The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on early years transition to school in the UK context

ABSTRACT

The transition to school is a critical period for children and families. Successful transition predicts later school achievement and socio-emotional outcomes with sustained long-term benefits. Educational disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic meant that support for the transition of children from nursery to school was limited. The study aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on early years transitions in the U.K., with a focus on children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities. Using a sequential mixed-methods research design, data was gathered from a survey before children started school, and semi-structured interviews after starting school. Results revealed that support for the transition of young children from nursery to school was inevitably affected. Key challenges and facilitating factors in planning for transition are reported as well as the impact of the pandemic on children, families and early years practitioners. The paper concludes with recommendations for policy and practice.

KEYWORDS:

• COVID-19
• transition
• early years
• primary school
• special educational needs

Introduction

The transition to primary school is a critical period in the lives of children and their families. During this time, children experience a novel and qualitatively different environment with increased expectations (Pianta and Kraft-Sayre 2003; Cowan et al. 2005; Ramey and Ramely 2010) that place increased demands on children’s behaviours, cognitions and social skills as they navigate and adapt to their new environment (Yeboah 2002; Dockett and Perry 2007).

It is, therefore, unsurprising that early years transition has inspired a great deal of research over the past two decades. Studies demonstrate that a positive experience during transition to school predicts later school achievement, socio-emotional outcomes and well-being with sustained long-term benefits (Dunlop and Fabian 2006; Peters 2010; Sayers et al. 2012; OECD 2017). Research also reveals that a substantial number of children experience difficulties adjusting to formal schooling (Rimm-Kaufman, Pianta, and Cox 2000; DeMeo Cook and Coley 2017) which is concerning considering the long-term impact of poor transition on subsequent educational achievement (Burrell and Bubb 2000).

Successful transition practices include pre-entry home and school visits, communication with early years settings, flexible admission procedures and staggered entry (Fabian and Dunlop 2007). Such ‘priming activities’ (Corsaro and Molinari 2000; 2008) can provide an opportunity to engage with peers, interact with older children already ensconced in primary school, and prepare children and families for what they might experience. In the English context, briefing reports (Public Health England 2014) suggest that this area of research is vital for improved public health, but currently, there are no existing government guidelines around effective transition practices and no statutory requirement for educational settings to offer an induction or transition period. As a result, the practice depends on local advice or on the approach of each setting (PHE 2014).

Early years transition for children with special educational needs and disabilities

Transition practices are especially critical for children identified as having Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) as the process can be even more complex and challenging. Research in this area identifies children with SEND as a ‘group at risk’ of difficult transitions to school (Sammons 2013; Evans et al. 2010) and in need to receive support tailored to their individual and their families’ needs (Connolly and Gersch 2016; Rodriguez, Cumming, and Strnadová 2017). Although research in this area is scarce, parents of preschool children with SEND often report being unsatisfied with transition support (Janus et al. 2008; Janus and Siddiqua 2015; Siddiqua and Janus 2017) highlighting the need for transition practices to be flexible and appropriate for children with varying profiles of need. An additional factor complicating transitions for children with SEND relate to the existing variation seen across educational settings that could potentially further disadvantage children with SEND.

Current research context

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on very young children has been noticeably absent in public debates which have instead focused heavily on children and young people in primary and secondary phases of education. With the first national lockdown in March 2020, the mandated closures of educational settings and social distancing measures, typical transition practices offered to children and their families as a way of preparing them for formal schooling were disrupted and support for the transition of young children from nursery to school was significantly reduced.

Existing research is very limited in this area, but some research has focused on the impact of the pandemic on the extent to which children are ready for school as evaluated at entry to Reception. A survey of 528 early years and primary school educational professionals (Nicholls et al. 2020) found that, on average, 43% of children were reported not school-ready upon entering Reception. The primary reason for this given by over half of respondents (62%) related to non-attendance at nursery, and therefore lack of learning opportunities to develop essential school readiness skills. In England, the impact of the pandemic on school starters was investigated by surveying 58 primary schools (Bowyer-Crane et al. 2021). The study found that 76% of schools reported children needed more support when entering school in the Autumn Term 2020 than previously reported. These concerns were particularly pronounced when it comes to considering children with SEND. Research undertaken by Ofsted (2020) indicated that early years providers were more concerned about the learning and development of children with SEND due to an increased likelihood of not attending their settings in the Autumn Term 2020.

