Transition at a standstill: preschoolers’ motor development during the COVID-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT

There is no other stage in life where physical growth and motor skills development undergo such rapid changes comprehensively impacting children’s overall development than the early and preschool years. Motor skills proficiency contributes to cognitive, social-emotional and academic development and closely connects to positive transition experiences and school success. While research indicates that COVID-19 restrictions have negatively impacted young children’s overall development, little is known about their motor skills development during this time. This longitudinal study investigates gross, fine, and visual motor performance during the 2020 shutdown. Due to challenges following-up all children after transition during the pandemic resulting 35% missing data, two analysis groups were used: Analysis 1 (n = 52) included children with complete pre- and post-test data, while Analysis 2 (n = 34) had varying data completeness. Results indicate declines in gross motor skills and visual motor quality during the shutdown, worsening throughout the pandemic. Fine motor and visual motor completion time deteriorated during the shutdown but improved post-transition to primary school, with fine motor quality unchanged. These findings offer insights into preschoolers’ motor development during transition, guiding future research and educational practices.

KEYWORDS:

• Motor development
• early childhood education
• transition
• COVID-19

Introduction

There is a growing body of research suggesting that the abrupt contact restrictions introduced in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated closures of educational and recreational facilities were a general burden, particularly for children, adversely affecting their overall development in various ways (Bantel, Buitkamp, and Wünsch 2021; Mays, Quenzer-Alfred, Schneider, et al. 2023; Quenzer-Alfred et al. 2021). Besides changes in preschoolers’ cognitive-academic and social-emotional development including effects at the psychological level, such as behavioural problems and depression (Bantel, Buitkamp, and Wünsch 2021; Mays, Quenzer-Alfred, Metzner-Guczka, et al. 2023; Quenzer-Alfred et al. 2021; Ravens-Sieberer et al. 2021; Schlack et al. 2020), studies also confirm an increased physical inactivity as well as an increase in media consumption combined with unhealthy nutrition and eating habits (Dayton et al. 2021; Nyström et al. 2020; Schmidt et al. 2021; Wunsch et al. 2021). For Germany, Schmidt et al. (2021) showed that the average amount of time spent in organised sports decreased from 13.8 min per day to 0.0 min and the overall physical activity (PA) decreased by 2.2 min from 17.1 to 15.2 min per day. Similarly, Gobbi et al. (2020) confirmed losses in PA for France, Italy and Turkey.

Although there is a genuine consensus within a holistic understanding of the physical literacy concept that engaging in PA is reciprocally related to the development of motor skills in children and adolescents by providing opportunities to enhance motor skill competence (Cairney et al. 2019; Haubenstricker and Seefeldt 1986; Schmutz et al. 2020; Stodden et al. 2008), limited studies have focused on motor skills development during the developmentally sensible phase of preschool age in the context of the pandemic (Ayubi and Komaini 2021). The limited research available focuses on school-age children and adolescents (Pajek and Trajkovic 2022) and mostly relies on in-comprehensive cross-sectional data gathered after the shutdown, lacking a longitudinal perspective to track motor skill changes over time. Furthermore, analyses of different motor facets including gross, fine, and visual motor skills are missing to gain a comprehensive understanding of children’s motor development. The following study aims to close this desiderate encompassing standardised pre-, post-, and follow-up data on gross-, fine- and visual motor skills. The longitudinal nature of the study enables a better understanding of the trajectory of motor skill development during the pandemic, shedding light on potential recovery or persistent issues at the sensible time of school transition.

Fundamental motor skills encompass all aspects of locomotive, stable and manipulative muscular control and coordination. These skills are concerned with various aspects of a healthy child development facilitating a smooth transition into formal schooling and future academic success (Bender, Pham, and Carlson 2011; Cameron et al. 2016; Donnelly et al. 2016; Thelen 1995). They are divided into gross motor skills, involving whole-body movements and fine motor skills, requiring targeted and coordinated hand and finger dexterity. Additionally, visual motor skills integrate visual perception with motor coordination. Proficiency in gross motor skills plays a crucial role in the development of academic abilities like mathematics and reading (Donnelly et al. 2016; Ricciardi et al. 2021), while fine motor skills predict language development up to preschool age independently of cognitive abilities or prior language skills (Alcock and Connor 2021; Peyre et al. 2019). Handwriting, linked to fine motor and visual motor skills, impacts writing accuracy, letter size, and hand-eye coordination (Feder and Majnemer 2007; Payne and Isaacs 2020). Motor skills aid cognitive acquisition, including attention and memory (Castelli 2022) and shape social-emotional development, fostering self-esteem, adjustment, and social skills (Bart, Hajami, and Bar‐Haim 2007; Ericsson 2011; Escolano-Pérez, Herrero-Nivela, and Losada 2020). Besides, motor skills also link to health, reducing disease risk (Rhodes et al. 2017; Tremblay et al. 2014). They correlate with future sports motivation (Ericsson 2011), positive attitudes towards physical education (Brown, Walkley, and Holland 2005), and active play engagement (Smyth and Anderson 2000).

