Since 23rd March 2020, UK schools have been closed for most children, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools are unlikely to re-open to the majority of pupils before September, meaning some will be out of school for more than six months. As school relationships serve as a buffer against psycho-social risks and against the risk of low academic attainment, particularly for children of low-income families (Masten and Barnes, 2018), the vulnerabilities of many children may have significantly increased as a consequence of the school closures. Research suggests that long absences from school are likely to have a negative effect on academic achievement and increase achievement gaps (see Sims, 2020). Inequalities in resources and time available to families to spend on home schooling is likely to exacerbate existing achievement gaps (see Dickson & Macmillan, 2020; Outhwaite, 2020). There may also be significant challenges to mental health and wellbeing in schools after lockdown (Lee, 2020). Children and young people have been away from the community and structure that school provides. Some may carry personal losses, and some may have experienced significant stressors in the family. Mental health and wellbeing are fundamental to learning and development (Panayiotou et al., 2019), and therefore must be prioritised in the post-lockdown transition and beyond. This briefing note summarises the empirical evidence on approaches to closing achievement gaps and supporting the most vulnerable children in academic, and social and emotional learning as schools can safely re-open

Gulliford, A

Outhwaite, L

English

UCL Discovery

CENTRE FOR EDUCATION POLICY & EQUALISING OPPORTUNITIESBriefing note Academic and social and emotional interventions in response to Covid-19 school closuresPrepared by Laura Outhwaite and Anthea GullifordRecommendations School leaders:   Implement universal approaches for community rebuilding during and following the post-lockdown transition period. Prioritise social and emotional learning alongside other academic skills.Policy makers:  Support schools with pupil premium-type funds to enable access to effective targeted academic and social and emotional intervention resources.  Enable schools to access specialist educational psychologist support, especially for children who are significantly at risk of psycho-social difficulties. Key Points Small group and one-to-one instruction are the most effective forms of academic intervention post-lockdown. This will be the best way to support at-risk children and young people in the return to school and mitigate the negative effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on academic achievement. Social and emotional learning is key. This includes play-based approaches, particularly for younger children. It improves students’ wellbeing, their sense of belonging, and, in turn, their academic outcomes.  Support for the most vulnerable children and young people will also need to involve external professionals, such as educational psychologists.The IssueSince 23rd March 2020, UK schools have been closed for most children, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools are unlikely to re-open to the majority of pupils before Sep-tember, meaning some will be out of school for more than six months. As school relationships serve as a buffer against psycho-social risks and against the risk of low academic attain-ment, particularly for children of low-income families (Masten and Barnes, 2018), the vul-nerabilities of many children may have sig-nificantly increased as a consequence of the school closures. Research suggests that long absences from school are likely to have a negative effect on academic achievement and increase achieve-ment gaps (see Sims, 2020). Inequalities in re-sources and time available to families to spend on home schooling is likely to exacerbate existing achievement gaps (see Dickson & Macmillan, 2020; Outhwaite, 2020). There may also be significant challenges to mental health and wellbeing in schools after lockdown (Lee, 2020). Children and young people have been away from the community and structure that school provides. Some may carry personal losses, and some may have experienced sig-nificant stressors in the family. Mental health and wellbeing are fundamental to learning and development (Panayiotou et al., 2019), and therefore must be prioritised in the post-lock-down transition and beyond.This briefing note summarises the empirical evidence on approaches to closing achieve-ment gaps and supporting the most vulnerable children in academic, and social and emotional learning as schools can safely re-open. Academic and Socio-Emotional LearningKey learning areas including reading, mathe-matics, and socio-emotional skills are strong predictors of later academic achievement (Duncan et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 2017), as well as of economic, employment, mental and physical health outcomes in adulthood (Good-man et al., 2015; Reyna et al., 2009). Childrenand young people may be vulnerable to diffi-culties in these areas for a variety of reasons. For example, children and young people from low socio-economic backgrounds, those with special educational needs, those in care, and those with low proficiency