To date, there has been no research on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on early years transitions to school. It was hypothesised that closures of educational institutions and reductions in learning opportunities, family support services and positive transition practices would negatively impact the experiences of children transitioning from nursery to school. Most importantly, the combination of existing variability in settings’ transition practices and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic may have a disproportionately negative impact on children with identified SEND and would therefore intensify existing educational inequalities and endanger children’s school readiness even further.

Scope of the current study

The study aimed to investigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on early years transitions to school in the U.K., with a focus on young children with SEND. We adopted Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci 1994; Bronfenbrenner and Morris 1998), which proposes that a child’s ecology is composed of layers of interacting systems which impact on their development. Relationships within layers are bi-directional and positive connections will provide support during the transition process. The bioecological systems theory provided a useful framework for the study for exploring the relationships between children’s individual experiences and their environment in the context of the pandemic, in which early years education is of central importance.

The project had two main objectives. Firstly, the project aimed to document changes to typical transition practices in the U.K. and explore educational professionals’ perspectives and experiences in the way they navigated the crisis to prepare children in their first year of formal schooling. Secondly, the study aimed to inform decision making about how educational settings in the U.K. can most effectively support transition to school (with a focus on children with SEND) in a situation where normal preparations have been adversely affected.

Our research questions were:

1. What are educational settings typical transition practices, and how, if at all, were these altered in response to the Covid-19 pandemic?

2. In the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, what transition practices have been positive and should be built upon (with a reference to children with SEND)?

Methods

Research design

An interpretivist sequential mixed-methods research design was adopted for the current study. We focused on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on all children starting school in the U.K., but particularly children with SEND and explored perspectives of all key stakeholders.

First, an online survey was sent to all Children’s Centres, early years settings and primary schools in a large city at the Southwest of England asking early years professionals to report transition practices they typically engage with, how these have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic and how they plan to tailor these for this year’s cohort of children. This was followed by online semi-structured interviews with a smaller number of Reception teachers at the first term after children started school, which allowed for greater depth of study and flexibility of participant responses (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2017).

As the design was sequential, survey data was used to inform the interview schedule and supported the purposive sampling strategy employed for the interviews. Given the context of the pandemic, it was essential both the survey and interviews were conducted online to comply with social distancing requirements.

Participants

Survey respondents

Early years settings

Between July and September 2020, 24 early years settings completed the online survey. Respondents worked in a nursery within a primary school (N = 7, 29%), a private early years setting (N = 12, 50%), or a voluntary and independent setting (N = 5, 21%).

Primary school settings

Between July and September 2020, 33 primary school settings completed the online survey. Of the 33 respondents, 24 (73%) were Reception class teachers, four respondents (12%) were Nursery class teachers, and five respondents (15%) were not in class: three Head Teachers, one Deputy Head, one Early Years Lead.

Interview participants

Ten Early Years Leads (EY Leads) in primary schools took part in online semi-structured interviews. Nine interviewees were Reception Class teachers; one was not in class.

Data collection

Data collection took place in two phases: Phase 1 took place in the Summer 2020 before children were due to start school (July and August 2020); Phase 2 took place following children starting school in their first term (October–December 2020).

An online survey was sent to all primary schools, children’s centres and early years settings in a large city in Southwest of England. Participants were sent a link to the online survey via the Local Authority’s Early Years Team with accompanying information about the project and its aims. A mixed survey design was used, the structure of which followed recommendations in the methodological literature (Bradburn, Sudman, and Wansink 2004; Ganassali 2008; Dillman, Smyth, and Christian 2014). Closed questions generated basic demographic data. Open questions provided opportunities for qualitative data production, which contributed to theory generation alongside interview data (Wellington and Szczerbinski 2007). The survey open-ended questions asked participants to report transition practices they typically engage with, how these have been affected to date by the pandemic and how they plan to tailor these for this year’s cohort of children. We probed for practices designed with and without reference to SEND.

Semi-structured online interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams from October until December 2020 at mutually convenient times. Participants were identified by asking respondents to the Phase 1 schools’ online survey above to indicate their willingness to participate in future interviews. Interviews lasted between thirty minutes to one hour each. A semi-structured approach to interview questions was used to allow for researcher reflexivity and sensitivity towards the participants as individuals. Participants were invited to discuss their experiences of transition and reflect on what transition practices were positive and should be built upon. We probed for practices with and without reference to SEND. We also explored practitioners’ views about children’s adjustment to formal schooling and the perceived impact of Covid-19 on children’s development. With consent, video and/or audio footage was recorded using the Microsoft Teams software. Written transcriptions were produced from the recordings.

Data analysis

Analysis of both the qualitative survey data and interview data was carried out using the model of Thematic Analysis as described by Braun and Clarke (2006, 2013, 2019). Entire transcripts were read and re-read for familiarisation and initial codes noted. An inductive approach was taken to coding (Clarke, Braun, and Hayfield 2015) which has been described as ‘reflexive thematic analysis’ (Braun and Clarke 2019). This facilitated the generation of ‘new’ themes, not previously identified in the literature. Data extracts related to codes were collated and grouped together proceeding to identification of themes. Candidate themes were reviewed and refined to ensure internal coherence and assess the validity of each theme in relation to the whole data set. Once fully established, themes were refined and named.

Findings

Survey findings

COVID-19 has severely disrupted transition practices to school

Our study found that with the mandated closures of educational settings (early years and primary school settings), typical transition practices offered to children and their families as a way of preparing them for formal schooling, were severely disrupted and/or delayed. For example, early years survey respondents reported that the most widely used transition practices under normal (non-pandemic) circumstances (such as, gathering information from parents; inviting Reception class teachers to meet the child prior to starting school) were delayed or only took place for vulnerable children. For example,

We actually set classes really early, but we had to put that back so parents found out what class their child was in a little bit later. It wasn’t what our parents are used to (EY Lead 1)

The impact of the need for social distancing and of closure of many early years settings was evident in survey respondents. Gathering, providing and exchanging information remained possible, but for settings where typical practice depended on interpersonal encounters a different approach was required. Physical movement between schools, homes and settings for face-to-face meetings was impossible. Even in schools with a nursery provision on site, the creation of ‘bubbles’ challenged face-to-face communication. For some, having to adapt and dismiss completely their typical transition activities was felt as a key challenge:

Home visits are a really big part of our philosophy and replacing that was difficult (EY Lead 22)

In most cases, support for transition moved entirely online. Three-quarters of participants who responded to our question about alternative and unique ways of supporting transition mentioned making videos to be made available often via the setting’s website. Tours of the school, staff introducing themselves, welcome messages from class teachers were the most frequently mentioned content. Video for some settings involved teachers reading stories or singing songs. More than half of the respondents reported holding virtual meetings with families and professionals. These were intended to replace home visits, introduce the new teacher and start forming relationships with school staff. Holding story or singing sessions online with new children was also reported as a unique transition practice so that children have an opportunity to at least meet some of the children who would be in the same class as them in September.

A longer induction or slower transition was favoured by some of our participants. Extending staggered entry arrangements and having children join in smaller groups was often reported as a unique transition practice. It was generally felt that this would enable teachers to support children and facilitate a smoother transition.

Key challenges when planning for transition

The most mentioned factor was the reduction or disappearance of face-to-face contact with children and families and concerns about how this would affect building relationships with the receiving setting. Of concern to early years, survey respondents were the impact this had on updating key developmental information and reporting:

Because of lock down and bubbles we had much less time to spend with children and help them prepare but also track their progress and update their developmental records (EY Setting 24)

The next factor most frequently mentioned as a challenge was that there were reduced opportunities for children to visit the school or the class to familiarise themselves with the environment, meet their teacher and their new peers. Only four responses did not include this challenge, finding the organisational and information gathering issues created more difficulties:

Children started in September without ever having met or seen their teacher. They were sent photos but they hadn’t actually seen them (EY Lead 2)

The same proportion of respondents was concerned about lack of contact with parents/carers. Although some responses cited lack of welcome and information meetings, and home visits, more had concerns about the general lack of opportunities to explain, inform, reassure, dispel anxiety, gain cooperation and encourage parental engagement:

Early years transition is all about those relationships and them seeing you and them getting used to how you work, seeing what the classroom looks like and then feeling secure in that environment. And although we did a virtual tour and a little welcome video and we did a lot of stories, but people weren’t engaging, people weren’t looking at those things (EY Lead 3)

Nearly as many survey respondents said that cross-setting communication was a great difficulty. This was because they were unable to meet the children who would be joining their class or because they were concerned that closure of early years settings, and staff being furloughed, meant that liaison with keyworkers was difficult or in most cases impossible. A few primary school respondents resented that it was seen to be their responsibility to ensure this happened, rather than an expectation for staff on both sides. In addition, not establishing relationships before children started school was seen by practitioners as having an impact on the quality of the information they received about the children:

Seeing things on paper is very different to seeing a child in their setting (EY Lead 2)

Shortcomings of government guidance on how to specifically support early years transition was reported very frequently by survey respondents. Lack of clarity, lateness of arrival, constant change of guidance given were all mentioned by respondents who talked about the difficulty in planning safe transitions for both children and staff:

The government guidelines have been interpreted very differently in different schools even down to very practical things like using sand. Some schools aren’t allowed to sing at all with some schools singing outside, some schools are still singing in the classroom. (EY Lead 1)

Most importantly, the impact of changes in government guidance made it very difficult to communicate with parents/carers about transition arrangements:

A little bit more notice might have been helpful so that we could have things in place ‘cause we were bombarded with questions from parents and carers (EY Lead 2)

Key facilitators when planning for transition

Compared to reporting challenges, respondents found less to say about helpful factors or facilitators when planning for transition. The factor mentioned as most helpful was the exchange of information and/or guidance between practitioners. The necessary move online and increased dependence on electronic communication was seen as generally helpful by the majority of the respondents:

Virtual meetings with pre-school SENDCOs and with primary schools generally – so that we can exchange information (EY Setting 4)

Pre-existing strong relationships with local primary schools and having started planning earlier in the year were also mentioned often. Several respondents mentioned the importance of having accurate and readily available contact lists between settings:

Links with local schools, having a named SENDCo and a willingness to ‘make it work’. (EY Setting 15)

Working together was another strong theme across the responses. Mutual support and cooperation between practitioners were seen as a helpful factor when planning for transition as was the value of teamwork within settings. Having committed, flexible, creative and experienced early years professionals to work with was seen as very important:

Established and experienced staff who have a wealth of knowledge about transition to draw upon to think creatively (Primary School 32)

Also, a supportive senior leadership team who ‘get’ early years education and understand the importance of positive transitions to school were factors that appeared to generate confidence and optimism in facing challenges.

Having good established links and good relationships with parents was mentioned as helpful, as was having ‘pro-active’ parents or those willing to provide information. Helpful parents were described as understanding that things will change, but were open, patient and flexible.

Beyond these, a few respondents reported that support from local government (Early Years Team) and local support networks were also mentioned as helpful. Locally developed transition guides enabled staff to focus their thinking and prioritise but also to ‘standardise’ their response and practices according to what other local settings were doing.

Transitions for children with SEND

Perceived difficulties in planning transition for children with SEND were very similar to those for other children. However, for children with SEND, the difficulties created by lack of face-to-face contact were magnified:

Providing accurate and up-to-date information on progress has been challenging. Lack of face-to-face interventions from other professionals means it’s not always possible to have accurate medical or SALT reports to hand onto the school (EY Setting 15)

In addition, not being able to visit and observe children with SEND in their preschool setting was reported as very problematic. In particular, not having access to keyworkers and the information they possessed was a key challenge, as was the lack of opportunities for teachers to meet the children and their families, in school, or on home visits. Visits to school were seen as important in building relationships, enabling the teachers to observe and spend time with the child, enabling the child to experience and familiarise themselves with a new environment. For one respondent, this lack of direct contact meant ‘reading documents with no context’ (Primary School 18).

Not able to meet the children in person to see how they engage in learning / play and see how their additional needs are supported in their current setting. EYFS transfer documents being sent after a delayed amount of time so information from an external establishment cannot be taken into account when classes are set. Not being able to invite parents / professionals into the school to view the classroom to advise if any amendments are required to meet the needs of the child. (Primary School 32)

Survey respondents talked about the difficulty in sharing accurate information about school provision in relation to supporting a child’s needs with parents. Changes to the classroom and outdoor environment meant that making photo books so children would know what to expect in September was difficult, and therefore they felt the child was not appropriately prepared for transition.

Importantly, difficulties accessing specialist services and support to meet the needs of children with SEND was reported as a crucial challenge:

Significant delay in the EHCP process has led to our school being named on an EHCP when we have had no contact with the pupil or their family prior to being named. (Primary school 26)

Finally, respondents cited government guidance as a significant challenge where lack of specific SEND advice and constant changes created uncertainties and made planning for transition very difficult.

Like perceived challenges, facilitating factors for the transition of all children were also very similar when planning for transition of children with SEND. Responses related to previous knowledge of pre-school settings and therefore established good relationships which made exchange of information smoother:

Our SENCo liaised closely with pre-schools at the beginning of the year before Covid-19 hit so we knew the children we could be potentially receiving as from September and so we were able to put certain plans in place and update information (Primary school 34)

As for all other children, the move online was cited as helpful by the majority of the respondents. Virtual meetings, video messaging and access to online resources were often the only way settings could communicate with each other and with families.

Finally, the most commonly cited facilitating factor was being able to adapt start dates and being flexible in planning the transition of children with SEND. Respondents talked about the importance of allowing children and their families time to get to know the school and gradually build relationships with staff and peers. Related to that, some respondents mentioned the quality of colleagues as making a difference in transition experiences, describing them as persistent in making things work and confident and experienced in best practice around transition for children with SEND.

Interview findings

Impacts of disrupted transition on children, families and early years practitioners

Impact on children

All but one interviewee reported varied and sometimes significant negative impact of the pandemic on children’ development. The first and most significant area of impact mentioned was on children’s language development. A varied impact on language development due to the closure of educational settings and children spending large periods of time at home was reported. Some felt that children’s language ability has improved by increased interaction with parents and older siblings:

I think their language is actually really good. I think you can tell they’ve been at home having one to one talking to a parent (EY Lead 1)

The majority of our interviewees, however, reported a significant negative impact on children’s spoken language, in particular for children with already identified needs:

They came in at such a low level on their language. I mean they are always low with their language but this year it was particularly concerning. (EY Lead 7)

Interviewees also reported significant difficulties with important language and communication skills, such as listening and attention:

It’s noticeable that it’s taken longer to get those routines. For example, the first couple of weeks listening to a story – that was very difficult. The children were just not ready to sit and listen to a 10–15-minute story (EY Lead 4)

Following that, a significant impact was reported on children’s social development. Interviewees reported poorly developed social skills and difficulties in being and learning in a group:

Socialisation has been an issue especially for children with no siblings. It appears as a fear. When we are doing story time or snack time, we’ve got a few children who appear highly anxious about being in a group (EY Lead 10)

All interviewees expressed a sense of relief about the fact that children’s emotional wellbeing did not seem affected or as affected as they feared it might have been following the first national lockdown:

Their wellbeing is actually quite high, probably higher than when they were at home and didn’t have the structure and normality of nursery (EY Lead 1)

Interviewees’ positivity was also reflected in their comments about children’s overall resilience:

I just find this cohort in both classes, they are just the most appreciative, hungry to learn, lovely bunch of kids (EY Lead 7)

However, some reported differences in children’s willingness to ‘have a go’ and take risks with their learning:

They are not willing to have a go, they are not so willing to try anything new (EY Lead 6)

Linked with the concerns expressed above were reports on the impact on children’s independence skills. All interviewees reported that children have less well-developed independence and self-help skills in comparison to previous cohorts. Toileting, independently getting dressed and undressed were all mentioned as skills which have been ‘regressed’:

We noticed that children were less independent when they came into Reception, because they were at home with grandparents or people around them have been doing things for them which wouldn’t have happened if they’d been in nursery (EY Lead 7)

The greatest impact reported by all our interviewees concerned children’s physical development. This related to children’s general physical stamina as well as specific skills in their fine motor skills (using and holding equipment) and gross motor skills (general muscle strength). There was a consensus that this was the result of children not spending time outdoors:

We’ve never encountered a cohort like this. There is just no strength in their fingers in their hands so all we are doing at the moment is getting stamina and strength and dexterity going. And that core muscle strength was definitely not where we wanted. Just literally they haven’t got the strength to hold themselves, hold their heads up (EY Lead 8)

Finally, interviewees expressed concerns about children’s delayed early learning skills such as phonics development and early numeracy skills:

Those phase one letters and sounds skills and listening. We don’t want children to come to school knowing about all that, but we are used to them distinguishing between sounds and knowing a bit about rhyme and alliteration. We noticed that they don’t have that. We saw how many could already blend and segment and it’s a lot less than usual (EY Lead 1)

Interviewees acknowledged the fact that the impact of the pandemic on children’s development has not been the same for all children and that children from disadvantaged backgrounds and children with SEND have been affected more:

Some children have had hardly anything done with them, and some have had a lot of attention (EY Lead 3)

Impact on families

Interviewees talked very positively about parents being resourceful with supporting home learning but also children’s wellbeing and wider life skills. For some interviewees, the biggest impact reported on the families related to food poverty and food insecurity:

We had a lot of food poverty during the actual lockdown itself. And we had our own food bank next to the school (EY Lead 7)

Interviewees reported an impact on parents’ and carers’ emotional wellbeing and feelings of anxiety:

We’ve had a lot of parents messaging us with quite small things, but I think that’s because they can’t come in and talk to us as much and they haven’t got to know us as well (EY Lead 4)

Impact on staff

Although interviewees were not explicitly asked about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teachers and their work, they all mentioned varied forms of impact. Some interviewees felt positive and argued that the pandemic, despite the challenges it posed, had also provided a lot of opportunities for learning and revising systems on how they support children’s transition to school.

Some interviewees felt unprepared and unskilled to respond to the new technical and digital demands made on them:

It was quite a steep learning curve when we first closed down because we didn’t have a clue about online learning and how to use it (EY Lead 3)

The most significant impact for teaching staff related to their emotional wellbeing. Our interviewees talked about feeling stressed and overworked and incredibly concerned about the children and families they work with:

Although children don’t know any better, it’s not as we want it to be for them. And that’s really tough on teachers. I don’t think any of us got the emotional and mental wellbeing to keep going. It’s a lonely job and not having that connectivity with your colleagues. Collaboratively working is all gone. It’s a very depressing time to be a teacher (EY Lead 9)

A lot of the emotional stress derived from the fact that teachers were trying to minimise the impact of the pandemic on children and support them as best as they could:

Because our kids are definitely disadvantaged already, we don’t want Covid to disadvantage them anymore so you are doing everything you possibly can, but in a shorter time span, all the time and you are doing extra stuff and provide those interventions and we’ve still got to make sure that attainment is there but with less time to do it in, less resources and less guidance (EY Lead 10)

Discussion

The Covid-19 pandemic had an unprecedented influence on the education system from early years settings to higher education institutions. By applying a bioecological perspective, the current study aimed to explore the potential impact that the pandemic has had on the transition experiences of children who started formal schooling in the U.K. in the academic year following the first national lockdown (March to June 2020) and investigate how early years professionals in the U.K. navigated the crisis to prepare children in their first year of formal schooling. These children were the first cohort to transitioning from early years settings into school settings, with the majority having not had access to early education in the months leading up to this important transition. This leads up to question how early years practitioners responded in order to prepare children for the environmental, curricular and pedagogical changes they faces as they transitioned to school.

Unsurprisingly, our study found that with the mandated closures of educational settings, typical transition practices offered to children and their families as a way of preparing them for formal schooling were severely disrupted and/or delayed. Despite this, early years practitioners responded to the challenge by adapting their typical transition practices and by employing a range of new activities to prepare children for starting school. In most cases, support for transition moved entirely online. The majority of our survey respondents reported making videos to be made available often via the setting’s website including tours of the school, staff introducing themselves and recording welcome messages. Holding virtual meetings with families and professionals was also a commonly reported practice. Our study also showed that a longer induction or slower transition was favoured by some of our respondents who reported extending staggered entry arrangements and having children join in smaller groups.

The most common transition activity reported related to efforts to increase communication with families. Sharing expectations with parents concerning school routines, practices and demands generally help children’s adjustment into school and promote positive learning experiences in their first year of formal school (McIntyre et al. 2007; Axford et al. 2019). Our study findings showed a much greater focus from early years practitioners to engage and support families in an effort to facilitate their child’s transition to school.

The importance of building strong relationships between early years settings and schools was also evident in our study, benefits of which have been documented in previous research (LoCasale-Crouch et al. 2008; Hopps and Dockett 2011). The exchange of information between early years and primary settings has been consistently identified as a key means of supporting children in the transition period and improve continuity of pedagogy and curriculum (Ahtola et al. 2012; 2011). However, our findings suggest that systems of effective communication across settings are not always in place, and communication that does exist, is reliant on individuals’ energy and willingness to make those links and build relations with professionals working in other settings.

Added to the above, one of the most significant challenges reported by our participants related to the unclear, late and not specific to early years government guidance that constantly changed leaving practitioners unprepared and families feeling anxious. Respondents talked about feeling confused about how to proceed with their transition plans and lacking in confidence that governmental guidance was based on knowledge of early years education and empirical evidence around good practice. Local government guidance and support was perceived by our participants to be more helpful although responses were varied in that respect.

Early years transition of children with SEND

Transition practices for children with SEND presented unique challenges exacerbating and further emphasising difficulties that already exist. There was a general consensus from all survey respondents that, for children with SEND, the difficulties created by lack of face-to-face contact were magnified, especially in relation to being able to observe and get to know and understand the child as well as having access to up to date and accurate information from children’s early years setting. Lack of access to specialist intervention support by external agencies was reported as the biggest challenge, leading to children missing out on early diagnosis and intervention and an inevitable lack of preparation and readiness to start school.

However, our survey respondents talked about their plans to meet uncertainties with flexibility. Common transition practices included moving transition meetings with families and external agencies online, appointing additional staff and focusing on professional development to ensure schools can meet children’s needs. The transition period was seen by our respondents as a critical window of opportunity to intervene and address early disadvantage associated with children’s SEND, and many responded with determination and increased efforts in understanding and supporting children’s needs.

Perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children, families and early years professionals

In relation to the perceived impact of COVID-19 pandemic on children’s first year of schooling, unsurprisingly, there was a noticeable ‘regression’ of skills, such as in the area of language and communication, physical development, risk taking, social skills and independence. All these areas have been raised as concerns in recent studies (Fox et al. 2021; Tracey et al. 2022).

This impact was perceived to be greater for children with SEND and children from disadvantaged backgrounds, pointing to the diverse range of experiences that children have had during the pandemic resulting in various levels of impact (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci 1994, 568; Pascal et al. 2020). Our participants repeatedly talked about how, on the one hand, there were groups of children who continued to access provision and benefited from smaller class sizes or spending ‘quality time’ with parents. Conversely, there were children who were at home in more difficult circumstances, already likely to be more vulnerable in society. Our participants perceived that the pandemic lockdown is likely to have exacerbated these existing inequalities.

Finally, our study highlighted a significant impact on the emotional wellbeing of early years professionals. Teachers talked about feeling stressed, overworked, and incredibly concerned about children and families as a result of the pandemic. This emotional stress was created by unclear government guidance and uncertainties posed by the pandemic as well as professionals’ determination to minimise the impact of the pandemic on children and their families.

Implications for policy and practice

Returning to education after a significant disruption provides a unique opportunity for policymakers and early years educators to re-consider the way we support young children in one of their most important educational transitions. Building on the wealth of good practice already in existence and lessons learned during the pandemic, this is a chance for us all to recalibrate our priorities and focus our efforts by viewing transition as a process that happens over time, as opposed to a single point in time.

Our study highlighted that each child’s transition to school is unique as children’s previous experiences are so diverse (Margetts 2013). Now even more than ever, lessons from the pandemic point to the need to treat transitioning to school not as a standardised process but rather an experience that is unique to each individual pupil and their family. This relates particularly to vulnerable young children, like children with SEND, for whom an early, targeted and flexible transition is imperative.

The impact of the pandemic on children’s first year of schooling was seen in many areas but most importantly in their language and communication, physical development, social development and independence. Therefore, children would benefit from adjusted curriculums to support their development and early learning over a sustained period of time.

A significant impact was reported on the emotional wellbeing of early years practitioners. Supporting the emotional wellbeing of early years professionals needs to be a priority ensuring they have access to clear guidance, opportunities for professional development and support networks that can promote good practice in relation to transition as well as emotional support in times of need.

Overall, our study suggests that early years transition appears to be reliant on individual professionals’ beliefs and endorsement that successful transitions provide children with the foundation for later school success. There was less evidence of a consistent and systematic approach to transition planning across all settings in our study. At present, there are no existing government guidelines and no statutory requirement for educational settings in the U.K. to offer transition support. As a result, transition practice is varied, fragmented and inconsistent and depends on local advice or on the approach of each receiving school. As such, clearer expectations in relation to transition to school are needed to ensure all settings can consistently support smooth transitions. This can be achieved in two ways: firstly, by ensuring all settings are supported by Local Authority systems to develop effective ways of communication between early years and primary school settings so that transition can be jointly considered and planned and, secondly, and most importantly, by creating a national long-term policy strategy to inform and guide transition practices (Margetts 2013) that focus on continuity in children’s education and learning experiences (Dunlop 2013; Einarsdottir 2013).

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank all early years professionals who participated in this study and supported this research in a particularly challenging time for all educators.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Bristol City Council Early Years Team.