Next Article in Journal
Changes in Air Pollution-Related Behaviour Measured by Google Trends Search Volume Index in Response to Reported Air Quality in Poland
Next Article in Special Issue
Online Training in Accessibility and Design for All: A Tool to Train Post-COVID Inclusive Graduates
Previous Article in Journal
Role of Socio-Demographic and Environmental Determinants on Performance of Community Health Workers in Western Kenya
Previous Article in Special Issue
Reflections throughout the COVID-19 Lockdown: What Do I Need for Successful Learning of Engineering?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 18
Issue 21
10.3390/ijerph182111710
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Family and School Relationship during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

by
José Juan Carrión-Martínez
1,
Cristina Pinel-Martínez
1,
María Dolores Pérez-Esteban
1 and
Isabel María Román-Sánchez
2,*
1
Education Department, Universidad de Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain
2
Economy and Enterprise Department, Universidad de Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(21), 11710; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111710
Submission received: 22 September 2021 / Revised: 22 October 2021 / Accepted: 3 November 2021 / Published: 8 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Effects of COVID-19: Issues on Health Economics and Education)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Education systems worldwide have been affected by a sudden interruption in classroom learning because the coronavirus pandemic forced both the closure of all schools in March 2020 and the beginning of distance learning from home, thus compelling families, schools, and students to work together in a more coordinated fashion. The present systematic review was carried out following PRISMA guidelines. The main objective was to present critical information on the relationship between the family and the school in the face of the imposed distance learning scenario caused by COVID-19. A total of 25 articles dealing with the relationships established during the pandemic of any of the three agents involved (family, students, and school) were analysed. The results showed that the relationships between the three groups involved must be improved to some extent to meet the needs that have arisen as a result of distance learning. In conclusion, the educational scenario during the pandemic has been one of the most significant challenges experienced in the recent history of education.

1. Introduction

On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) [1] declared the new coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) as a pandemic, which quickly ravaged the entire world from its epicentre in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 [2]. Given the virus’s rapid pace of expansion and the high rates of infection and mortality around the world [3,4], one of the measures taken by many nations and states was to place the civilian population under lockdown or quarantine measures, whose duration and characteristics were subject to the advance of the virus in each country [5]. Although these restrictive measures have been shown to have had positive effects against the spread of the virus [6,7,8], as was observed with previous diseases such as swine flu or MRSA [9,10], society was forced to enter a new reality that directly affected daily routines [11,12,13,14] and habits [15]. One of the most immediate government decisions was to close all educational institutions and opt for virtual or distance education from home [16,17].
This new educational landscape has led to each of the involved educational agents to perceive the same event in different ways. From the perspective of schools and teachers, it has been observed that despite some regions having kept face-to-face learning with fully open centres [18], educative centres from other countries have partially or totally closed, forcing students at all educational levels to turn their homes into learning centres in a very short period, thus disrupting their educational processes [15,19]. Schools from many regions were forced to move from purely face-to-face learning to blended learning or, in numerous cases, to purely virtual and distance learning [20]. Thus, the teaching–learning process radically changed, and both educational institutions and teachers had to immediately react, turning educational digital tools into educational elements par excellence throughout this process [21]. Accordingly, information and communication technologies (ICT) and learning and knowledge technologies (TAC) were converted from complementary tools, sometimes infrequently used by teachers in their classes, to a main and binding element of the teaching–learning process [21].
The closure of educational institutions over long periods of time has always been of interest to researchers and international organizations that are concerned with armed conflicts, strikes, or natural disasters and their subsequent consequences on educative centres. In such cases, it has often been observed that the acquisition of basic skills has been diminished, especially in students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds [22,23].
The coronavirus pandemic has engendered these kinds of situations, as the closure of educational institutions in several regions and countries and blended-learning imposition in many others have been generalized throughout the world. This situation has led to the realization of one of the most extensive global educational experiments in recent history, as various platforms, radio, and television channels became educational sources that could be accessed from within homes to allow students to keep learning [16,20,24]
In line with this observation and focusing on the perspective of the family environment, with schools closed, families were forced to assume a new role in the education of their children and have gone from being one of the educational agents [25,26] who (in collaboration with the school, looked after the interests and success of students) to assuming the roles of teachers and learning facilitators [27,28].
The many case studies concerning these obligatory relationships that quickly had to be assumed by schools, families, and students have revealed the many needs and difficulties that had to be faced, including a disparity of economic resources [29], lack of internet accessibility [30], lack of digital skills [31], and the inability of families to provide curricular help [32].
The essential role of families in the teaching–learning processes was already revealed by a great variety of studies carried out before pandemic [33], which showed that families are undoubtedly one of the main gears that guaranteed the success or failure of educational systems, as well as the development of significant educational activities [34].
Schools were forced to establish a double aspect of relationships with families [35,36] (who assumed the role of proxy teachers [37]) and students to continue developing the teaching–learning processes. Similarly, families had to internally strengthen relationships with their children for optimal educational processes.
Beyond the more institutional and family perspective, it is also important to observe how the change from face-to-face education to a distanced and semi-presential one has been experienced by students, the main protagonists in all teaching–learning processes.
Students have experienced the entire transition period from more traditional learning, having to move from their homes to educational institutions to a virtual or blended scenario in which the contents reached their homes without having to travel. This situation has generated situations of stress, anxiety, and uncertainty among students, not knowing when they would return to a period of “normality” to which they were accustomed [38].
Likewise, students’ motivation to study was also greatly affected by both the fact that parents acquired the role of teachers and the necessity to learn quickly, without hesitation, all the technological skills required to be able to access a remote education [39]. Considering that different virtual platforms have been used to develop each subject content and lessons, being able of controlling each one of them has meant an added effort for the students [40].
One of the most considerable challenges traditionally tackled by schools is the commitment to forging stronger bonds between the school and the families and between the students and families [35] by opting for more significant family presence and involvement [41]. Given that the results have not always been achieved as intended, many teachers have called for more robust connections and greater involvement from all educational community members [42]. In studies conducted before the pandemic, parental involvement in education was witnessed to be essential in children’s school performance [43,44,45]. Other studies have revealed that many adults have a great educational deficit concerning new technologies [45,46,47].
Nevertheless, the use of new technologies and the development of a virtual education, in which the relationships between educational institutions, families, and students must be very present, has become a new educational paradigm that is already far removed from the circumstantial situation originated by the pandemic. As a matter of fact, it has been currently implemented as a new educational model that brings to light the real resilient potential of the different educational systems, as well as its capacities to explore novel approaches and models that allow for the satisfaction of present needs [48].
In this context, we have asked ourselves questions such as (1) how supportive have the relationships between the family and the school and the school and the students been during the pandemic? (2) how have parents been involved in the task of educating their children during the pandemic? and (3) have these three groups (family, school, and students) supported each other sufficiently? These questions were linked to the more general objective of presenting critical information about the relationship established between the family and the school in the face of an imposed distance education scenario due to COVID-19. We break this objective down into the following specific objectives: (1) to analyse what relationships have been established between the family and the school, (2) to determine how the school has supported its students, and (3) to examine what relationships have been constituted between parents and their children in a home learning situation.

2. Materials and Methods

The present systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [49]. Our primary purpose was to select studies related to the response of families and schools to non-presential teaching scenarios resulting from COVID-19 measures.

2.1. Search Strategies

The authors of the present work carried out a literature review in several phases. First, a review of the generic literature was carried out in the main scientific research databases and specialized journals on health and educational issues, both national and international. In order to cover the largest number of studies related to the objectives set above, the Web Science (WoS) Scopus, Dialnet Plus, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Science Direct, and ERIC databases were selected. During this phase, the descriptors used were, in Spanish, “COVID-19”; “familias”, “familiar”, “escuelas”, “educación”, “educativo”, “padres”, “progenitores”, “niño”, “niños”, and “adolescentes”. In English, the descriptors used were “COVID-19”; “Family”, “home”, “house school”, “education”, “educative”, “parent”, “school”, “child”, “children”, and “adolescent”. Where permitted, the Boolean operators “AND” and “OR” and apocopated words were used to avoid a loss of information.
In the second part of the process, a search was carried out in each of the databases using the most appropriate filters in each case to narrow down the research topic. Finally, a review of both titles and abstracts was carried out, making an initial selection based on the occurrence of the main descriptors “COVID”, “families”, or “education” accompanied by any of those mentioned above while considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

In this case, the inclusion criteria comprised works in which three of the main descriptors or variants were in the title, keywords, or abstract and works that could be accessed in the full text. This criterion, fortunately, proved to be possible in all the publications related to COVID-19, even in journals and publishers that do not usually publish in an open access format. The exclusion criteria included articles not written in English or Spanish, those written before 2019, those not related to family and home education caused by COVID-19, studies carried out on health without a link to education and the adaptation of families, articles unrelated to the subject of education, works that could not be accessed in full text, non-empirical studies, and those without further research that were more an explanation of a future project.

2.3. Screening and Selection Process

The screening and selection process was performed from February 2021 to May 2021 by two independent reviewers and supervised by a third reviewer to solve any possible discrepancy in study selection according to exclusion and inclusion criteria mentioned above. The final number of works used in the present study was 28, of which 80% (n = 20) were found in two or three databases. Only 20% (n = 5) were registered in a single database (2 in ERIC, 1 in WOS, 1 in Dialnet Plus, and 1 in Scopus). On the other hand, 85% (n = 21) of the reviewed papers were written in English, with Spanish being the language of the remaining 15% (n = 4). Figure 1 shows the search scheme for the various studies.
Table 1 presents a detailed description of each of the searches carried out, the Boolean operations used, filters, and the number of articles selected in each of the review stages.

3. Results

The main characteristics from the selected articles for the present systematic review are presented below. According to Table 2, most of the articles were focused on schools and families’ relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic, although some focused on psychological factors (well-being, stress, anxiety, etc.). In contrast, others analysed the educational response of families with children who have some type of disability.
Table 2 shows the total number of articles and the country where the research was conducted, the main research objective, the educational stage studied, and the relationships established.
One of the studies on family–school relations established the design and validation of an assessment instrument of said relationship [35], while the other studies applied a qualitative or quantitative methodology to obtain data.
Concerning the relationships between students and the school, only two articles focused in depth on these variables [28,50], though there were sample differences, since, the respondents in the first study were high school students and the respondents in the second study were infant and primary school pupils.
Some studies focused on the relationships between the three groups [12,20,51,52,53]. It is worth noting how the actions carried out in Norway are one of the best examples of collaborative relationships formed between families, teachers, and students.
All the studies used various technological resources such as the internet, Google Form, Facebook, and phone calls to administer online surveys and conduct in-depth interviews. This methodology was in line with health recommendations and advice but left out families with less or no access to electronic resources.
Additionally, some studies analysed variables related to the support that had been offered to students with disabilities during home-schooling; three of them mainly focused on the family–school relationship [54,55,56], another three mainly focused on the family–child relationship [24,57,58]; and a single study combined the three variables [59].
Several studies [11,18,37,60] addressed the relationships between the groups studied from a psychological perspective, emphasizing the participants’ stress, health, and well-being.
A lack of motivation or change in children’s behaviour are variables that have been studied in research focused on the family–child relationship [15,27,53,61].

3.1. Family–School Relationships during the Pandemic

For many families, the closure of schools meant converting their homes into classrooms. The most challenging aspects in seven of the analysed studies, in which families expressed feelings of frustration, concern, and denial, were: combining housework [11,57], the need to create or establish communication links with teachers to guarantee educational tutoring of their children [15,53,62], and managing and balancing the time spent on educational needs and that spent working either outside the home or working from home [27,51,63].
Regarding the decisions taken by national governments, the studies developed on Spain [20,28,62,64] showed that the various measures carried out have not satisfied the demands and necessities of either teachers or families and, on many occasions, they worked along different paths [28]. One of the articles carried out in Hong Kong stated that despite home learning being unanimously established [64], there were insufficient specific guidelines and schools had to take the lead. In contrast, another study centred on Kazakhstan [63] claimed that government granted schools the freedom to establish flexible approaches to facilitate learning for students, although the schools had to report on the success of their actions. One of the negative aspects of government efforts was excessive bureaucratization [59], where families with children with disabilities did not receive additional support or aid for carrying out therapies. Despite all these, governments decided to continue with their own established schedules or make minor modifications to the main ones [14,18,20,28,50,63]. Those changes were made in each country and, on several occasions, in each region or county separately and individually, without making a common decision at global scale but reorganizing education according to their own characteristics, which can explain the differences between studies.
Table
Table 2. List and characteristics of articles selected by the systematic review.
Table 2. List and characteristics of articles selected by the systematic review.
Relationship and NumberAuthorsCountryResearch ObjectiveEducational Stage
School–family relationship1Davis et al. (2020) [37]USAParental anxiety-
2Bokayev et al. (2021) [63]Pan-KazakhstanParental involvement, satisfaction, and quality of education-
3Díez- Gutiérrez and Gajardo-Espinoza (2020) [20]SpainPerspective of families and students on education and assessment-
4Hortigüela-Alcalá et al. (2020) [62]SpainFamily–school, family–teacher, and family–student relationships
Effects of virtual teaching		Infant
primary, secondary, and
university
5Yates et al. (2020) [59]AustraliaInvestigate funds dedicated to people with disabilities and their development-
6Pozas et al. (2021) [51]Mexico and GermanyHome-schooling opportunities and challengesInfant
7Jæger and Blaabæk (2020) [65]DenmarkInequalities in families regarding educationInfant,
primary, secondary, and
university
8Güvercin, Kesici and Akbaşlı (2021) [18]TurkeyChanges, challenges, perceptions, and experiences of teachers and parents during pandemicInfant, primary, secondary, and higher education
9Thorell et al. (2021) [54]United States, Sweden, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, ItalyOrganization of home education; negative and positive experiences; comparison of families with children with some type of mental illness or difficultyNursery/preschool
Primary and secondary
10Weaver and Swank (2020) [12]AmericaParental experiencesInfant
primary, and secondary
11Lau and Lee (2020) [50]Hong KongParents’ opinion of distance learning
Perceptions of difficulties and necessary support
Children’s screen usage time		Infant
primary
12Wendel et al. (2020) [55] CanadaChanges in the child’s and parent’s behaviourInfant
13Bonal and González (2020) [64]Spain (Catalonia)Learning gap between students of different social originsInfant
primary, and secondary
14Jones (2020) [13]USAHome learning, expectations, adjustments, challenges, and benefits, as well as the concerns of parents and teachers.Infant
primary
15Dong et al. (2020) [14]ChinaChildren’s experiences
Parents’ beliefs about and attitudes towards learning		Infant
primary
16Sosa (2021) [56]SpainChanges in education, socio–digital inequalities, and family participation and accompanimentInfant, primary, secondary and special needs
School–family–student relationship17Cahapay (2020) [58]PhilippinesOpportunities, changes, and challenges for parents of children with autism-
18Rojas (2020) [35]EcuadorStudy of the parent–family relationshipInfant
Primary, and secondary
19Sala (2020) [28]SpainEvaluate whether the students were able to follow the work remotelyHigh school
20Bubb and Jones (2020) [52]NorwayKnow the point of view of teachers, parents, and students about how teaching has developed during COVID-19Infant
primary, and secondary
21Yıldırım (2021) [53]TurkeyPerceptions of teacher and parents about COVID-19 effect on preschool education, and changes in educative content.Infant
Student–family relationship22Goldberg et al. (2020) [11]USASchool–work relationships
Stress and parental concerns about the pandemic		Infant,
primary, and secondary
23Taubman-Ben-Ari and Ben-Yaakov (2020) [60]IsraelParental anxiety, stress, and apprehensionInfant
24Neece, McIntyre and Fenning (2020) [57]USA (California and Oregon)Parental perspectives of the impact on parents with young children with developmental delay or autism spectrum-
25Majoko and Dudu (2020) [24]ZimbabweParent strategies for educating children with ADD
Challenges and opportunities to home-schooled children		Primary and secondary
26Parczewska (2020) [15]Lublin, Podlaskie Masovian and Greater Poland voivodeshipsParents’ experiences and difficultiesInfant
primary
School family/ student–family relationship27Garbe et al. (2020) [27]USAParents’ experiences and difficultiesInfant
primary, secondary, and
university
28Lee et al. (2021) [61]USAAnalyse activities that parents carry out with their children, educational activities, and state of well-beingInfant
primary
Schools have had to improvise based on their resources, thus generating a necessary two-way relationship with families to send the students’ homework. The level of involvement and the family–school relationship depend on the students’ educational stage [13]. Greater participation in online learning is observed in the compulsory, primary, and secondary educational stages [13,15] than in the non-compulsory stages, such as infant [14,50,53,55], professional and technical training courses, and university [20].
The establishment of communication channels between families and schools has been conditioned by the multitude of platforms and means of communication available such as Skype, Zoom, and WhatsApp, the latter being the most used application during the pandemic [18,35]. Spanish teachers [62] have stated that families do not know the virtual teaching model their children are using, although they did praise the communication channels established between teachers and families, which showed a considerable increase during the pandemic [35,56]. A similar situation occurred in a study carried out in Hong Kong [50], in which more than half of the parents were not satisfied with the support measures offered by the school but were satisfied with the actual learning activities proposed. On the other hand, many parents have reported the desire to communicate with teachers to receive guidance on how to proceed with the multitude of resources and online platforms provided [27,53].
In theory, the already consolidated family–school relationships should not be affected by the lockdown. However, the exceptional situation has catapulted one of the gaps that make it difficult for these relationships to flow. The digital divide [35,64] has meant that thousands of families have been unable to establish successful communications due to low levels of computer skills [14,56,64], difficultly in accessing the internet [53,61], and the time dedicated to using these digital means. A technological barrier to learning has been generated [27,56], though this can be eradicated by giving families greater access to technology to become more technologically proficient and thus help students carry out their tasks [63].

Family–School Relationships and Students with Disabilities

The pandemic seriously affected families and students with disabilities since it was quite complex to access educational resources, such as technological tools, the internet, and various devices (tablet or computer), at home [27,62]. This was acerbated by a lack of knowledge of the pedagogies carried out at school [27] or the ability to reproduce them at home, the lack of communication with teachers and specialists [27,57,59], a lack of support [24,57,59], and excessive bureaucratic obstruction to request the aid they had received before the pandemic [49].
Families with children with disabilities were largely overwhelmed, frustrated, and stressed [24,54,59] in the face of assuming new routines [55,57], as well as their children’s educational tasks at home, and not receiving any guidance on how they should manage the curriculum that was being carried out [54,56]. However, all family members were involved in the teaching–learning processes [24,54,55,56,57,58]. Parents went beyond serving as support to access the platforms where the didactic contents were housed [11,55] since on many occasions, the families saw their hours of homework support increased [59] and the need to adapt said content, since the teachers uploaded homogeneous materials without adaptations [24].
Despite all difficulties, some parents have found home-schooling to be a viable alternative to face-to-face education with multiple advantages for their children, since the relationships with the specialists were good throughout the lockdown and the students showed significant improvements in both knowledge and behaviour [24,54,58]. Furthermore, due to poor communication between teachers, many parents contacted other families in similar circumstances [24,56].

3.2. Teacher–Student Relationships in Times of Pandemic

The student–teacher relationship has gone from bidirectional in a face-to-face classroom environment to unidirectional in the online education sphere [62]. The relationships established in a pandemic were conditioned by short lessons [63] and the timely delivery of assigned tasks [64]. Many parents had to intensify their efforts [27] to deliver tasks of little importance or significance [62] because they were hosted on multiple and sometimes complex platforms available to teachers and students. A feedback system between students and teachers regarding the monitoring of work was established using alternative communication channels such as emails [63]. However, communication presented more negative aspects at higher educational levels such as secondary and university [20].
Concerning study plans and modifications of the curricula, teachers have had to make alterations to adapt face-to-face learning to virtual learning in order to [64] increase student participation [50,56], foster social relationships [51], offer support [27,53], provide feedback [13,28], and use the most appropriate educational platforms to improve the experience [65].
The situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has severely challenged teachers’ technological knowledge [15,18,63] regarding the development and creation of digital content, as well as the use of educational platforms adapted to different academic levels. They often chose to use pre-prepared or pre-recorded materials [14,50] hosted on different educational platforms, thus favouring an asynchronous education that facilitated the connection of students to this platform but sacrificed interaction in learning [14,51].
The issue of homework has been one of the turning points in this relationship [12]. Teachers have devoted more time, effort, and creativity [13] to carrying out assignments, class preparation, and question-solving [28,53] than to providing practical guides regarding the time required to do a task [27], since many students spent more than three hours a day in front of the screens to carry out homework, thus increasing the use of electronic devices [15,50,54,64]. Parents reported spending more than an hour a day supporting their children in order to continue with scheduled classes [14,27] and attributed this complex situation to excessive homework [18,20] and imposed requirements [15], feeling as if educational institutions were trying to recreate a school day without considering family consequences.
Another aspect to consider concerning homework is the difficulty of the tasks and the cognitive challenges they present. Research has emphasized the materials’ homogenization of tasks [51,59] or a lack of difficulty [14,27,56] compared to the level of tasks and activities set in face-to-face contexts.
There are conflicting opinions regarding the quality of education received by students during the pandemic. On the one hand, parents have stated that they have a favourable opinion about the quality of education [63,64] and the evaluations of home learning carried out during the pandemic [14]; the quality of teaching is prioritized over the way it is delivered [65]. On the other hand, many parents have expressed serious concerns regarding the quantity and quality of content provided to their children [12,18,27]; these worries have been aggravated when thinking about the possible resumption of face-to-face classes, about which a vast majority of parents expressed concern due to the low educational level their children had during home-schooling [11,12,20,50]. The link between schools and parents results from positive social behaviours and academic outcomes [55,64].
Two of the selected studies [51,52] stand out as resounding exceptions to the rest of the investigations. In the first of these studies [51], the home-based educational possibilities offered in Germany were very different from the rest of the analysed studies. The students received a differentiated instruction that adapted the educational activities and tasks to the characteristics and needs of each student, whether they had a disability or not. Parents experienced no difficulties when it came to accessing different electronic resources or maintaining a cordial relationship with the school. Moreover, the study also showed how home-schooling was not a barrier to develop inclusive approaches, as students received learning aids appropriate to their needs (extra time, extra homework, and daily plans). Research carried out in Norway [52] established a differentiating starting point from the rest of the research, stating that schools had laid the foundation for digital learning before home learning began so that all students had a tablet and were accustomed to its use in face-to-face settings. The teachers, for their part, had received the necessary training in their use and the municipality had invested the necessary capital in purchasing the resources, thus establishing an almost utopian link between school, students, and their social environment. Positive results were quickly shown due to the considerably increased use of new technologies; the holding of periodic meetings between families, teachers, and specialists; the possibility of offering feedback to their students; and the increase in digital competence of both teachers and students.

3.3. Family–Student Relationships during the Pandemic

Seven studies specifically addressed this family–child relationship since the sudden change in daily routines [11,57] and the responsibility assumed by families in taking up the teaching role within the home [24,48,64] have made dents in this relationship. Parents have reported feeling overwhelmed and distressed [12,18] by the situation, given their low qualification in this regard [27,37,51,56,63] and the need to continue working and carrying out household chores. As a consequence, situations of verbal violence [15,54,63], stress, and decreased general well-being have emerged in families [11,37,64], teachers [13,37], and students themselves [12,13,50,63].
Many families have reported that tasks are complicated when several children are in the home, each in different educational levels and with different needs [13,27,63]. A scarcity of resources [18,35,51,53], lack of time [12,13,27,63], and uncertainty surrounding the pandemic increased the stress of families in this situation [54].
Parents must establish communication channels with their children that allow them to set limits [50,61] on the independent use of technologies and encourage alternate activities (sports, video games, leisure, etc.) [15,18,61,64], whether or not it is specifically aimed at reducing screen time in favour of strengthening social ties and relationships [11] with different family members [50].
Student motivation has decreased as lockdown has lengthened over time due to the difficulty in using different educational platforms [12,13] or in living harmoniously with other family members [50] according to the analysed studies [27,53]. A lack of motivation, boredom, decreased attention span, concentration, or cooperation with their children have made it very difficult for parents to fulfil their responsibilities as they divide their attention between motivating one child’s learning while taking care of other children [27]. This situation is even more difficult if a child has a disability at home [59].
In a home learning situation, the provision of technological resources to meet the educational needs of children was one of the most important concerns that was reflected in 12 articles, since the vast majority of families claim to have access to very few resources [15,18,27,35,51,52,63,65] to carry out the various learning tasks, as well as feeling overwhelmed by the sheer number of tasks to be completed [27,51,52]. Students also require appropriate tools such as computers [24], tablets [28], the internet [20,53], mobile phones [12,56,64], and television [12,63] to access online education [15].
School administrations have been aware of these concerns and needs, and they have taken according measures. Hong Kong, for example, implemented an assistance program for the acquisition of electronic resources for low-income families [50,64]. In some regions of Spain [28], school institutions provided low-income families with tablets with internet access to enable students to attend virtual classes. In Zimbabwe [24], the ministry made digital services, learning platforms, and radios available to the population so that all students could receive a minimum level of education. Similarly, in Spain [20], educational television programs (5 h) were broadcast to increase resources and support student learning.
The relationships between families and students can be complex. Despite all the difficulties endured during the pandemic, however, ties with all family members have been strengthened [12,51,57,58]; many parents rediscovered their children, and children rediscovered their parents [13,15].

4. Discussion

This article has presented a systematic review of the most recent research on the relationships between students, families, and schools during COVID lockdown. The three groups were discussed in a comprehensive set of 25 articles.
In this context, we asked ourselves questions the following questions: (1) how supportive have the relationships between the family and the school and the school and the students been during the pandemic? (2) how have parents been involved in the task of educating their children during the pandemic? (3) have these three groups (family, school, and students) supported each other sufficiently? These questions are linked to the more general objective of presenting critical information about the relationship established between the family and the school in the face of an imposed distance education scenario due to COVID-19. We break it down into the following specific objectives: (1) to analyse what relationships have been established between the family and the school; (2) to determine how the school has supported its students; and (3) to examine what relationships have been constituted between parents and their children in a home learning situation.

4.1. Family–School Relationships during the Pandemic

Concerning the first objective, it was evident in a large number of investigations that one of the main concerns of families was related to time compatibility [27,51,63] to meet the educational needs of students [51,54,57,59] and be able to go to work or work from home. Similar studies showed that families sometimes have not had the sufficient capacity to be able to combine everything [56,66], coupled with the need to share resources [20,27,62] and spaces [15].
School administrations have acquired a special prominence within the development of home learning. It has been observed that the decisions made in some countries have not been those expected or desired [28,50,59,62]. The studies analysed in this review and others developed during the pandemic highlight the lack of coordination among school administrations in carrying out their responsibilities [67]. In addition, different approaches carried out by the administrations have made it difficult for schools to provide quality education, as shown by the non-governmental organization Save the Children [68].
One of the main lines of action of school administrations resides in reducing inequalities and allowing students with disabilities to have equal access to education and diverse activities by providing them with the necessary support. The present situation has revealed many shortcomings, as shown in another study carried out during the pandemic [69]. Many families have had to buy the necessary resources to continue their children’s therapies without government aid or benefits [59].
Both the good and the bad have been exposed in the relationships established between teachers and families. Depending on the educational stage and the country, these relationships have been either positive [27,52,62] or negative [14,19,20,24,51,54,55,57,64]. Indeed, they have mostly leaned toward the negative and exposing the need for improvement. Similar studies revealed that a vast majority of parents were not entirely satisfied with the relationships established between school and families [70], with regards both to online learning [71] and the difficulties in participating in it [72]. This dissatisfaction may be affected by the parent’s educational level, socioeconomic characteristics [73], or degree of involvement [74].
Regarding the offered resources, families have demonstrated little or no knowledge about the use of different technological tools and about virtual teaching [14,62,64], which shows that despite the dizzying pace with which they have adapted to these technologies, they have been less focused on teaching or pedagogical purposes [75] and more geared towards entertainment and leisure [62]. Furthermore, parents felt overwhelmed by the number of technological resources presented by the school [27,51,52]. Studies carried out before the pandemic already highlighted some of the challenges in this regard such as the establishment of communication channels between families and schools [76], the importance of teachers [77], financial resources [78], the lack of interest in the use of technology [79], the high level of commitment of families [80], and the establishment of a good two-way relationship between these two educational agents, all of which can positively influence both motivation and student academic performance [81,82,83]. Resources are an essential part of the family–school–student relationship, as demonstrated in research carried out during the pandemic [84].
It is quite clear that establishing communication channels between families and schools is essential if the aim is to successfully move towards learning, including online learning. Even before the pandemic, studies have shown the many positive aspects of virtual learning, such as direct interaction with teachers, which is more flexible than face-to-face learning [85]. Various studies have shown that online education should not be based solely on uploading and downloading documents or videos from different virtual platforms [85], nor should it be based on training and innovations; instead, it is crucial to train families in digital skills. This should be conducted is in addition to training teachers in the use of these resources [35,64] so that they can create scenarios appropriate to the needs and characteristics of their students and promote the different didactic strategies so that students achieve the desired meaningful learning—autonomous learning adapted to the rhythm of each one of them [86,87].
Special mention must be made of students with disabilities, since several of the analysed studies [27,51,59,62] showed that, in a pandemic situation and compared to fellow pupils, these groups are at a disadvantage in terms of education and well-being. This is not a new finding since, in previous studies, this group’s educational, social, and employment differences have been highlighted [88].
Some parents [24,54,57,58] noticed substantial improvements in the development and learning of their children with disabilities. Many ultimately decided to implement home-schooling as a definite rather than temporary measure. Research carried out during the pandemic showed that many families, despite its many challenges, have opted for home-schooling for their children [89].
As families have become “teachers” in the home learning environment, the critical role that teachers play in their children’s education, as well as the lack of preparation of parents and families to assume this role, has become increasingly evident [15,27]. Many parents have felt overwhelmed because their attention was split between their other responsibilities and having to master new technologies. Moreover, they fought with other issues exacerbated by the pandemic, such as anxiety, frustration, anger, irritation, fear, uncertainty, confusion, and loneliness [11,15,37,60]. In studies carried out during lockdown, it was shown that the role of the teacher is essential for supporting students, clarifying concepts, and deepening their understanding, thus releasing parents from this burden—actions which have been diminished during this period [56,66]. It is also important to remember that although parents are one of the main axes in the educational processes of their children, they do not have the necessary skills to promote knowledge acquisition [15,56].

4.2. Teacher–Student Relationships in Times of Pandemic

Concerning the second objective, student–teacher relationships have been overshadowed at all education levels and contexts by the exceptional situation that education has undergone. Students, and failing that, parents, must fully understand the management of multiple platforms in which teachers host content. In many cases, these platforms offer a few cognitive challenges for students [14,27], who must then wait until the next virtual class to contact the teacher and communicate any doubts they may have had [63], turning the teaching–learning process into a tedious and unmotivating activity [27]. Studies before the pandemic showed that the variety of activities and the feedback that students receive from teachers throughout the teaching–learning processes are vital for promoting meaningful learning [36,90].
It has been shown how the student–teacher relationship in compulsory schooling stages, whether primary or secondary [13,15], has become more robust in that teachers provide necessary wake-up calls when there have been connectivity problems or decreases in task productivity [27]. However, in the non-compulsory stages such as infant school or university levels [20,50,55], this communication has sometimes faltered [20]. However, in studies carried out before the pandemic, it was observed that families present a multitude of issues that entangles these communications (such as materials, resources, low culture, and different languages) [87].
One issue, present in most of the analysed studies and which parents have highlighted as being a major concern, is the constant use of computers [24], tablets [28], or mobile devices [12], as well as the amount of time spent doing school tasks. Pre-pandemic research analysed how excessive screen time use can negatively influence student development, increase health problems [14], and increase risk of accessing inappropriate content [82]. Some articles [50] have shown that the time spent by students carrying out their tasks exceeds 2–3 h a day, an aspect that goes against the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) that argues that screen-time for children under five years of age should not be greater than one hour per day [91]. Although electronic or virtual learning has long been promoted [92,93], the pandemic has forced its implementation for an extended period and in such a generalized way for the first time.

4.3. Family–Student Relationships during the Pandemic

Finally, regarding the third objective, the changing relationship between parents and children has meant that parents’ levels of stress and frustration increased, as did feeling overwhelmed by the ever more difficult school tasks with which children needed help [10]. Thus, in research carried out before the pandemic, it was evident that the involvement of parents when tackling their children’s learning difficulties was also conditioned by face-to-face education, a condition that became harder to tackle when the learning took place in an online environment [89].
Some studies have shown how family violence or verbal violence between the family and students has increased during this lockdown [15,54,63], a regrettable fact but not an isolated issue since another study carried out during this period corroborated it [94].
Limitations and suggestions: Generally speaking, most of the selected studies were characterized by the fact that the samples were collected and accessed through social networks or the use of technologies. Thus, it is possible to perceive a bias in most of them since they excluded the most vulnerable families and those who do not have full access to the internet or computer resources due to low socioeconomic resources. On the other hand, studies that were written in languages other than English or Spanish were not selected for the present review, which may have been a source of selection bias as the epicentre of the pandemic was developed in China, a country were the mother language is not considered in school–family–students relationship as a trinomial. An additional limitation was the general lack of research directly centred on the opinion of students, especially of those at the highest educative levels. Understanding their experience is as important as the perceptions of families and teachers in order to know the real impact of the pandemic on the educative process. Although PRISMA guidelines were followed to complete every section and report data, it should be considered that analysed studies had both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. This fact could be perceived as both a strength and a limitation. Though the variety of methodology allowed for the analysis of the changes and relations between schools–families–students in a greater breadth, outcomes reflected on the present review were obtained through the general comparison of the different results of selected papers without working on the meta-analysis. Thus, the results of this review could be employed as the basis for future meta-analysis and empirical research while considering the limitations discussed above. It is necessary to keep studying the characteristics of educative systems of different countries, studying the measures of different government and educative centres, and analysing the differences that may be present between them. The present study proves the great variety of opinions, experiences, and perceptions around teaching–learning process progress in a limit situation. Thus, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each country could help to improve educative systems around the world.

5. Conclusions

The coronavirus pandemic abruptly and suddenly changed the routines and prospects for many households around the world. The educational field was one of the most affected in this sense since after the successive closure of schools worldwide in mid-March, an alternative plan to the acclaimed and entrenched face-to-face education needed to be improvised.
This systematic review revealed an objective reality: in the 21st century, students’ lack of autonomy and motivation is attached to an educational system that continually revolves around face-to-face education.
New technologies have been the immediate and most effective solution to the closure of schools, thus becoming both a problem and solution regarding a complex social and educational situation. They have evidenced various inconsistencies and setbacks that had remained hidden under the normality of pre-academic education, such as the enormous challenge posed by its immediate use within a purely face-to-face educational system, the scant training of families in its use, the limited access to it by many students, and the diversity of platforms and media.
Schools and families have had to strengthen their relationships, fight for their causes, and satisfy their students’ educational needs. Parents and their children have discovered various positive and negative effects of home-schooling, though the adverse effects have been much more palpable and evident. A beneficial line of future research may be related to those positive aspects of home-schooling that need further study.
While families and students have had time to experience the effects of home-schooling, educational institutions have had the opportunity to rethink how education is delivered. They must seriously consider both the challenges and the opportunities that online education brings without leaving behind the different groups that, due to their characteristics (such as low socioeconomic level, disability, or ethnic minorities), are more vulnerable and, unfortunately, have been forgotten in pandemic education.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.D.P.-E. and I.M.R.-S.; methodology, C.P.-M.; formal analysis, C.P.-M.; investigation, C.P.-M.; writing—original draft preparation, M.D.P.-E.; writing—review and editing, J.J.C.-M. and I.M.R.-S.; visualization, M.D.P.-E.; supervision, J.J.C.-M.; project administration, J.J.C.-M.; funding acquisition, all authors. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades) Within the framework of the FPU program (PhD fellowship) granted to the second author (C.P.M.; with reference FPU16/05225), and the third author (M.P.E.; with reference FPU18/05887); and by the European Regional Development Fund (Agencia Estatal de Investigación) within the framework of Programa Estatal de I+D+I Orientada a los Retos de la Sociedad 2020 (project reference PID2020-114508RB-I00).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organization. WHO Director-General’s Opening Remarks at the Media Briefing on COVID-19—11 March 2020. Available online: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-generals-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 (accessed on 25 February 2021).
  2. Lasheras, I.; Gracia-García, P.; Lipnicki, D.M.; Bueno-Notivol, J.; López-Antón, R.; de la Cámara, C.; Santabárbara, J. Prevalence of anxiety in medical students during the covid-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review with meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 7, 6603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yang, H.; Bin, P.; He, A.J. Opinions from the epicenter: An online survey of university students in Wuhan amidst the COVID-19 outbreak 1. J. Chin. Gov. 2020, 5, 234–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Post, L.; Culler, K.; Moss, C.B.; Murphy, R.L.; Achenbach, C.J.; Ison, M.G.; Resnick, D.; Singh, L.N.; White, J.; Boctor, M.J. Surveillance of the Second Wave of COVID-19 in Europe: Longitudinal Trend Analyses. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021, 7, e25695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Aubert, C.; Augeraud-Véron, E. The relative power of individual distancing efforts and public policies to curb the COVID-19 epidemics. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0250764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rashid, H.; Ridda, I.; King, C.; Begun, M.; Tekin, H.; Wood, J.G.; Booy, R. Evidence compendium and advice on social distancing and other related measures for response to an influenza pandemic. Paedia. Respira. Rev. 2015, 16, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Kim, S.; Kim, Y.J.; Peck, K.R.; Jung, E. School Opening Delay Effect on Transmission Dynamics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea: Based on Mathematical Modeling and Simulation Study. J. Korean Med. Sci. 2020, 35, e143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Choe, Y.J.; Choi, E.H. Are We Ready for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Arriving at Schools? J. Korean Med. Sci. 2020, 35, e127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cowling, B.J.; Ali, S.T.; Ng, T.W.; Tsang, T.K.; Li, J.C.; Fong, M.W.; Liao, Q.; Kwan, M.Y.W.; Lee, S.L.; Chiu, S.S.; et al. Impact assessment of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 and influenza in Hong Kong: An observational study. Med. Rxiv. 2020, 5, e279–e288. [Google Scholar]
  10. Nafisah, S.B.; Alamery, A.H.; Al Nafesa, A.; Aleid, B.; Brazanji, N.A. School closure during novel influenza: A systematic review. J. Infect. Public Health 2018, 11, 657–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Goldberg, A.E.; McCormick, N.; Virginia, H. Parenting in a Pandemic: Work-Family Arrangements, Well-Being, and Intimate Relationships among Adoptive Parents. Family Relat. 2021, 70, 7–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Weaver, J.L.; Swank, J.M. Parents’ lived experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic. Fam. J. 2021, 29, 136–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jones, D. The Impact of COVID-19 on Young Children, Families, and Teachers; Defending the Early Years: Jamaica Plain, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  14. Dong, C.; Cao, S.; Li, H. Young children’s online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Chinese parents’ beliefs and attitudes. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020, 118, 105440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Parczewska, T. Difficult situations and ways of coping with them in the experiences of parents homeschooling their children during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland. Education 2020, 3, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  16. UNESCO. Reopening Schools: When, Where and How? Available online: https://en.unesco.org/news/reopening-schools-when-where-and-how (accessed on 13 March 2021).
  17. Huber, S.G.; Helm, C. COVID-19 and Schooling: Evaluation, Assessment, and Accountability in Times of Crises—Reacting Quickly to Explore Key Issues for Policy, Practice, and Research with the School Barometer. Educat. Assess. Eval. Account. 2020, 32, 237–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Güvercin, D.; Kesici, A.E.; Akbaşlı, S. Distance Education Experiences of Teacher-Parents during the COVID-19. Athens J. Educ. 2021, 8, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gouëdard, P.; Pont, B.; Viennet, R. Education Responses to COVID-19: Implementing a Way Forward. OECD. Educa. Work. Papers 2020, 224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Díez Gutiérrez, E.J.; Gajardo Espinoza, K. Educating and Evaluating in Times of Coronavirus: The Situation in Spain. Multi. J. Educ. Resear. 2020, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. de la Peña Consuegra, G.; Nieves Riverón, J.L.; Vinces Centeno, M.R. Apuntes sobre indicadores de calidad para los cursos virtuales en las plataformas educativas. Rev. Electrón. Entrevista Acad. 2021, 2, 138–151. [Google Scholar]
  22. Quinn, D.M.; Cooc, N.; McIntyre, J.; Gomez, C.J. Seasonal dynamics of academic achievement inequality by socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity: Updating and Extending past research with new national data. Educ. Res. 2016, 45, 443–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Cattaneo, M.A.; Oggenfuss, C.; Wolter, S.C. The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance. Educ. Econ. 2017, 25, 433–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Majoko, T.; Dudu, A. Parents’ strategies for home educating their children with Autism Spectrum Disorder during the COVID-19 period in Zimbabwe. Int. J. Dev. Disabil. 2020, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bou-Sospedra, C.; González-Serrano, M.H.; Jiménez, M.A. Study of teaching-learning styles from the perspective of the three educational agents: Students, teachers and families. Retos 2020, 39, 330–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Benitez, P.; Domeniconi, C. Professional development of educational agents: Proposal for developing inclusive strategies. Rev. Brasi. Educa. Espe. 2014, 20, 371–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Garbe, A.; Ogurlu, U.; Logan, N.; Cook, P. COVID-19 and remote learning: Experiences of parents with children during the pandemic. Ame. J. Quali. Res. 2020, 4, 45–65. [Google Scholar]
  28. Aznar Sala, F.J. Secondary Education in Spain amid the COVID-19 Crisis. Int. J. Sociol. Educ. 2020, 9, 53–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Save the Children. Familias en Riesgo, Análisis de la Situación de Pobreza en los Hogares con Hijos e Hijas en España. Available online: https://www.savethechildren.es/publicaciones/informe-familias-en-riesgo-analisis-de-la-pobreza-en-los-hogares-con-hijos-e-hijas (accessed on 15 April 2021).
  30. Rodicio-García, M.L.; Ríos-de-Deus, M.P.; Mosquera-González, M.J.; Abilleira, M.P. The digital divide in Spanish students in the face of the COVID-19 crisis. Rev. Int. De Educ. Para La Justicia Soc. 2020, 9, 103–125. [Google Scholar]
  31. UNESCO. Adverse Consequences of School Closures. Available online: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/consequences (accessed on 13 April 2021).
  32. Cifuentes-Faura, J. Consecuencias en los niños del cierre de escuelas por Covid-19: El papel del gobierno, profesores y padres. Rev. Int. Educ. Justi. Soci. 2020, 9, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  33. Muñoz, M.C. La importancia de la colaboración familia-escuela en la educación. Innov. Exp. Educ. 2009, 16, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  34. Martín Criado, E.; Gómez Bueno, C. El mito de la dimisión parental. Implicación familiar, desigualdad social y éxito escolar. Cuader. Rela. Labo. 2017, 35, 305–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Ire Rojas, A. Instrumento para evaluar la relación escuela familia en el proceso educativo virtual provocado por la COVID-19. Rev. Conrado 2020, 16, 298–306. [Google Scholar]
  36. Otero-Mayer, A.; González-Benito, A.; Gutiérrez-de-Rozas, B.; Vélaz-de-Medrano, C. Family-School Cooperation: An Online Survey of Parents and Teachers of Young Children in Spain. Early Child. Educ. J. 2021, 49, 977–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Davis, C.R.; Grooms, J.; Ortega, A.; Rubalcaba, J.A.A.; Vargas, E. Distance Learning and Parental Mental Health during COVID-19. Educ. Res. 2021, 50, 61–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Daniel, S.J. Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects 2020, 49, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Rodríguez Faría, J.J.; Rodríguez Pacheco, J.J. Edublog como recurso de la educación a distancia. Luces y sombras a la luz del COVID-19. Rev. Eduweb 2020, 14, 280–286. [Google Scholar]
  40. Vita Carrillo, M. Plataformas Educativas y herramientas digitales para el aprendizaje. Vida Científica Boletín Científico De La Esc. Prep. 2021, 9, 9–12. [Google Scholar]
  41. Goiria, M. 10 Tópicos Sobre la Homeschool; CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform: Scotts Valley, CA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  42. León, V.; Fernández, M.J. Diseño y validación de un instrumento para evaluar la participación de las familias en los centros educativos. Rev. Española De Orientación Y Psicopedag. 2017, 28, 115–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Woofter, S. Book Review: Building Equity: Policies and Practices to Empower All Learners. Am. J. Qual. Res. 2019, 3, 136–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Makrooni, G. Being a First-Generation Migrant Family Student in Finland: Perceptions and experiences of the Educational Journey to Higher Education. J. Ethn. Cult. Stud. 2019, 6, 157–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Van Voorhis, F.L.; Maier, M.F.; Epstein, J.L.; Lloyd, C.M. The Impact of Family Involvement on the Education of Children Ages 3 to 8: A Focus on Literacy and Math Achievement Outcomes and Social-Emotional Skills; MDRC Building Knowledge to Improve Social Policy: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  46. Aguilar-Ramos, M.C.; Urbano, A. La necesidad de alfabetización digital e intergeneracional en la familia y la escuela. Didáctica Innovación Y Multimed. 2014, 28, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  47. Peña Vélez, A.; Napal Fraile, M.; Mendioroz Lacambra, A.M. Competencia digital y alfabetización digital de los adultos (profesorado y familias). Int. J. New Educa. 2018, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Jacovkis, J.; Tarabini-Castellani Clemente, A. COVID-19 y escuela a distancia: Viejas y nuevas desigualdades. Rev. De Sociol. De La Educ. 2021, 14, 85–102. [Google Scholar]
  49. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 88, 105906. [Google Scholar]
  50. Lau, E.Y.H.; Lee, K. Parents’ views on young children’s distance learning and screen time during COVID-19 class suspension in Hong Kong. Early Educ. Dev. 2021, 32, 863–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Pozas, M.; Letzel, V.; Schneider, C. ‘Homeschooling in times of corona’: Exploring Mexican and German primary school students’ and parents’ chances and challenges during homeschooling. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 2021, 36, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bubb, S.; Jones, M.A. Learning from the COVID-19 home-schooling experience: Listening to pupils, parents/carers and teachers. Impro. Schools 2020, 23, 209–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yıldırım, B. Preschool education in Turkey during the Covid-19 pandemic: A phenomenological study. Early Child. Educ. J. 2021, 49, 947–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Thorell, L.B.; Skoglund, C.; Giménez de la Peña, A.; Baeyens, D.; Fuermaier, A.B.M.; Groom, M.J.; Mammarella, I.C.; van deo Oord, S.; van den Hoofdakker, B.; Luman, M.; et al. Parental experiences of homeschooling during the COVID-19 pandemic: Differences between seven European countries and between children with and without mental health conditions. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2021, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wendel, M.; Ritchie, T.; Rogers, M.A.; Ogg, J.A.; Santuzzi, A.M.; Shelleby, E.C.; Menter, K. The association between child ADHD symptoms and changes in parental involvement in kindergarten children’s learning during COVID-19. School Psychol. Rev. 2020, 49, 466–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sosa, M.J. Emergency Remote Education, Family Support and the Digital Divide in the Context of the COVID-19 Lockdown. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Neece, C.; McIntyre, L.L.; Fenning, R. Examining the impact of COVID-19 in ethnically diverse families with young children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. J. Intell. Disabil. Res. 2020, 64, 739–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cahapay, M.B. How Filipino parents home educate their children with autism during COVID-19 period. Int. J. Dev. Dis. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Yates, S.; Dickinson, H.; Smith, C.; Tani, M. Flexibility in individual funding schemes: How well did Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme support remote learning for students with disability during COVID-19? Soc. Policy Adm. 2021, 55, 906–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Taubman-Ben-Ari, O.; Ben-Yaakov, O. Distress and apprehension among new parents during the COVID-19 pandemic: The contribution of personal resources. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 2020, 90, 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lee, S.J.; Ward, K.P.; Chang, O.D.; Downing, K.M. Parenting activities and the transition to home-based education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2021, 122, 105585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hortigüela-Alcalá, D.; Pérez-Pueyo, Á.; López-Aguado, M.; Manso-Ayuso, J.; Fernández-Río, J. Familias y Docentes: Garantes del Aprendizaje durante el Confinamiento. Rev. Int. De Educ. Para La Justicia Soc. 2020, 9, 353–370. [Google Scholar]
  63. Bokayev, B.; Torebekova, Z.; Davletbayeva, Z.; Zhakypova, F. Distance learning in Kazakhstan: Estimating parents’ satisfaction of educational quality during the coronavirus. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2021, 30, 27–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bonal, X.; González, S. The impact of lockdown on the learning gap: Family and school divisions in times of crisis. Int. Rev. Educ. 2020, 66, 635–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jæger, M.M.; Blaabæk, E.H. Inequality in learning opportunities during Covid-19: Evidence from library takeout. Rese. Soci. Strati. Mob. 2020, 68, 100524. [Google Scholar]
  66. Craig, L.; Churchill, B. Dual-earner parent couples’ work and care during COVID-19. Gend. Work Organ. 2020, 28, 66–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Fernández-Franco, F.J. Estudio Comparado de las Normas del Tercer Trimestre del Curso 2019/2020 Reguladas por las Administraciones Educativas; USIE: Andalucía, España, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  68. Save the Children. Covid-19: Cerrar la Brecha. Impacto Educativo y Propuestas de Equidad Para la Desescalada. Available online: https://www.observatoriodelainfancia.es/oia/esp/documentos_ficha.aspx?id=7086 (accessed on 24 April 2021).
  69. Dickinson, H.; Yates, S. More Than Isolated: The Experience of Children and Young People with Disability and Their Families during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Melbourne: Children and Young People with Disability Australia; UNSW Canberra: Campbell, Australia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  70. Pew Research Center. Research Center’s American Trends Panel Wave 65. Available online: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/3/2020/04/PSDT_04.21.20_covidfinance_TOPLINE.pdf (accessed on 17 May 2021).
  71. Beck, D.; Maranto, R.; Lo, W.-J. Determinants of student and parent satisfaction at a cyber charter school. J. Educ. Res. 2013, 107, 209–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Rideout, V.; Katz, V.S. Opportunity for All? Technology and Learning in Lower-Income Families. In Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop; Ganz Cooney, J., Ed.; Center at Sesame Workshop: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  73. Jónsdóttir, K.; Björnsdóttir, A.; Bæck, U.K. Influential factors behind parents’ general satisfaction with compulsory schools in Iceland. Nord. J. Stud. Educ. Policy 2017, 3, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Borup, J. Teacher perceptions of parental engagement at a cyber high school. J. Rese. Techno. Educ. 2016, 48, 67–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Nepo, K. The use of technology to improve education. Child Youth Care Forum 2017, 46, 207–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Razeto, A. El involucramiento de las familias en la educación de los niños: Cuatro reflexiones para fortalecer la relación entre familias y escuelas. Pág. Educ. 2016, 9, 184–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Oblinger, D.G. It’s not just about the technology. It’s what you do with it that counts. Chang. Mag. High. Learn. 2018, 50, 40–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Scherer, R.; Siddiq, F. The relation between students’ socioeconomic status and ICT literacy: Findings from a meta-analysis. Comp. Educ. 2019, 138, 13–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Nouwen, M.; Zaman, B. Redefining the role of parents in young children’s online interactions. A value-sensitive design case study. Int. J. Child-Comp. Interac. 2018, 18, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Smith, S.J.; Burdette, P.J.; Cheatham, G.A.; Harvey, S.P. Parental role and support for online learning of students with disabilities: A paradigm shift. J. Special Educ. Leader. 2016, 29, 101–112. [Google Scholar]
  81. Faize, F.A.; Dahar, M.A. Effect of Mother’s Level of Education on Secondary Grade Science Students in Pakistan. Rese. J. Int. Stu. 2011, 19, 13–19. [Google Scholar]
  82. Waters, L.H.; Leong, P. Who is teaching? New roles for teachers and parents in cyber charter schools. J. Techno. Teach. Educ. 2014, 22, 33–56. [Google Scholar]
  83. Mann, B.; Kotok, S.; Frankenberg, E.; Fuller, E.; Schafft, K. Choice, cyber charter schools, and the educational marketplace for rural school districts. Rural. Educ. 2016, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Tsai, I.-C.; Laffey, J.M.; Hanuscin, D. Effectiveness of an online community of practice for learning to teach elementary science. J. Educ. Comp. Rese. 2010, 43, 225–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Robinson, H.A.; Al-Freih, M.; Kilgore, W. Designing with care: Towards a care centered model for online learning design. Int. J. Info. Learn. Techno. 2020, 37, 99–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Romeu-Fontanillas, T.; Guitert-Catasús, M.; Raffaghelli, J.-E.; Sangrà, A. Mirroring learning ecologies of outstanding teachers to integrate ICTs in the classroom. Comunicar Media Educ. Res. J. 2020, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Domingo, M.; Marqués, P. Classrooms 2.0 and the use of ICT in teaching practice. Communicate 2011, 19, 169–175. [Google Scholar]
  88. Cox, F.M.; Marshall, A.D. Educational engagement, expectation and attainment of children with disabilities: Evidence from the Scottish longitudinal study. British Educational Rese. J. 2020, 46, 222–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Feeney, P.T. Homeschooling Children with Special Needs during COVID-19 Quarantine—Parents Speak Candidly about the Challenges and Realizations. Available online: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/south-plainfield/sections/board-of-education/articles/homeschooling-children-with-special-needs-during-covid-19-quarantine-parents-speak-candidly-about-the-challenges-and-realizations (accessed on 22 September 2021).
  90. Pushor, D. Tracing my research on parent engagement: Working to interrupt the story of school as protectorate. Act. Teach. Educ. 2012, 34, 464–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. World Health Organization. Guidelines on Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour and Sleep for Children under 5 Years of Age. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/311664 (accessed on 5 May 2021).
  92. Hernández-Sánchez, A.M.; Ortega, J.A. Aprendizaje electrónico afectivo: Un modelo innovador para desarrollar una acción tutorial virtual de naturaleza inclusiva. Form. Univ. 2015, 8, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Robles, A.S.; Vigil, M.Á.G. Entornos virtuales de aprendizaje: Nuevos retos educativos. Etic@net. Rev. Cienti. Electro. Educ. Comunica. Socie. Conocí. 2013, 13, 260–272. [Google Scholar]
  94. Usher, K.; Bhullar, N.; Durkin, J.; Gyamfi, N.; Jackson, D. Family violence and COVID-19: Increased vulnerability and reduced options for support. Int. J. Mental Health Nurs. 2020, 29, 549–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Ijerph 18 11710 g001 550
Figure 1. Selection criteria flow chart 1.
Figure 1. Selection criteria flow chart 1.
Ijerph 18 11710 g001
Table
Table 1. Procedure for selecting articles from the structured search in the primary databases.
Table 1. Procedure for selecting articles from the structured search in the primary databases.
DatabaseBoolean OperationsInitial NumberFiltersAfter FiltersAfter CriteriaFinal
WoSCOVID-19105,585Domain: social sciences; databases: Web of Science core collection; languages: English and Spanish; research areas: education, educational research, social issues, family studies, social work, and sociology.19,4537922
COVID-19 AND famil *29451523
COVID-19 AND educa * AND famil *411301
COVID-19 AND (paren * or pad *) AND educa *14942
COVID-19 AND educa * AND (youth OR child * Or adolesc * OR young OR niñ *)51495
COVID-19 AND school *1451442
COVID-19 AND school * AND famil *310122
COVID-19 AND school * AND (youth OR child * Or adolesc * OR young OR niñ *)730227
COVID-19 and home-schooling18No filters; all checked.18
SCOPUSCOVID-1992,282Search within: article title, abstract, keywords; years: 2020 and 2021; subject area: social sciences and psychology (exclude the rest); language: English and Spanish.44732721
COVID-19 AND famil *4280957
COVID-19 AND educa * AND famil *692233
COVID-19 AND (paren * or pad *) AND educa *258122
COVID-19 AND educa * AND (youth OR child * Or adolesc * OR young OR niñ *)1332390
COVID-19 AND school *2638890
COVID-19 AND school * AND famil *376138
COVID-19 AND school * AND (youth OR child * Or adolesc * OR young OR niñ *)1098291
COVID-19 and home-schooling2414
Dialnet plusCOVID-196210Filters: social sciences, psychology, and education; languages: Spanish and English8093
COVID-19 AND famil *2655
COVID-19 AND educa * AND famil *735
COVID-19 AND (paren * or pad *) AND educa *81735
COVID-19 AND educa * AND (adolescent* OR child* Or adolesc * OR niñ *)384
COVID-19 AND school * or escuel *15810
COVID-19 AND school * AND famil *283
COVID-19 AND school * AND (youth OR child * Or adolesc * OR young OR niñ *)31
COVID-19 and home-schooling11
Science DirectCOVID-1940,220Subject areas: social sciences and psychology4521133
COVID-19 AND family11,5532013
COVID-19 AND education AND family or familia43901172
COVID-19 AND parent AND education1441546
COVID-19 AND education AND adolescent OR child468169
COVID-19 AND school OR escuela317
COVID-19 AND education AND family or familia167
COVID-19 and home-schooling124
RICCOVID-191476Audience: parents11214
COVID-19 AND family227Descriptor: distance education100
COVID-19 AND education AND family or familia205100
COVID-19 AND parent AND education14880
COVID-19 AND education AND adolescent OR child176
COVID-19 AND school OR escuela88642
COVID-19 AND education AND family or familia18294
COVID-19 and home-schooling99
* appocoped words.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Carrión-Martínez, J.J.; Pinel-Martínez, C.; Pérez-Esteban, M.D.; Román-Sánchez, I.M. Family and School Relationship during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111710

AMA Style

Carrión-Martínez JJ, Pinel-Martínez C, Pérez-Esteban MD, Román-Sánchez IM. Family and School Relationship during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(21):11710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111710

Chicago/Turabian Style

Carrión-Martínez, José Juan, Cristina Pinel-Martínez, María Dolores Pérez-Esteban, and Isabel María Román-Sánchez. 2021. "Family and School Relationship during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 21: 11710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111710

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop