s really loved” (Sophie’s mum, Y5). Although most parents recognised the challenge of providing a rich and varied remote curriculum, many were critical of a perceived failure to adequately account for children’s need for dynamic feedback, variety, and the opportunity to learn with peers. Parents associated tedious or repetitive home learning materials, or a very restricted focus on core skills, with a decline in children’s well-being. Overall, most families were dissatisfied or ambivalent about the content of home learning and were critical of a perceived reluctance for schools to provide interactive teaching online: “Other organisations have adapted but the schools just couldn’t seem to get their heads round how to do it” (Laurie’s mum, Y6).

Children also tended to talk about home learning in negative terms, describing tasks as a poor substitute for normal lessons and reported missing regular input from teachers and opportunities to share their learning with peers: “There’s not much I’ve been enjoying about not going to school to be honest. I haven’t really been enjoying home schooling” (Harry, Y5).

During the second period of school closures, parents and children reported significant improvements to home learning resources which they related to increased child engagement. Mothers felt that learning plans had a more coherent and manageable structure, and most children were taught via pre-recorded videos or live on-line lessons rather than worksheets.

However, despite improvements, parents were concerned that pupils’ well-being was likely to be adversely impacted by a second period of home learning with virtual learning considered no substitute for face-to-face interactions.

Some schools came up with imaginative ways to engage children during closures, and parents particularly valued varied activities that children could access independently and that kept them imaginatively occupied.

However, overall, parents felt that creative opportunities to inspire and motivate children beyond the curriculum had been missed and that there should have been a stronger emphasis on “the social aspects of learning and fun” (Nicole’s mum, Y4). Several parents attributed this to a lack of ambition from schools and policy makers over this period. “The starting point is always “we can’t rather than, can we?” (Mabel’s mum, Y3). “The kids… at home, they’ve been pretty much abandoned. Or that’s what we feel like” (Frank’s mum, Y6). Overall parents felt that support for children at home had not been schools’ main priority. Specifically, they identified a lack of coordinated planning and resources that could have enabled schools to provide a more ambitious programme of support with a holistic focus on children’s well-being. “I do think the whole thing was inevitable, given the complete lack of preparedness of the Government to deal with any of this” (Evie’s mum, Y6).

Schools also varied in the extent they were able to maintain a sense of community and connectedness with families. Most parents felt that schools had a duty to support and promote emotional and social well-being and were critical of schools perceived as adopting a restricted academic focus. Overall, parents felt that children living in disadvantaged environments would be disproportionately impacted by a’ perceived reluctance to maintain a connected school system for families at home: “[There should be] recognition of the fact that schools should provide more than education” (Evie’s mum, Y6). “It’s not just about the work but the connection. Just reminding people that they care about you. That’s important” (Harry’s mum, Y5).

Examples of good practice included hosting virtual, or distanced, community events and competitions, providing remote well-being sessions in small groups, and sending supportive messages or creative tasks home. Parents felt that it was important for children to feel that teachers were still there for them and that the perception of being kept in mind was an essential part of maintaining motivation and engagement. “She felt like her teachers were listening, even if they weren’t actually teaching in that time… They showed throughout the whole thing that they cared” (Lily’s mum, Y4).

Most parents were not aware of any targeted interventions specifically to address pupil’s social and emotional well-being although many felt that additional support was likely to be available for pupils on a targeted basis if needed. Where pupils did receive specific interventions, these were either 1:1 emotional therapeutic support from a counsellor or, more frequently, class-based activities talking about their feelings about school closures and lockdown. In general, children did not enjoy explicitly Covid-focused well-being lessons: “We had like one or two class meetings where we talked about like how Covid has been for you and whether you think Covid has affected your family and stuff. But we all found that really boring” (Seb, Y4).

While parents agreed that targeted interventions were necessary for some children, they shared children’s concerns that specific Covid-focused interventions at the class level might not always be helpful, noting that discussing feelings about lockdown was an adult-centric approach, and that children would be less likely to be able to meaningfully access this kind of support. “I think they did bubble times, that’s what they call it in their classes…He’s a bit like, ‘oh you’re here to like draw our feelings again” [laughter] (Toby’s mum, Y3)

Overall, there was consensus that children’s reintegration was best supported by universal, preventative approaches that focused on developing the school community, promoted children’s participation in outdoor learning and sport, and prioritised fun and play.

Access to play was identified as an important way to support children’s friendships and well-being. While parents generally felt that schools had managed to balance ongoing Covid restrictions with children’s access to play, several were critical of perceived unreasonable restrictions to play time and equipment which they felt came at a cost of allowing children to settle back into school routines and social groups.

This concern was echoed by all the children we interviewed who described frustrations about restricted access to play as the most important limiting factor during the first term back to school. While some schools adapted cleaning schedules to ensure most play equipment remained accessible to children, others had imposed tight restrictions on the use of play areas: “We’re allowed to walk through it [adventure play equipment], but we’re not allowed to actually play on it (Wes, Y4).

Although opportunities for the whole school to gather for assemblies were limited by ongoing restrictions, parents reported that several schools operated virtual or outdoor assemblies and retained a focus on reinstating school routines and fun. One mother described the significant impact of an outdoor concert hosted by her child’s school during this time. “Music is blaring out and I kind of had a bit of a — I felt quite emotional about it, you know—that they refuse to kind of diminish the experience of the children” (Peter’s mum, Y4).

The marked improvement in children’s well-being following the return to school was largely attributed to the opportunity for children to interact and play with their friends, and to experience a varied and stimulating routine. Mothers commented that children benefitted from being in larger groups and from learning to be more socially independent, particularly as they approached transition to secondary (high) school.

For most parents, children being back in school was also associated with improved family relationships, “he has had a break from the intense family environment that he was in before. You know we can’t really escape from each other so that’s been good for all of us” (Harry’s mum, Y5). While a minority of children required additional targeted support, most adapted well and benefitted from the social contact and enriched environment of the classroom. Parents reflected that lockdown and the period of closures had given them new insight into the role of schools and their wider significance for children’s social development and well-being. “I feel very strongly that they need—that for their well-being, school is the place for them to be. And I felt that that overrides really anything else” (Ben’s mum, Y3).

Overall, parents felt that schools, and society more generally, should prioritise children’s access to social contact and meaningful activity in the aftermath of the pandemic, and were concerned about the long-term impact of restrictions on children’s emotional and social development. Parents described emotional health as an essential prerequisite for academic learning and felt that the impact of restrictions on children had frequently failed to adequately consider children’s developmental needs, commenting that the public health response did not properly account for the likely detriment to children’s well-being when making policy recommendations: “I felt that although we weren’t doing things, it was important that if someone was going to go out and do stuff that it should be children” (Theo’s mum, Y5).