While basic motor skills may develop naturally, the acquisition of mature forms of motor skills requires a developmentally appropriate environment during the early and preschool years (Dapp, Gashaj, and Roebers 2021; Figueroa & An; Malina, Bouchard, and Bar-Or 2004). Encouragement, skill-specific practice, and challenging physical environments can facilitate the development of preschoolers’ motor skills (Gagen and Getchell 2006; Gallahue and Donnelly 2003). It may be structured and unstructured and in different contexts, including institutional educational settings (i.e. Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) centres), organised sports (i.e. sports clubs, swimming classes or guided movement activities), and everyday activities (i.e. outdoor play, playgrounds, etc.) (Elkind 2007). Restricting or neglecting opportunities for motor performance can have negative consequences on motor skills development and other related areas of child development (Pianta et al. 2002). Therefore, it is essential to provide preschoolers with as many opportunities for movement as possible that promote their motor development.

During COVID-19, this situation was drastically exacerbated with the most severe disruptions of daily life and educational systems in recent history. Diverse opportunities supporting motor skills development in early childhood were restricted including activities in age-specific formal and informal settings such as ECEC centres, organised sports activities in sports clubs as well as everyday activity opportunities in playgrounds, swimming pools and interaction in out- and indoor play with peers. Considering that motor skills proficiency contributes to cognitive, social-emotional and academic development and closely connects to positive transition experiences and school success (Bart, Hajami, and Bar‐Haim 2007; Gashaj et al. 2019) and their importance for the overall well-being and health, the question remains how preschoolers motorically developed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and materials

A longitudinal study design with three assessment points (baseline, post-shutdown, 18-weeks-follow-up) was used to examine preschoolers’ motor development during and following the first COVID-19 shutdown (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Study design and timeline of COVID-19 restrictions in Germany.

Procedure

The developmental data gathered was repurposed from an originally planned intervention study in four ECEC centres, which had to be postponed due to the pandemic-related shutdown. ECEC centres were chosen based on pre-pandemic socio-spatial analyses, considering factors like unemployment, migration, education, and support networks for representation. The study comprised three testing sessions: before the initial shutdown (before 16 March 2020), the second after ECEC centres reopened after 19 April 2020, and 5 months later after the transition into primary school for follow-up (Figure 1). This unique approach allowed for a comparison of motor skills development in the same group of preschoolers before and after the shutdown, thereby enabling an assessment of preschoolers’ motor development during the time of restrictions.

Prior to data collection, a trust-building phase involving professionals, participating children, parents, and researchers was carried out. To ensure reliable results, two experienced and trained researchers, different from the author, conducted standardised tests outlined under measures. Demonstrations and explanations preceded each test. After the shutdown, masks were compulsory for adults, and hygiene measures had to be observed. Individual testing minimized distractions.

Ethical approval was secured from the University of Siegen committee for research involving young children (Approval No. ER_02/2020). Written consent was obtained from ECEC centre directors and parents, with verbal child assent. Children were assured of their option to withdraw from the study at any time.

Participants

The sample included all n = 58 preschoolers at t₁ from four public ECEC centres in a medium-sized city in North Rhine-Westphalia. Six participants were excluded from statistical analysis because of dropout from t₁ to t₂ making the overall sample size n = 52. The children were between 5 years and 2 months to 6 years and 3 months before their transition into primary school at the first data selection point. The transition between ECEC and primary school is the first inter-institutional educational transition in the German educational system. Early childhood education is a legal right and 93.5% of children aged 3–6 years attend ECEC centres (BMFSFJ Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend 2018). Prior to inclusion, it was ensured that all participating children had no motor, cognitive, or health impairments that could potentially influence their performance on motor tests, as reported by their respective teachers. Of the children, 22 (42%) came from households where German was the first language, while 30 (58%) came from households where another language was spoken as the first language. Following the post-shutdown assessment and subsequent transition to primary school, a re-assessment on n = 34 children who had enrolled at the same primary school was conducted.

Measures

Motor development was measured using the psychomotor scale of the Intelligence and Development Scales 2 (IDS-2; Grob and Hagmann-von Arx 2018), a standardised and validated German-speaking test battery with which motor development can be accurately compared on the basis of a common norm sample assessing children between ECEC and elementary education. The assessment of motor development was based on three subscales: gross motor skills, fine motor skills, and visual motor skills. The gross motor skills subscale (α = .71) measured larger body movements such as balancing over a rope, catching and throwing a softball, and jumping sideways over a rope. The fine motor skills subscale (α = .87) comprised tasks such as unscrewing and screwing nuts of different sizes and threading beads of different sizes. The visual motor skills subscale (α = .82) involved traversing predetermined paths with a pencil, tracing geometric shapes, and drawing mirror images of given figures. The raw test scores for fine and visual motor skills were determined on the basis of completion time (‘time’) and quality of performance (‘quality’). The children were encouraged to perform to the best of their ability, and their performance was evaluated using norm-referenced criteria. Month-normed value points were calculated for each subscale, allowing for age-sensitive developmental assessment. Results below the norm values indicate the need for additional support to improve relevant motor skill areas. Additional information regarding age, gender and language background (German spoken at home ‘yes’ or ‘no’) was collected with a questionnaire filled by parents for age-appropriate evaluation to examine potentially different developmental processes as well as gender and language-related interactions between variables. Despite not all children speaking German as their mother tongue, the IDS-2 test battery was appropriate as all children spoke German in ECEC centres, tasks were demonstrated beforehand, and termination rules prevented undue burden, ensuring compliance with the test’s requirements as confirmed by discussions with the authors.

Data analysis

The raw data of all motor tests were transformed to standardised value points ranging from 1 to 19 (M = 10, SD = 3) using the Hogrefe Test System 5 (HTS-5) evaluation software and transferred to the statistical analysis software SPSS (Version 27.0; IBM Corp 2020) for further analysis. Due to children transitioning to different primary schools, some schools not permitting follow-up, and difficulties in reaching children at home, not all children could be re-assessed at the follow-up evaluation (t₃) during the pandemic. This resulted in numerous missing values (approximately 35%) at the third measurement point, necessitating the use of two analysis groups for inferential statistical data analysis (Wirtz 2004). Analysis 1 consisted of children for whom all variables were fully collected at both the pre-test and post-test (n = 52). Analysis 2 consisted of children who participated in the pre-test, post-test, and follow-up test or only missed either pre- or post-test while participating in the follow-up assessment (n = 34). Exploratory Mann–Whitney U-tests could not show any significant differences between the two analysis groups.

Besides descriptive analyses, non-parametric inferential statistics were conducted due to minor outliers and partial violations of the normal distribution assumption in the Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov tests, as well as due to the small sample size for both samples. Furthermore, the sphericity assumption of ANOVA was violated. For analysis 1, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for related samples was used. For analysis 2, Friedman tests with pairwise comparisons were used due to three measurement time points. Effect sizes in each analysis were estimated using correlation coefficients and reported as r. The interpretation of the correlation size measures was based on Cohen’s (1988) classification of small (r ≥ .10), medium (r ≥ .30), and large (r ≥ .50) effects. The variables were not skewed, and the assumption of approximate symmetry for the Wilcoxon and Friedman tests was met for the different variables (Büning and Trenkler 1994). Bonferroni-adjusted post-hoc tests were added for pairwise comparisons of the measurement times (Bland and Altman 1995). The Bonferroni adjustment was applied to control the type-1 error rate by taking into account the number of comparisons made. The Kruskal–Wallis test for independent samples was used to examine potential group differences based on language and gender.

Results

Analysis 1: pre–post motor development (n = 52)

The pre–post results indicate that there was a significant decline as visualised in Figure 2 in most areas of motor performance among preschoolers following the shutdown, except the quality of fine motor performance (cf. Table 1).

Figure 2. Means of motor subtests before and after the shutdown (M = 10, SD = 3).

Table 1. Comparison of motor development tests before and after the first shutdown: results of Wilcoxon signed rank test and Pearson correlation analysis (n = 52).

			Pre (t1)^b		Post (t2)^b		Change t1→t2
			Median^a	Range	Median	Range	Z	r^c
Gross motor skills			10.00	4.0–13.0	9.00	3.0–13.0	-2.452*	0.34
Fine motor skills
	Fine Motor skills (‘time’)		11.00	2.0–18.0	9.00	3.0–14.0	-3.508***	0.49
	Fine Motor skills (‘quality’)		7.00	1.0–18.0	8.00	3.0–15.0	−1.559	0.22
Visual motor skills
	Visual motor skills (‘time’)		11.50	7.0–19.0	9.50	5.0–19.0	-4.409***	0.61
	Visual motor skills (‘quality’)		9.50	4.0–16.0	8.00	1.0–13.0	-3.802***	0.53

^an = 52.

^bAll test statistics are based on positive ranks.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

^cPearson correlation: low (r≥,10), medium (r≥,30) and strong (r≥,50) effect.

Statistics revealed strong correlations and significant Wilcoxon tests (p < .001) for ’time’ and ‘time’ in visual motoric tests, as well as significant decreases in fine motor skills completion time (p < .001) and medium correlations for cross-motor skills (p > .05). Two-sided paired t-tests confirmed similar results.

Controlling for groups via Kruskal–Wallis test showed no differences between children’s gender and languages on any occasion of measurement. The number of children classified with below-average motor activity increased for all scales apart from qualitative fine motor skills indicating a higher need for support after the shutdown (Figure 3). The norm and above-average group decreased for gross motor and visual motor skills. For fine motor skills, an increase within the norm could be observed. Moreover, at t₂, there was a decrease in number of above-average motor performance for all scales.

Figure 3. Relative (y-axis) and absolute (bar chart) group frequencies before and after the shutdown (n = 52).

Analysis 2: follow-up motor development (n = 34)

The results of the Friedman test for dependent samples confirmed significant changes in the areas of gross motor, as well as fine motor and visual motor ‘time’ over the time of the shutdown until the follow-up for the reduced sample group (Table 2).

Table 2. Change in the median across all three measurement points.

		Pre	Post	Follow-up
		Median	Median	Median	χ^2a
Gross motor skills		9.0	9.0	9.0	7.261*
Fine motor skills
	Fine Motor skills (‘time’)	11.0	9.0	10.0	9.362*
	Fine Motor skills (‘quality’)	7.0	8.0	9.5	2.850
Visual motor skills
	Visual motor skills (‘time’)	11.5	9.5	12.0	12.151**
	Visual motor skills (‘quality’)	9.5	8.0	7.5	16.062***

^asignificance level: *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001.

The SPSS Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise test confirmed small significant decreases between pre- and posttest for ’time’ in visual motor and fine motor tasks and ‘quality’ in visual motor skills (Table 3).

Table 3. Bonferroni adjusted post-hoc tests for pairwise comparisons.

		Pretest– posttest		Pretest follow-up		Posttest follow-up
		z	Effect size (r)	z	Effect size (r)	z	Effect size (r)
Gross motor skills		.250		.588*	0.10	.388
Fine Motor skills (‘time’)		0.662*	0.11	0.176		−0.485
Visual motor skills
	Visual motor skills (‘time’)	.706*	0.12	0.44		-0.662*	0.11
	Visual motor skills (‘quality’)	0.676*	0.12	0.912***	0.16	0.235

Bonferroni adjusted p-values, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001.

After the shutdown, this trend turned around again, as visualised in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Follow-up means of motor subtests (M = 10, SD = 3).

For visual motor performance completion time, a significant change between t₂ and follow-up is observed, making the difference between t₁ and t₃ non-significant. The significant decline in visual-motor performance quality after the shutdown is confirmed by a strong overall effect between the pre- and follow-up test. Fine motor completion time increased between t₂ and t₃ but did not reach significance after Bonferroni adjustment. Fine motor performance time did not significantly differ between pre-test and follow-up anymore, indicating a recovery over time. While the decrease of gross motor performance was not yet significant after the shutdown, it significantly differed after the further decrease between pre- and follow-up test. Acknowledging that the conservative correction methods employed may yield different results is important. Nevertheless, the overall trend of the results is clear.

For gross motor skills and the qualitative aspect of visual motor performance, the amount of children outperforming did not recover over time. Instead, more children perform below average after shutdown and even more beyond at follow-up (Figure 5). Considering the completion time in fine motor and visual motor tasks, the proportion of children below average increased after shutdown, however, dropped again after follow-up. For the quality of performance in fine motor tasks, the number of children performing below average constantly decreased over time, and the number of children outperforming increased at follow-up – also in comparison to the time before the shutdown. The overall sample performed best in the completion time of visual motor tasks with the highest frequency of children achieving above-average results before the shutdown and at the follow-up. For the qualitative performance in fine motor tasks, the number of children outperforming increased at the follow-up, even in comparison to the time before the shutdown. Overall, 41,2% of the children showed an above average performance in the completion time of visual motor tasks before the shutdown and at the follow-up. Due to the reduced sample size, the frequencies of t₁ and t₂ differed compared to Analysis 1.

Figure 5. Relative in-group frequencies over time. Frequencies given in percentage (%).

Similar to analysis 1, group effects controlled via the Kruskal–Wallis test revealed no differences between the children’s sexes and language background.

Discussion

The present study contributes comprehensive insights on the potential implications of the COVID-19 restrictions on preschoolers’ motor development particularly concerning the transition from early childhood education to primary school. The results complement findings from Canada, Japan, Uruguay and the Czech Republic, which reported a negative trend in general motor development during the pandemic’s first wave (Abe et al. 2022; González et al. 2022; Moore et al. 2020; Nyklová, Moree, and Černohorská 2022). Different to these data, our results further differentiate the findings with insights into the different aspects of motor skills subdivided into gross, fine (’time’ and ‘quality’) and visual motor skills (‘time’ and ‘quality’).

In light of our present understanding, no research exists that offers insights into the gross motor development of preschoolers amidst the restricted PA opportunities imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, the noteworthy reduction in gross motor performance witnessed during the initial wave of shutdowns raises concerns. Of even greater concern, this unfavourable trend endured beyond the period of shutdown, devoid of any observable indications of restorative adjustments. The observed negative trend in visual motor performance quality, which significantly worsened after the initial shutdown, contrasts with the recovery in preschoolers’ visual motor completion time over time, suggesting that while the accuracy of their motor skills deteriorated, their ability to complete tasks improved. For fine motor skills, the present study partly supports the results of two German studies according to which abnormalities in the fine motor skills of young children were found (Bantel, Buitkamp, and Wünsch 2021; Wessely et al. 2022). Interestingly, although our data also revealed a significant deterioration in fine motor completion time during COVID-19 restrictions, the follow-up results showed encouraging signs of improvement after the transition into primary school. By the follow-up period, their fine motor completion times were comparable to those observed before the shutdown, indicating that the developmental delays experienced during the restrictions were mitigated over time. As a positive finding, even though the fine motor completion time suffered, the quality of fine motor performances developed age-appropriate during the time of restrictions.

Overall, the observed trends underscore the dynamic nature of motor development during early childhood. While we noted a decrease in gross motor skills and visual motor performance quality post-initial shutdown, followed by a further decline in the follow-up assessment, there was a consistent increase in fine motor performance quality and a recovery in visual motor completion time. One possible explanation for these developments might be that children may have engaged in more sedentary activities that required fine motor skills, such as drawing or playing with small toys, which could have helped maintain or even improve their fine motor performance quality. Meanwhile, the restrictions’ negative impact likely contributed to the decline in gross motor skills and the quality of visual motor skills. One possible explanation might be the closure of developmentally appropriate environments that foster the acquisition and refinement of these skills, even in times of crisis. The increase in visual motor completion time might be due to the lifting of restrictions, allowing children to gradually re-engage in activities that enhance task completion skills, even though the quality of these skills did not similarly improve. These findings highlight the importance of promoting diverse motor activities to support optimal motor development during times of crisis. The absence of gender or language background effects on motor development in our data suggests that the impact restrictions on motor development was consistent across genders and language background. They emphasise the need for comprehensive and inclusive interventions to support preschoolers’ gross motor development at the transition to primary school and the importance of opportunities and support for motor development, especially during times of crisis and beyond, i.e. as in (Mays et al. 2022).

Although developmental losses cannot be attributed to ECEC centres’ shutdowns specifically, it can be assumed based on the literature that their structured opportunities of PA are an effective socialisation instance for preschoolers’ motor development. For the fine motor and visual motor completion time, a reversal of the previously recorded downward trend was observed after the end of the first wave, which, however, was not accompanied by lifting the greatest variety of other restrictions. This suggests transitioning to a more structured educational environment may have positively influenced the recovery and advancement of fine motor skills and visual motor task completion time among preschoolers after the first shutdown. This is in line with the final report of the Corona Kita study (Kuger et al. 2023), which observed an increase in motor support in ECEC centres after the shutdown. Forty percent of the ECEC centre managers stated that they saw an increased need for motor support among preschoolers after the shutdown. Although parent support and co-participation are key correlates of children’s motor development support (Rhodes et al. 2019), the challenges of compensating for these motor domains within a home environment – due to the need for specialized instructional knowledge, age-appropriate activities, and the quality of caregiver interactions (Anders et al. 2012) – highlight areas for further investigation, particularly considering the additional burden on families balancing care work and home-office responsibilities during this time. Nevertheless, ECEC centres were still limited in their options when reopening after the first shutdown wave, explaining that not all developmental areas equally benefited. Lafave et al. (2021) found that stringent cleaning protocols, cohort separation and shrinking indoor space limited children’s access to both large indoor PA spaces and play equipment as well as to engage in moderate–vigorous indoor PA. These protective measures resulted from the lack of activity variety related to gross motor development educators rely on to engage children’s motor interest.

However, even though in the context of the pandemic, ECEC centres’ shutdowns may be seen as a vital factor in explaining motor developmental losses that affected 94% of preschoolers worldwide (De Giusti 2020), there are further interrelated explanations and challenges for impaired motor development (Bacher-Hicks, Goodman, and Mulhern 2021). The continuous closure of non-formal education facilities (e.g. structured and non-structured sports, music and play), playgrounds and a general ban on contact and going out further restricted especially gross motor opportunities and reinforced the previously observed trend in the increase of media time during the pandemic (Bacher-Hicks, Goodman, and Mulhern 2021; Gassman-Pines, Ananat, and Fitz-Henley 2020; Rothstein 2020). Research has shown that children’s health behaviour deteriorated during the pandemic, with significant reductions of movement and other opportunities for motor development and increases sedentary behaviour, leading to potential risks for overall health (Pietrobelli et al. 2020; Ravens-Sieberer et al. 2021).

Beyond the pandemic, the findings also align with research on the impact of critical events such as epidemics, financial crises, and wars on children’s normal developmental progress (Almeida and Won 2009; Benner and Mistry 2020; De Walque 2011; Mays, Quenzer-Alfred, Metzner-Guczka, et al. 2023). This highlights significant long-term consequences of such events and restrictions on children’s motor development and overall education. Research has shown that effects may be more severe if children are undergoing important life transitions, such as starting school, and have not yet developed adequate coping mechanisms (Almeida and Won 2009; Benner and Mistry 2020).

Strengths and limitations

The study’s key strengths include a longitudinal pre–post pandemic data sample from a population who was difficult to access. Additionally, a validated test instrument examining motor development at preschool age across different subscales was used allowing differentiated and holistic insights into motor development and comparisons to a norm sample from the time before the pandemic. Several limitations should also be considered: Due to the pandemic restrictions in the field, it was impossible to collect a control group, plan for a larger sample and collect further socio-demographic or other child variables. This limits the validity of the data. Hence, drawing causal conclusions is not possible, and generalised statements based on inferential statistical results must be interpreted with caution due to sample size and the lack of a control group. Further investigation of moderator variables and interaction effects was also limited due to the small sample. Ground effects have to be assumed for below-average results.

Conclusions

Looking at the motor development of preschoolers through the lens of the COVID-19 pandemic, the results zoom in developments that have existed before. They draw attention to the impact of COVID-19 related restrictions on the motor development of preschoolers – skills that have been found to closely connect to diverse academic-related competencies ensuring better transition experiences. Hence, the results have important implications for educational policy in and outside times of crisis, practice and further early childhood research. In particular, the gross motor development and visual perception and their importance for other relevant developmental areas must be further assessed and observed for a full generation. Additionally, it stresses the importance of continuously proving the restriction of children’s rights (i.e. early childhood education, play and social participation) against securing other rights, such as the right to health in times of crisis and to develop a strategy to maintaining opportunities for motor development to support children’s physical engagement under the conditions of a pandemic age. The new digital society and increased media time require rethinking the development of digital programmes for children to support motor development.

Data accessibility statements

Due to confidential and privacy agreements, the data cannot be made available.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

The secondary analytical study was funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) in the context of the focus funding COVID-19 “Education and Corona: Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Educational Processes in the Life Course” with the project number 470909907. The data collection was financed from funds of the department of Univ.-Prof. Dr Daniel Mays.