in English, are more likely to face academic difficulties relative to their not-at-risk peers (Children’s Commis-sioner, 2019; Strand et al., 2015; Strand and Hesell, 2018; Sullivan et al., 2013). Adverse events, environments, and family stressors in childhood are also associated with increased academic and developmental risk (Blodgett and Lanigan, 2018; Mayer, 2002). While chil-dren may face risk throughout their academic careers (Dietrichson et al., 2020), they can be protected by positive psycho-social environ-ments provided by the school (Masten and Barnes, 2018). To tackle academic achieve-ment gaps, it is important to have effective in-structional and social-emotional practices and interventions available across all age groups and skill areas. Socio-emotional learning encompasses chil-dren and young people’s ability “to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve posi-tive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions” (Hagarty and Morgan, 2019). Research shows socio-emo-tional skills are associated with better mental health outcomes in childhood, including well-being, coping with emotional distress, and lower internalised symptoms of anxiety and depression (Durlak et al., 2011; Goodman et al., 2015). Socio-emotional skills are also positively associated with academic outcomes (Wigelsworth et al., 2020) and with a sense of school belonging, which itself has significant positive associations with academic outcomes (Panayiotou et al., 2019).Characteristics of Effective Interven-tionsFor academic achievement, small group in-struction (e.g. groups of 3-5 pupils) and one-to-one tutoring were consistently found to be the most effective form of targeted interven-tion for boosting reading and mathematics attainment of at-risk children aged 4-19 years across three systematic reviews and me-ta-analyses (Dietrichson et al., 2011; Dietrich-son et al., 2020; Nelson and McMaster, 2019). These studies considered children at-risk of learning vulnerabilities based on their low-so-cio-economic status and special educational needs. They also found significant benefits associated with interventions that incorporated feedback and progress monitoring (Dietrichson et al., 2017; Dietrichson et al., 2020), mixed ability groupings for mathematics with young children aged 4-8 years (Nelson and McMas-ter, 2019), and peer assisted learning with old-er children aged 12-19 years (Dietrichson et al., 2020). In contrast, peer assisted learning was found to be the least beneficial for young, at-risk children (Nelson and McMaster, 2019). Computer assisted instruction and incentive interventions also showed less beneficial impacts compared to small group instruction in closing the achievement gap in reading and mathematics between at-risk and not-at-risk students aged 12-19 years (Dietrichson et al., 2020).For social and emotional learning, Durlak et al. (2011) examined 213 studies focused on typically developing children aged 5-18 years. Results showed socio-emotional learning inter-ventions, which were sequential, active, fo-cused, and explicit, had significant benefits for socio-emotional skills targeted by the interven-tions, as well improving academic outcomes. These positive effects remained statistically significant for a minimum of six months after the intervention, even if the size of the effect reduced marginally during the follow-up period when the intervention had stopped. Similarly, across 12 studies, Hagarty and Morgan (2020) found play-based and social skill programmes were beneficial for children with learning disa-bilities. This evidence emphasises the impor-tance of play within the educational experienc-es of children and young people (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2009). Wigelsworth et al. (2020) detail the specific activities that teachers can confi-dently use to promote socio-emotional learn-ing. Many layers of influence affect children’s academic achievement and socio-emotion-al wellbeing (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) and the nterventions listed so far may not be enough to ensure the necessary support for the most vulnerable children and young people. Edu-cational psychologists can play a vital role in providing this support through offering guid-ance on the transition back to school, advising schools on implementing targeted provision (Atkinson et al., 2014), and conducting spe-cialist work with individuals at greatest risk (Zafeiriou and Gulliford, In Press).  Costs of Effective InterventionsInvesting in effective early intervention has long-term economic advantages in terms of costs savings on later public spending (Doyle et al., 2007). It is estimated that nearly £17 billion per year is spent by the state in England and Wales on late intervention, including ac-cess to acute or statutory services and welfare benefits, as a consequence of adverse child-hoods (Chowdry and Fitzsimons, 2016). Other estimates suggest educational underachieve-ment costs the UK economy £18 billion a year (McNally and Telhaj, 2007).Effective, evidence-based interventions in reading, mathematics, and socio-emotional skills across age groups are summarised in the Teaching and Learning and Early Years Toolkits and Guidance Reports by the Edu-cation Endowment Foundation. Importantly, these resources also provide information about the costs per pupil for each intervention evalu-ated and the implementation logistics required. This can help teachers and school leaders make informed decisions about what is right for their children and young people within their school context (Higgins et al., 2018). To facilitate academic and social-emotional learning for children and young people fol-lowing the pandemic, schools need to have access to appropriate financial and non-finan-cial resources. Many effective interventions, especially small group instruction will require teaching assistants (TAs). Research shows that well-trained TAs can play a valuable role in children’s educational environments (Shar-ples, Blatchford and Webster, 2016; Inns et al., 2019) and will be especially vital as schools re-open. Access to one-to-one tutoring could also be increased through the proposals to designed to mobilise university students to tutor disadvantaged pupils in English and mathematics (Action Tutoring, 2020; Elliot Major, Tyers, and Chu, 2020). For those most vulnerable, there is evidence that targeted group social and emotional learning interven-tions provided by professionals external to the school are more effective (Stallard, 2010). Pol-icy makers should therefore consider providing funds for such purposes and making educa-tional psychology and other mental health services available to schools.Summary and ImplicationsOverall, schools and related educational ser-vices play a vital role in supporting children and young people’s academic and social and emotional learning. We need well-resourced and sustained interventions that can help pre-vent later health and economic issues for our children and young people as they continue to develop through the experience of this pan-demic. For academic achievement, one-to-one and small group instruction (e.g. 3-5 students) are consistently found to be effective forms of intervention to support catch-up in reading and mathematics. Pupils’ socio-emotional learning should also be prioritised, as part of a whole school, post-COVID transition process involv-ing staff and parent liaison, and through spe-cific socio-emotional interventions. Play-based approaches should be valued as part of this targeted curriculum provision. Based on the summarised evidence, this briefing note recommends that socio-emotion-al learning for children of all ages is prioritised alongside academic achievement in reading and mathematics, as schools safely re-open. Policy makers should ensure that schools have access to adequate funds, intervention resources, and further professional support through educational psychologists to help sup-port their most vulnerable children and young people. ReferencesAction Tutoring. (2020). Action Tutoring joins forces in online tutoring pilot to reach disadvantaged pupils. Available from: https://actiontutoring.org.uk/policy_update/action-tutor-ing-joins-forces-in-online-tutoring-pilot-to-reach-disadvan-taged-pupils/Atkinson, C., Squires, G., Bragg, J., Muscutt, J., & Wasilewski, D. (2014). Facilitators and barriers to the provision of therapeutic interventions by school psychologists. School Psychology International, 35(4), 384-397.Blodgett, C., & Lanigan, J. D. (2018). The association between adverse childhood experience (ACE) and school success in elementary school children. School Psychology Quarter-ly, 33(1), 137.Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human develop-ment. Harvard university press.Children’s Commissioner’s Office. (2019). Briefing: the chil-dren leaving school with nothing. Available from: https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/2019/09/20/almost-one-in-five-children-left-education-at-18-last-year-without-basic-qualifications/  Chowdry, H., & Fitzsimons, P. (2016). The cost of late inter-vention: EIF analysis 2016. Available from: https://www.eif.org.uk/report/the-cost-of-late-intervention-eif-analysis-2016Dickson, M., & Macmillan, L. (2020). Inequality in Access to Grammar Schools. CEPEO Briefing Note 20-03. Available from: https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/uclcepeob/3.htmDietrichson, J., Bøg, M., Filges, T., & Klint Jørgensen, A. M. (2017). Academic interventions for elementary and middle school students with low socioeconomic status: A sys-tematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 243-282.Dietrichson, J., Filges, T., Klokker, R. H., Viinholt, B. C., Bøg, M., & Jensen, U. H. (2020). Targeted school-based interventions for improving reading and mathematics for students with, or at risk of, academic difficulties in Grades 7–12: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16(2), doi:10.1002/cl2.1081. Doyle, O., Tremblay, R. E., Harmon, C., & Heckman, J. J. (2007). Early childhood intervention: rationale, timing, and efficacy. Available from: https://researchrepository.ucd.ie/bitstream/10197/546/3/doyleo_workpap_001.pdfDuncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., ... & Sexton, H. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychol-ogy, 43(6), 1428-1446.Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.Elliot Major, L., Tyers, M., & Chu, R. (2020). The National Tutoring Service: Levelling-up education’s playing field. Available from: https://www.exeter.ac.uk/media/university-ofexeter/collegeofsocialsciencesandinternationalstudies/education/documentsfordownload/National_Tutoring_Ser-vice_April_2020.pdfGoodman, A., Joshi, H., Nasim, B., & Tyler, C. (2015). Social and emotional skills in childhood and their long-term ef-fects on adult life. Available from:  https://www.eif.org.uk/report/social-and-emotional-skills-in-childhood-and-their-long-term-effects-on-adult-lifeHagarty, I., & Morgan, G. (2020). Social-emotional learning for children with learning disabilities: a systematic review. Educational Psychology in Practice, 1-15.Higgins, S., Elliot-Major, L., Coleman, R., Katsipataki, M., Henderson, P., Mason, D., Aguilera, A. B. V., & Kay, J. (2018). Sutton Trust- Education Endowment Foundation Teaching and Learning Toolkit. Available from: https://edu-cationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/ Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool: Apply-ing the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press.Inns, A., Lake, C., Pellegrini, M., & Slavin, R. (2019). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthe-sis. In annual meeting of the Society for Research on Ed-ucational Effectiveness, Washington, DC. Available from: http://www.bestevidence.org/word/strug_read_April_2019_full.pdfLee, J. (2020). Mental health effects of school closures during COVID-19. Lancet Child Adolescent Health, doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30109-7.Masten, A. S., & Barnes, A. J. (2018). Resilience in children: Developmental perspectives. Children, 5(7), 98; doi: 10.3390/children5070098.Mayer, S. (2002). The Influence of Parental Income on Chil-dren’s Outcomes. Available from: https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resourc-es/research/influence-parental-income/influence-of-paren-tal-income.pdfMcNally, S. & Telhaj, S. (2007). The cost of exclusion: count-ing the cost of youth disadvantage in the UK. Available from: https://intouniversity.org/sites/all/files/userfiles/files/Prince's%20Trust%20Cost%20of%20youth%20exclusion.pdfNelson, G., & McMaster, K. L. (2019). The effects of early numeracy interventions for students in preschool and early elementary: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psy-chology, 111(6), 1001-1022.Outhwaite, L. (2020). Inequalities in Resources in the Home Learning Environment. CEPEO Briefing Note 20-02. Available from: https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/uclce-peob/2.htm  Panayiotou, M., Humphrey, N., & Wigelsworth, M. (2019). An empirical basis for linking social and emotional learning to academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psy-chology, 56, 193-204.Reyna, V. F., Nelson, W. L., Han, P. K., & Dieckmann, N. F. (2009). How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 943–973.Sharples, J., Blatchford, P., & Webster, R. (2016). Making best use of teaching assistants. Available from: https://educa-tionendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Publications/Teaching_Assistants/TA_Guidance_Report_MakingBestU-seOfTeachingAssistants-Printable.pdf.Sims, S. (2020). School Absences and Pupil Achievement. CEPEO Briefing Note 20-01. Available from: https://econ-papers.repec.org/paper/uclcepeob/1.htm Stallard, P. (2010). Mental health prevention in UK class-rooms: The FRIENDS anxiety prevention programme.  Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(1), 23-35.Strand, S., & Hessel, A. (2018). English as an Additional Language, proficiency in English and pupils’ educational achievement: An analysis of Local Authority data. Available from:  www.bell-foundation.org.uk Strand, S., Malmberg, L., & Hall, J. (2015). English as an Ad-ditional Language (EAL) and educational achievement in England: An analysis of the National Pupil Database. Avail-able from: https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/23323/EAL_and_educational_achieve-ment2.pdf?sequence=1Sullivan, A., Ketende, S., & Joshi, H. (2013). Social class and inequalities in early cognitive scores. Sociology, 47(6), 1187- 1206 Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88(4), 1156–1171.Wigelsworth, M., Verity, L., Mason, C., Humphrey, M., Qual-ter, P., & Troncoso, P. (2020). Programmes to Practices: Identifying effective, evidence-based social and emotional learning strategies for teachers and schools: Evidence review. Available from: https://educationendowmentfoun-dation.org.uk/public/files/Social_and_Emotional_Learn-ing_Evidence_Review.pdfZafeiriou, M.E. & Gulliford, A. (in press). A grounded theory of educational psychologists’ mental health casework in schools: connection, direction and reconstruction through consultation. Educational Psychology in Practice.Image creditsFront and back: UCL Imagestore.Prepared by: Laura Outhwaite & Anthea Gulliford (University of Nottingham)  Contact for further information: Centre for Education Policy &Equalising Opportunities (CEPEO)www.ucl.ac.uk/ioe/cepeoemail: cepeo@ucl.ac.ukDate: June 2020. 

Academic and social and emotional interventions in response to COVID-19 school closures

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10114837/1/cepeobn5.pdf

Academic and social and emotional interventions in response to COVID-19 school closures

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery