literature review of secondary school

Facilitating a Successful Transition to Secondary School: (How) Does it Work? A Systematic Literature Review

• Systematic Review
• Open access
• Published: 16 June 2017
• Volume 3 , pages 43–56, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Marlau van Rens 1 , 2 ,
• Carla Haelermans 1 , 2 ,
• Wim Groot 1 , 2 &
• Henriëtte Maassen van den Brink 1 , 2  

39k Accesses

49 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

For children, the transition from primary to secondary school is sometimes difficult. A problematic transition can have both short- and long-term consequences. Although information from children and their parents about what concerns them can contribute to a smooth transition, this information is rarely shared during the transfer to secondary school. This review examines 30 empirical studies on the effects of interventions to ease the transition process. These are interventions which, in contrast to the usual information about curriculum and test results, focus on what children report about the transition. Our findings suggest that, although their perspectives differ, positive relationships between the stakeholders in the transition process—schools, children and their parents—can help to improve the challenges presented by the transition. It shows the importance to involve all stakeholders in the transition process. However, there is a gap in exchanging information. Little evidence is found on interventions that focus on partnership or cooperation between parents, children and schoolteachers. We conclude that children and their parents are not well represented in the decision making and in the interventions that provide information to the other stakeholders. There is a need for further research on the way children can be partners in the transition process and how they can inform other stakeholders. Researchers also must investigate how this information can be evaluated and what the consequences are for the collaboration between stakeholders in the transition.

Similar content being viewed by others

Supporting children’s transition to school age care

A Systematic Review of School Transition Interventions to Improve Mental Health and Wellbeing Outcomes in Children and Young People

Research to Policy: Transition to School Position Statement

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Every year, after the summer break, many children around the world make the transition to secondary school. This is not an uncomplicated step in a child’s development because the transition is accompanied by several changes in both the school environment and in the social context. Children do not only have to get used to a larger building, the different teachers and a larger number of peers. They also have to adapt to the ways of thinking and the way you have to behave in secondary school. These changes can have positive or negative effects on children’s well-being. It has been shown that poorer school and peer transitions can have negative long- term consequences on mental health (Chung et al. 1998 ; Waters et al. 2012 ).

It is important that children can develop themselves according to their abilities. A smooth transition from primary to secondary school contributes to this. Zeedijk et al. ( 2003 ) call the transition to secondary school one of the most difficult transitions in a pupil’s educational career. Children frequently have mixed feelings about the transition. They look forward to secondary school but may also have reservations (Sirsch 2003 ). Children are looking forward to having more freedom, more challenges, and making new friends. At the same time, they are concerned about being picked on and teased by older children, having to work harder, receiving lower grades and being lost in a larger, unfamiliar school (Lucey and Reay 2000 ). Success in navigating this transition cannot only affect children’s academic performance, but also their general sense of well-being and mental health (Waters et al. 2012 ; Zeedijk et al. 2003 ).

Not only children but also society benefits from students who use their talents and do not drop out of school because of underachievement. Unnecessary absenteeism, dropout, grade retention and runoff should be avoided as much as possible (Bosch et al. 2008 ). Children who fail to make a successful transition frequently feel marginalized, unwelcomed, and not respected or valued by others. This may initiate a disengagement process from school (Roderick 1993 , in Anderson et al. 2000 ), lead to poor academic achievement and school dropout (Waters et al. 2012 ) and contribute to conflicts between the child and the school (Roderick 1993 , in Anderson et al. 2000 ).

Since the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989) was introduced, the involvement of children in decision-making has been an area of growing interest. During the past 30 years, research about self-regulated learning has become popular in educational research and has been integrated into classroom practice to help children to become independent learners (Paris and Paris 2001 ). The aim of this article is to determine what the effect is of the involvement of children in the process to ease the transition to secondary school. Although a number of publications has analyzed students’ perceptions on the transition to secondary school and has made recommendations based on the content of what students say (Ashton 2008 ; Bru et al. 2010 ; Cedzoy and Burden 2005 ), little is known about the role of children as the owners of their learning process.

The Current Study

In this article, we review the literature on the characteristics and interventions that contribute to a smooth transition. The aim of this systematic literature review is to identify empirical studies focusing on the effects of interventions to ease the transition process between primary and secondary school, especially interventions which, in contrast to the usual information about curriculum and test results, “give children a voice”. We distinguish three stakeholders involved in the transition: the children and their parents, primary schools, and secondary schools. We investigate whether children (and their parents) are involved as a partner in the transition process and if this involvement influences the transition.

Several indicators can be used to determine a successful transition. Evangelou et al. ( 2008 ) define a successful transition as consisting of the following five underlying dimensions: (1) After a successful transition children have developed new friendships and improved their self-esteem and self-confidence; (2) they are settled so well in school life that they cause no concern to their parents; (3) interest in school and schoolwork has increased compared with primary school; (4) they are used to their new routines and, (5) the school organization and they experience curriculum continuity. This definition links all stakeholders and their interests, and is therefore used for the purpose of this review.

The stakeholders, with their background characteristics, are the focus of the article. The article is structured as follows: first the factors that influence the transition are described. These are the child- and family characteristics, the preparation and support at school, and the school characteristics and peers. Then interventions that facilitate a successful transition are presented. After that, the article provides a discussion and conclusion.

To find relevant literature about the involvement of children in the transition process, online databases Education Research Information Center (ERIC), PsychINDEX and SocINDEX were searched using the terms: transition primary secondary school; trans* primary secondary school (*indicates a wide card option so trans* extracts transition, transfer, transitional, etc.). The keywords were paired with the keywords “child* AND perspectives; child* AND perceptions; child* AND concerns; child* AND experiences”. Database Google Scholar was searched both for a free search and for a snowball search. The search of the databases revealed 202 international studies. After reading the abstracts 57 international studies remained, of which 30 articles published between 1987 and 2011 were found to be relevant. Included were peer-reviewed articles, written in Dutch, English or German and relevant to the research theme.

The main criteria for inclusion were that the study examined typically developing children making the transition to secondary school. Due to different school systems between different countries and ages that children make transitions, an age range of 11–13 was used. Studies were excluded if the children were outside that age range. Studies that focus on a-typically developing children or focus on special groups, special themes or curriculum area were also excluded. Small case studies, containing less than ten children, were excluded as well. This yielded 30 international, mostly descriptive, studies. The studies include various perspectives from parents, children, teachers and principals. They include a range of foci: aspects of the transition, children’s background and personal characteristics (gender, adjustment, well-being and self-esteem, motivation) perceptions and expectations about support, preparedness, bullying, peer and teacher relationships and parental perceptions, involvement, choices and support. Most data are collected by questionnaires and interviews.

The reviewed literature is diverse. The sample sizes differ between N = 10 and N = 7883. Questionnaires and students and teachers reports are frequently used. Most studies are descriptive and only a few studies provide solid evidence. Despite the different perspectives of the reviewed literature and the diverse assumptions of the researchers there is agreement about the key aspects which influence a successful transition. Important aspects are: the involvement of all stakeholders in the interventions and a good communication between all stakeholders (Coffey 2013 ; Green 1997 ; Jindal-Sape and; Miller 2008 ; Lester et al. 2012a ), the formation of a supporting network (Topping 2011 ), priorities for preparedness for autonomy and relatedness (Gillison et al. 2008 ) and for making relationships at secondary school, related to safety and belonging (Ashton 2008 ), awareness for gender differences (Chedzoy and Burden 2005 ; Chung et al. 1998 ) and for children who are vulnerable for a poorer transition (Chung et al. 1998 ; Jindal-Snape and Miller 2008 ; Pratt and George 2005 ; Lester et al. 2012a ; Pellegrini and Long 2002 ; Rudolph et al. 2001 ).

In the transition to secondary school, various stakeholders, who have an interest in a successful transition, are involved. All stakeholders—the children and their parents, primary- and secondary schools—have their own approaches to smoothen the transition. It was clear that the selected articles could be linked to the stakeholders and to their characteristics. Consequently, this classification is used to organise this review. We distinguished the factors that can contribute to a smooth transition and describe if and how they can lead to interventions to facilitate a successful transition.

An overview of the reviewed studies and their characteristics is presented in Table  1 . Table  1 shows, in alphabetical order, per author the theme and the main results of each study. The sample sizes and measures are also indicated.

The transition from primary to secondary school represents a significant challenge to the stakeholders who are involved in the process. The children, parents and teachers have to adapt to the new circumstances. While this process may be stressful, positive interrelationships can help to improve many of the challenges (Coffey 2013 ).

Factors Influencing the Transition

All stakeholders have their own approaches to smoothen the transition, as is shown in Fig.  1 . In this figure we distinguish the three stakeholders, with their background characteristics, who influence the transition and hence the development of the child. For children, it is important that their development continues in accordance with their capabilities. Schools have an interest in a smooth transition because it demonstrates the ability to anticipate the capacity of the feeding/primary school and the adaptive capacity of the secondary/receiving school. Primary schools prepare children to realize their academic potential at secondary school and secondary schools are responsible for curriculum continuity and continuity in attainment. The parents are positioned in the circle of the child because they are inextricably linked with the child. They are the constant factor in all development stages of the child and are ultimately responsible for the education of the child and for the choices involved (Bosch et al. 2008 ).

Stakeholders involved in the transition primary–secondary school

Child- and Family Characteristics

Adjustment difficulties to both school and peer social systems at the beginning of secondary school are related to the personal characteristics of the child (West et al. 2010 ). Changing school, especially if the child moves to a secondary school with fewer children with a similar ethnical background, may have a negative impact on children’s school career. Even children who are doing well in primary school can experience transition disruptions if their ethnic group is smaller at the secondary school (Benner and Graham 2009 , in Hanewald 2013 ). The transition can pose specific problems and concerns for children from minority cultures and can make them vulnerable for a poor transition. Socio-economic factors, socio-ethnic factors/race, gender, prior problem behavior and low academic achievement can all have an impact on the transition to secondary school (Anderson et al. 2000 ).

The factor age does not seem to influence the transition process but self-confidence and academic support do. McGee et al., find that, regardless of age, there appears to be evidence that the transition may lead to a decrease in academic attainment. This seems to be caused by the transition itself (McGee et al. 2004 ). Children, who believe that they cannot exert much influence over their success in school and who experience little academic support, report more school related stress and become more depressed when they experience a transition into secondary school, but not when they remain in the same school (Rudolph et al. 2001 ).

Personal factors, such as socioeconomic status (SES) and gender, particulary seem to be predictive factors for the perceived threat to the transition to secondary school (Sirsch 2003 ). A lower SES may lead to lower achievement (Vaz et al. 2014 ). Among children from low socio-economic (SES) households, 72% did not get used to the routines at secondary school and 58% did not settle in very well (Evangelou et al. 2008 ). Children from higher SES households had the highest score for academic competence while children from socially disadvantaged households were having the lowest scores.

Gender differences are related to subject area. Girls perceive that close friend support and school support declines during the transition period, boys self-report an increase in school problems during that period. School functioning during the transition period is a greater challenge for boys than for girls, while girls struggle to form new friendships with a new set of girls (Martinez et al. 2011 , in Hanewald 2013 ). The majority of children moving to secondary school look forward to more freedom, new challenges, other subjects, different teachers and the opportunity to make new friends. Overall, girls make the transition more easily than boys and seem to be more settled after transition (Marston 2008 , in Hanewald 2013 ).

School climate and school attachment as perceived by children themselves is correlated with misbehavior and aggressiveness. Violence and delinquency are related to negative perceptions of the school climate. Children’s positive perceptions of school climate and academic motivation are linked to teacher support (Hanewald 2013 ). Familiarity with the new school makes the transition easier (Sirsch 2003 ). Teachers and children have different perceptions of where problems lie (Topping 2011 ). Children tend to think there is a problem with the delivery of the programs while teachers tend to think that the students bring the problems with them (McGee et al. 2004 ).

Children showing high levels of psychological distress prior to transition are at a greater risk than their peers for a stressful school transition (Chung et al. 1998 ; Riglin et al. 2013 ). Boys at risk tend to show adjustment problems (academic achievement and school behavior) whereas girls at risk show more generalized adaptive difficulties following the transition (Chung et al. 1998 ). Self-esteem is related to children’s perceived social, physical and cognitive competence (Nottelmann 1987 ).

Children with lower ability and lower self-esteem have more negative school transition experiences which leads to lower levels of attainment and to higher levels of depression. Of all children 3–5% experienced depression and 3–6% was anxious (Lester et al. 2012a ). Anxious children experience peer victimization and thus poorer peer transition more frequently, which leads to lower self-esteem, more depression and anti-social behavior and therefore to a poor transition to secondary school (West et al. 2010 ). Of the children who were victimized 12–21% experienced depression and 16–22% anxiety. Increased victimization at the end of primary school led to increased depression at the beginning of secondary school. Increased depression at the end of primary school leads to increased victimization for boys (Lester et al. 2012a ).

Evangelou et al. ( 2008 ) found that children who experience a successful transition have developed friendships and boosted their self-esteem and confidence after moving to secondary school. These children have received more help from their secondary school to settle in. Most of their primary school friends move with them to the same school and they have one or more older sibling(s) at the same school. They find that the older children at their school are friendly. Children are at risk of not expanding their friendships and boosting their self-esteem and confidence if they experience bullying while in secondary school. Problems with bullying are most acute among children with special education needs (SEN) (Vaz et al. 2014 ). Of them, 37% has problems with bullying, compared with 25% of the children without SEN (Evangelou et al. 2008 ).

Children from low or medium socio-economic status (SES) households are also vulnerable for a less smooth transition into school life if they experience bullying while at secondary school (Evangelou et al. 2008 ) and are less academically competent (Vaz et al. 2014 ). Three of every ten children have experienced bullying during their live (Evangelou et al. 2008 ). Pellegrini and Long ( 2002 ) found disruptions in peer affiliations during transition to secondary school, peer victimization and increased use of aggression by boys possibly to establish peer status. The factors gender, prior problem behavior, low academic achievement, low SES and ethnicity are not independent of one another. They can be combined (and are) in many ways (Evangelou et al. 2008 ). Boys with a high level of psychological distress showed a significant decline in academic attainment and an increase in psychological distress while girls showed a significant increase in only psychological distress (Chung et al. 1998 ).

Parental involvement can affect the transition process and the school achievement before and after the transition. It can be categorized into three dimensions: direct participation, academic encouragement and expectations for attainment (Chen and Gregory 2009 , in Hanewald 2013 ). Children have a smooth transition from primary to secondary school if their parents remain a constant support, monitor their activities and intervene positively (Hanewald 2013 ). Studies in the US have shown the importance of factors at home, such as the presence of books and a place to study, for a successful transition. Parental involvement is seen as important in the transition. Parents need to maintain rules, check on homework, discuss the schoolwork, and monitor their child’s social life and academic progress (McGee et al. 2004 ). This affects children’s school achievement. If parents and schools are not on line parental support is less likely to be effective (McGee 2004 ).

Family support is also linked to achievement after transition. Both school and family should create and keep an environment for reinforcing and renewing children’s academic motivation (Kakavoulis 1998 ). Children from lower SES households often lack parental support including parental interest and participation in the school process, the extent to which they talk with their children about school, and the extent to which parents supplement the learning process with educational activities (Anderson et al. 2000 ).

Children living with both biological parents seem to perceive fewer concerns about the transition to secondary school than their peers from single-parent or blended families. It may be that intact families often have a higher quality of interactions that may prepare the children better to stressful events like the transition to secondary school (Duchesne et al. 2009 , in Hanewald 2013 ).

Preparing for a Successful Transition and Support

In many school systems, in the final grade of primary school children and their parents are advised which secondary school is the most suitable. In making this decision, three parties with desires or preferences are involved: the children, their parents and the teachers. The choice for a secondary school is determined by cognitive competences (performance, and test results), non-cognitive factors (attitudes, motivation, and interests) and the teacher’s judgments (Driessen et al. 2008 ).

Children must be prepared for a successful transition. Children who have the knowledge and skills to succeed at the next level (academic preparedness) and who are able to work by themselves and stay at the task (independence and industriousness) as well as children who conform to adult standards of behavior and effort and children who are able to cope with problems and difficulties are more likely to be successful at the next school level (Simmons and Blyth 1987 ; Ward et al. 1982 ; Snow et al. 1986 ; Timmins 1989 , in Anderson et al. 2000 ).

The literature shows that the environmental context has a stronger effect on the success or failure of a school transition than developmental characteristics (Anderson et al. 2000 ). The relative importance of the environmental context suggests the possibility that educators can contribute greatly to facilitate successful school transitions. However, few efforts have been made to do so (Anderson et al. 2000 ). One of the main features affecting a successful transition is whether children received considerable help from their secondary school. Help can include procedures to help the children to adapt and to know their way at secondary school. Schools organize induction and taster days, and offer information support and assistance by lessons and homework to help children adapt (Evangelou et al. 2008 ).

During the transition children pass through two types of discontinuities: organizational/formal (departmentalization) and social (fear of getting lost, and being victimized) (Anderson et al. 2000 ). The greater the discontinuity the child perceives, the greater the support that is needed. To help vulnerable children cope with, and even benefit from, the period of transition, we need to focus more on the social and personal experiences at this time (Jindal-Snape and Miller 2008 ). There is a need for interventions to improve social and mental health outcomes (Lester et al. 2013 ). Waters et al., ( 2012 ) suggest early detection of children who are vulnerable to a poor transition to enable support, tailored to their particular needs, to increase their connection to the new school environment to minimize the potential of long-term negative implications (Waters et al. 2012 ). Support can be informational, tangible, emotional and social. Regardless of the type of support, parents, peers and/or teachers can provide it (Anderson et al. 2000 ).

There is a consensus in the literature that well designed and implemented transition approaches can assist in the process of supporting students, their families and school staff (Hanewald 2013 ). Most schools have developed systems to ease the transition process. Their emphasis is often on administrative and organizational procedures, in contrast with children and their parents who are especially concerned with personal and social issues (Jindal-Snape and Miller 2008 ). Head teachers frequently pay little attention to peer relationships or the importance of friendship during the transition process (Pratt and George 2005 ). The sensitivity of secondary school teachers to the children’s psychosocial transfer and their awareness of the importance of social relations may well play a significant role in helping children (Chedzoy and Burden 2005 ). Attention should be paid to facilitate the formation of interpersonal relationships between children in the new school (Coffey 2013 ; Tobbell and O’Donnell 2013 ).

An important aspect in the adjustment to a new school is the students’ sense of belonging and their socio-emotional functioning (Cueto et al. 2010 , in Hanewald 2013 ). Children who feel supported by teachers are found to have a positive motivational orientation to schoolwork and to experience positive social and emotional wellbeing (Bru et al. 2010 ). Teachers’ ability to support students is a crucial element for better learning.

The Relationship Between Primary and Secondary School

Coffey ( 2013 ) finds that positive relationships and good communication channels amongst and between the stakeholders before, during and after transition are crucial to improve the transition (Coffey 2013 ). For a smooth transition, the teacher plays a critical role (Coffey 2013 ; Topping 2011 ) and sharing information concerning the child is valuable to support transitions (Chedzoy and Burden 2005 ; Green 1997 ). Nevertheless, information shared between schools is usually generic information on the curriculum rather than information about individual children (Topping 2011 ). Schools generally pay little attention to peer relationships or the importance of friendships (Pratt and George 2005 ). Information from primary to secondary school also needs to provide personal and social factors to make secondary schools alert to children who may be more vulnerable when they move (Jindal-Snape and Miller 2008 ). Although it is known that sharing information, between primary and secondary school, focused on personal and social factors smoothens the transition, less is known about the results when children receive the opportunity to participate actively during the transition trajectory by sharing information with their secondary school teachers.

McGee et al. ( 2004 ) examined schools in New Zealand and found disappointingly few contacts between primary- and secondary schools to manage the transition effectively. In schools where there was contact, it mainly concerned the transfer of information about students, familiarizing students and their parents with the secondary school, sharing facilities and teacher contacts about curriculum and teaching (McGee et al. 2004 ). One of the issues facing secondary school teachers is how much they want to know or should know about their students coming from primary school. Is it best to know very little so as to give students “a fresh start”, or is it best to be well briefed on each student? Teachers at secondary school, faced with children from a variety of feeder schools, tended to start on the same level for all children regardless of previous achievement. This resulted in a loss of continuity in the curriculum because of the transition (Huggins and Knight 1997 , in McGee et al. 2004 ).

McGee et al. ( 2004 ) found that teachers’ expectations often differ between primary and secondary school. Once at secondary school, the children experience the workload as lower, including less homework, than they had expected at primary school. This raises the question of whether primary and secondary teachers understand each other’s work and whether steps should be taken to ensure that they do (Green 1997 ) because previous experience or achievement is often disregarded by secondary schools. This corresponds to the findings from Evangelou et al. ( 2008 ) that secondary schools do not appear to trust the data on children provided by primary schools.

The Formal and the Informal Context: School Characteristics and Peers

There is no consensus about children’s experiences with the transition. On the one hand, the literature shows that most children make the transition to secondary school without difficulties but it can be stressful for some children. Most children report they expected to like going to secondary school, 15% does not expect to like their secondary school (Nottelmann 1987 ). Cedzoy and Burden found 92% of the children looking forward to the transition (Cedzoy and Burden 2005 ). Midway the first term at secondary school, 88% of the children reported to be settled (Coffey 2013 ) and at the end of the first term at secondary school one in ten children did not enjoy the transfer (Cedzoy and Burden 2005 ).

On the other hand, West et al. ( 2010 ) found that the majority of children had some difficulties in dealing effectively with the start of secondary school. A quarter found the experience very difficult. In contrast to other studies (McGee et al. 2004 ) more concerns were expressed about the formal school system than the informal system of peer relations (West et al. 2010 ). McGee et al. ( 2004 ) found that continuity of peer group appears to be associated with continuity of achievement. Low achievers at primary school may do better with a new peer group at secondary school when they are influenced positively by their new peers (McGee et al. 2004 ).

Ashton ( 2008 ) and West et al. ( 2010 ), describe that children’s school and peer concerns constitute two dimensions during the transition, the formal school-system (size of school, different teachers, work volume) and the informal social peer-system (different kids, older teenagers, bullying). Children can be successful in one area but not in the other and higher factor scores on the two dimensions represent poorer transitions.

Children in secondary schools often report a decrease in the sense of school belonging and perceived quality of school life. Children who were bully victims at primary school are more likely to feel less connected in primary school and may expect to feel less connectedness in secondary school (Lester et al. 2012a ). Green ( 1997 ) found that all children at secondary school expressed concerns about making friends. Having friends is important for the security of walking into different rooms as well as who to sit next to. When a child moves to secondary school with some known friends, knows older children at school or has sibling at the same school, some of the anxiety about making friends is alleviated (Green 1997 ). This corresponds to the findings of Pratt and George ( 2005 ), who found that the continuity and development of peer group relations and friendships was the most important factor for children.

Having friends of your own is important because loyal, “real” friends are a protection against being bullied (Mellor and Delamont 2011 ). Mellor and Delamont distinguish rational anxieties (being separated from current friends, anxieties about the curriculum, the buildings and the range of different teachers) and irrational anxieties: myths or scary stories heard from older children. Friendship can serve as a social support. Green ( 1997 ) also reports that some children were concerned about being bullied by older students. Such fears were based on rumors, spread by older students. In reality such bullying did not occur (Green 1997 ). In contrast to the findings of Green ( 1997 ), a large scale survey in 40 countries revealed 10.7% of adolescents reporting involvement in bullying (as perpetrators), 12.6% as victimized and 3.6% as bully victims (Craig et al. 2009 , in Lester et al. 2012a ). Behind the rational anxieties lies the children’s culture with irrational fears, often spread by the stories of older students (Mellor and Delamont 2011 ). The children were particularly concerned about the way in which their behavior at secondary school was perceived by their peers. They did not want to be seen as “a nerd” but rather aimed to seen as being “cool” (Green 1997 ).

Interventions to Facilitate Successful Transitions

To help children who are at risk for a poor transition, interventions that provide adequate information and social support activities, that help forming friendship networks, could be crucial. They could help children coping. Prior to the transition, at primary school, children need to be prepared for holding more responsibility for their learning. They need to learn to think about strategies for learning independently in a more challenging curriculum with clear goals of academic achievement like at secondary school (McGee et al. 2004 ). When children enter secondary school, motivation increases significantly. Both school and family should care for creating and maintaining a highly motivating environment for reinforcing and renewing children’s academic motivation (Kakavoulis 1998 ).

According to Anderson et al. ( 2000 ), interventions to facilitate a successful transition should be comprehensive, should involve parents, and receiving schools should make every effort to create a sense of community belonging (Anderson et al. 2000 ). Parents can contribute to a smooth transition by participating in their child’s schooling. When they do so the child should achieve at a higher level (Coffey 2013 ). Pellegrini and Long ( 2002 ) suggest fostering relationships during the first year of middle school by organizing social and interest-specific events. Effective lines of communication need to be established between parents and the school so that both can work effectively together for the benefit of the children (Coffey 2013 ). Green ( 1997 ) recommends an ongoing information exchange between primary and secondary teachers to facilitate the transition process and to reduce unnecessary discontinuity (Green 1997 ).

Children struggling with the transition need support, provided by multiple groups. Parents can provide support with respect to homework (Coffey 2013 ; Jindale-Sape and; Miller 2008 ; Kakavoulis 1998 ; Pellegrini and Long 2002 ). Takeing into account of existing friendships, when classifying the children, can also support children (Green 1997 ). Teachers at secondary school that are more accessible to students facilitate successful transitions. Simply being available to students is a form of teacher support. Positive peer relationships promote adjustment to the new environment, the secondary school. In supporting these peer relationships teachers can play an important role. Hamm et al. ( 2011 ) in Hanewald ( 2013 ) found that teachers more attuned to peer group affiliations promote more positive contexts and have students with improved views of their school’s social climate and adjustment during the school transition period. Coffey ( 2013 ) noted that the teacher is the key person in helping the child settle.

Lester et al. ( 2012a ) conclude that there is a need for transition programs with a focus on early-targeted interventions to minimize health risks to children from bullying and to minimize the impact on the school environment. They suggest a critical time to implement bullying intervention programs (that address peer support, connectedness to school, pro- victim attitudes and negative outcome expectancies around perpetration) is prior to the transition to, and within the first year of secondary school (Lester et al. 2012a ). Waters et al. ( 2012 ) suggest to develop an intervention based on best practice guidelines, to help children to negotiate the transition.

Many school transition interventions have a single and relatively narrow focus. Essential components of a transition model are: developing a planning team, generating goals and identifying problems, developing a written transition plan, acquiring the support of all those involved in the transition process and evaluating the process (Anderson et al. 2000 ). A focus on relationships and empathic school personnel can ensure that both child and parent concerns are acknowledged and accounted for when planning transition programs (Coffey 2013 ). Topping found that having an external supporting network is crucial for a successful transition (Topping 2011 ).

Some children are vulnerable to poor academic progression and disengagement during the first year of secondary school. Especially children with conduct problems and children who do not like school as well as boys with depressive symptoms and school concerns may need special support (Riglin et al. 2013 ). Preventively oriented school psychologists need to understand different paths of adaption to the school transition in order to identify the characteristics of children at risk and provide them with early intervention services for their specific needs (Chung et al. 1998 ).

The transition to secondary school, an important moment in the lives of young adolescents, is not always successful. Children’s personal characteristics such as ability, self-esteem, depression and anxiety, and gender, as well as family characteristics, can lead to a poorer transition. They can influence the adjustment to the school systems and to the peer/social systems (West et al. 2010 ).

The current study provides evidence about how children are involved in interventions to ease the transition and about the effect of those interventions on the transition process. In this review, we identified empirical studies, focused on the effects of characteristics and interventions to ease the transition from primary to secondary school, especially interventions that give children a voice.

For the purpose of the study we distinguished three stakeholders (children with their parents, and primary and secondary schools) involved in the transition process, who would benefit from a successful transition and can influence it by their background characteristics (Jindale-Snape and Miller 2008 ). Unfortunately, we found little evidence of educational partnership or cooperation between these stakeholders. Although educators can do a great deal to facilitate successful school transitions (Anderson et al. 2000 ), few efforts have been made to work together or to realize effective lines of communication. All stakeholders seem to approach the transition process from their own, different perspective, and adjust interventions according to their own perspectives. The effectiveness of these efforts, however, is rarely evaluated.

The influence on the transition process of school characteristics, such as differences between the primary and secondary school in the school environment and in pedagogical didactic approach, is found barely investigated in the literature. The reviewed authors just give recommendations to facilitate successful transitions, suggestions for practice and targets for school interventions. Schools do not focus as much on their emotional climate as they do on academic requirements. This is particularly remarkable because, although the literature shows the need to help children to develop their social and personal skills and to enhance their self-esteem (Ashton 2008 ; Coffey 2013 ; Gillison et al. 2008 ; Zeedijk et al. 2003 ), there is a lack of proven effective interventions in this area.

Very close links between primary and secondary school teachers are found to be essential for successful transitions (Green 1997 ; Jindale-Snape and; Miller 2008 ). These close links would make them aware of children who are vulnerable for a poor transition (Cedzoy and Burden 2005 ; Chung et al. 1998 ). In practice, this is not obvious. Teachers, who prepare children for the transition or support them after the transition, do not always have sufficient information about the children.

Family backgrounds, including cultural and socio-economic factors, can pose specific transition problems. Children from families in poverty, and from larger and lower educated families, do worse than their peers, especially when they are young compared to their classmates (Topping 2011 ). Their parents, who can be a reliable source of information about their child, are less likely to be involved in school activities and to support school (Topping 2011 ).

Little evidence is found of interventions that focus on partnership or cooperation between parents and schoolteachers during the transition process. There is an agreement about the importance of support from external networks (Topping 2011 ). In particular, the support from the family is described as extremely important (Anderson et al. 2000 ; Coffey 2013 ; Green 1997 ; Jindale-Snape and; Miller 2008 ; Lester et al. 2012a , b ; McGee et al. 2004 ) but is often neglected by schools. Parents usually do not participate in the decisions about the transition.

The involvement of children in decision making by giving them a voice has been an area of growing interest. In the literature on the transition to secondary school, the active role of the child remains somewhat underexplored as few studies have focused on the perspective of the children. The absence of any direct consultation with the children involved in the transition process demonstrates the low priority given to this aspect of transfer. It should be possible for secondary schools to learn from children by asking incoming students about their thoughts about the transition, and ask recently switched students about their experiences and what they can suggest to smoothen the transition for other children. When teachers are able to explore teaching and learning through the eyes of the children, they might be able to develop strategies based on first hand evidence.

The current study is not without of limitations. The analyses of the literature indicate that, to gain insight into the active role of children during the transition, there is a need for further research. Issues such as the way children can be partners in the transition process, how they can inform their stakeholders on an effective way and how this information can be evaluated still have to be investigated. What the consequences are for a successful transition and how the collaboration between stakeholders and educational practice at primary and secondary school can help children who are vulnerable or at risk off a poor transition also needs to be investigated.

Exploring the literature on interventions to improve the transition to secondary school, especially on interventions that give the children a voice, the results of the present study underline that positive relationships and a good communication between all stakeholders are essential to realize a successful transition (Coffey 2013 ; Green 1997 ; Jindale-Snape and; Miller 2008 ; Lester et al. 2012a ). The findings also suggest that, despite agreeing, the children (and their parents) are under-represented both in the decision making and in the interventions that provide information to the other stakeholders, the schools (McGee et al. 2004 ).

To reduce risk factors for vulnerable children and their parents, the findings underscore the need for more social and personal interventions, such as interventions that promote the interpersonal relationships with peers and the sense of belonging at secondary school (Jindale-Snape and Miller 2008 ). Knowing that the environmental context influences a successful transition more than developmental characteristics can contribute to focusing interventions toward improving the transition (Anderson et al. 2000 ). Teachers especially have the opportunity to improve the transition by encouraging the children to participate in decision-making about their transition process. Unfortunately, little effort is still being made to do so.

This study not only provides empirical support for previous studies but also contributes to increasing the awareness of policy makers, school leaders and educators of the importance to involve all stakeholders as equal partners in the interventions to improve the transition process and of the need for communication with children rather than about children. We hope that this will promote a more successful transition of young adolescents to secondary school.

Anderson, L. W., Jacobs, J., Schramm, S., & Splittgerber, F. (2000). School transitions: Beginning of the end or a new beginning? International Journal of Educational Research, 33 , 325–339.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ashton, R. (2008). Improving the transfer to secondary school: How every child’s voice can matter. Support for Learning, 23 (4), 176–182.

Benner, A. D., & Graham, S. (2009). The transition to high school as a developmental process among multiethnic urban youth. Child Development , 80 (2), 356–476.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bosch, M., Konermann, J., de Wit, C., Rutten, M., & Amsing, M. (2008). Passende Overgang. Een verkenning naar de stand van zaken rond de overgang tussen primair en voortgezet onderwijs . ’s Hertogenbosch: KPC Groep.

Google Scholar  

Bru, E., Stornes, T., Munthe, E., & Thuen, E. (2010). Students’ perceptions of teacher support across their transition from primary to secondary school. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 54 (6), 519–533.

Chedzoy, S. & Burden, R. (2005). Making the move: Assessing student attitudes to primary–secondary school transfer. Research in Education, 74 , 22–35.

Chen, W. B., & Gregory, A. (2009). Parental involvement as a protective factor during the transition to high school. The Journal of Educational Research , 1003 , 53–62.

Chung, H., Elias, M., & Schneider, K. (1998). Patterns of individual adjustment changes during middle school transition. Journal of School Psychology, 36 (1), 83–101.

Coffey, A. (2013) Relationships: The key to successful transition from primary to secondary school? Improving Schools, 16 (3), 261–271.

Craig, W., Harel-Fisch, J., Fogel-Grinvald, H., Dastaler, S., Hetland, J., & Simons-Morten, B. (2009). A cross-national profile of bullying and victimization among adolescents in 40 countries. International Journal of Public Health , 54 , S216–S224.

Cueto, S., Guerrero, G., Sugimaru, C., & Zevallos, A. M. (2010). Sense of belonging and transition to high schools in Peru. International Journal of Educational Development , 30 , 277–287.

Driessen, G., Sleegers, P., & Smit, F. (2008). The transition from primary to secondary education: meritocracy and ethnicity. European Sociological Review, 26 (4), 527–542.

Duchesne, S., Ratelle, C. F., Poitras, S.-C., & Drouin, E. (2009). Early adolescent attachment to parents, emotional problems, and teacher-academic worries about the middle school transition. The Journal of Early Adolescence , 29 (5), 743–766.

Evangelou, M., Taggart, B., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., & Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2008). What makes a successful transition from primary to secondary school? London: Institute of Education, University of London.

Gillison, F., Standage, M., & Skevington, S. (2008). Changes in quality of life and psychological need satisfaction following the transition to secondary school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78 (1), 149–162.

Green, P. (1997). Moving from the world of the known to the unknown: The transition from primary to secondary school. Melbourne Studies in Education, 38 (2), 67–83.

Hamm, J. V., Farmer, T. W., Dadisman, K., Gravelle, M., & Murray, A. R. (2011). Teachers' attunement to students peer group affiliations as a source of improved student experiences of the school social-affective context following the middle school transition. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychologie , 32 , 267–277.

Hanewald, R. (2013). Transition between primary and secondary school: Why it is important and how it can be supported. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38 (1), 62–74.

Huggins, M., & Knight, P. (1997). Curriculum continuity and transfer for primary to secondary school: The case of history. Educational Studies , 23 (3), 333–348.

Jindal-Snape, D. & Miller, D. (2008). A challenge of living? Understanding the psycho-social processes of the child during primary-secondary transition through resilience and self-esteem theories. Educational Psychology Review, 20 (3), 217–236.

Kakavoulis, A. (1998). Motives for school learning during transition from primary to secondary school. Early Child Development and Care, 145 , 59–66.

Lester, L., Cross, D., Shaw, T., & Dooley, J. (2012a). Adolescent bully-victims: Social health and the transition to secondary school. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42 (2), 213–233.

Lester, L., Dooley, J., Cross, D., & Shaw, T. (2012b). Internalising symptoms: An antecedent or precedent in adolescent peer victimisation. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 22 (2), 137–189.

Lester, L., Waters, S., & Cross, D. (2013). The relationship between school connectedness and mental health during the transition to secondary school: A path analyses. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 23 (2), 157–171.

Lucey, H. & Raey, D. (2000). Identities in transition: anxiety and excitement in the move to secondary school. Oxford Review of Education, 26 (2), 191–205.

Marston, J. L. (2008). Perceptions of students and parents involved in primary to secondary school transition programs. Brisbane, QLD: Australian Association for Research in Education, International Education Research Conference, 30 November–4 December.

Martinez, R. S., Aricak, O. T., Graves, M. N., Peters-Myszak, J., & Nellis, L. (2011). Changes in perceived social support and socioemotional adjustment across the elementary to junior high school transition. Youth Adolescence , 40 , 519–530.

McGee, C., Ward, R., Gibbons, J., & Harlow, A. (2004). Transition to secondary school: A literature review . Hamilton: Waikato institute for research in learning curriculum school of education, University of Waikato.

Mellor, D. & Delamont, S. (2011). Old anticipations, new anxieties? A contemporary perspective on primary to secondary transfer. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41 (3), 331–346.

Nottelmann, E. (1987). Competence and self- esteem during transition from childhood to adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 23 (3), 441–450.

Paris, S. G. & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Journal Educational Psychologist, 36 (20), 89–101.

Pellegrini, A., & Long, D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20 (2), 259–280.

Pratt, S. & George, R. (2005). Transferring friendship: Girls’ and boys’ friendship in the transition from primary to secondary school. Children and Society, 19 (1), 16–26.

Riglin, L., Frederickson, N., Shelton, K., & Rice, F. (2013). A longitudinal study of psychological functioning and academic attainment at the transition to secondary school. Journal of Adolescence, 36 , 2007–2017.

Roderick, M. (1993). The path of dropping out . Westport, CT: Auburn House.

Rudolph, K. D., Lambert, S. F., Clark, A. G., & Kurlakowsky, K. D. (2001). Negotiating the transition to middle school: The role of self-regulatory processes. Child Development, 72 (3), 929–946.

Simmons, R. G., & Blyth, D. A. (1987). Moving into adolescence: The impact of pubertal change and school context . Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Sirsch, U. (2003). The impending transition from primary to secondary school: Challenge or threat? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27 (5), 385–395.

Snow, W. H., Gilchrist, L., Schilling, R. F., Schinke, S. P., & Kelso, C. (1986). Preparing students for the junior high school. Journal of Early Adolescence , 6 (2), 127–137.

Timmins, M. C. (1989). Solid preparation for junior high. Perspectives for Teachers of the Hearing Impaired , 7 , 2–5.

Tobbell, J. & O’Donnell, V. (2013). The formation of interpersonal and learning relationships in the transition from primary to secondary school: Students, teachers and school context. International Journal of Educational Research, 59 , 11–23.

Topping, K. (2011). Primary–secondary transition: Differences between teachers’ and children’s perceptions. Improving Schools, 14 (3), 268–285.

Vaz, S., Parsons, R., Falkmer, T., Passmore, A., & Falkmer, M. (2014). The impact of personal background and school contextual factors on academic competence and mental health functioning across the primary-secondary school transition. PLoS One, 9 (3), e89874. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089874 .

Ward, B. A., Mergendoller, J. R., Tikunoff, W. J., Rounds, T. S., Mitman, A. L., & Dadey, G. J. (1982). Junior high school transition study , Executive summary, vol. VII. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.

Waters, S., Lester, L., Wenden, E., & Cross, D. (2012). A theoretical grounded exploration of the social and emotional outcomes of transition to secondary school. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 22 (2), 190–205.

West, P., Sweeting, H., & Young, R. (2010). Transition matters: pupils’ experiences of the primary–secondary school transition in the West of Scotland and consequences for well-being and attainment (2010). Research Articles in Education, 25 (1), 21–50.

Zeedijk, M. S., Gallacher, J., Henderson, M., Hope, G., Husband, B., & Lindsay, K. (2003). Negotiating the transition from primary to secondary school. Perceptions of pupils, parents and teachers. School Psychology International, 24 (1), 67–79.

Download references

Author Contributions

MvR conceived of the study and drafted the manuscript. CH, WG and HMvdB helped to draft the manuscript. All authors participated in the design and coordination of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

TIER, Top Institute for Evidence Based Education Research, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Marlau van Rens, Carla Haelermans, Wim Groot & Henriëtte Maassen van den Brink

TIER, Maastricht University, Kapoenstraat 2, 6211 KW, Maastricht, The Netherlands

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marlau van Rens .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

van Rens, M., Haelermans, C., Groot, W. et al. Facilitating a Successful Transition to Secondary School: (How) Does it Work? A Systematic Literature Review. Adolescent Res Rev 3 , 43–56 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-017-0063-2

Download citation

Received : 11 May 2017

Accepted : 01 June 2017

Published : 16 June 2017

Issue Date : March 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-017-0063-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Primary–secondary school
• Child participation
• Child voice
• Stakeholders
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Corpus ID: 68244205

Transition to secondary school: A literature review

• Clive McGee , R. Ward , +1 author A. Harlow
• Published 2003

130 Citations

Student voices: experiences of solomon islands students in transition from primary school to boarding secondary school.

• Highly Influenced

Transition: a systematic review of literature exploring the experiences of pupils moving from primary to secondary school in the UK

Factors supporting and inhibiting teachers’ use of manipulatives around the primary to post-primary education transition, supporting the transition from primary to secondary school for pupils with social, emotional and behavioural needs: a focus on the socio-emotional aspects of transfer for an adolescent boy, girls’ and boys’ perceptions of the transition from primary to secondary school, facilitating a successful transition to secondary school: (how) does it work a systematic literature review.

• 15 Excerpts

Understanding the school environments that engage and motivate young adolescents

Transfer and transitioning: students' experiences in a secondary school in trinidad and tobago.

• 13 Excerpts

Transition to Secondary School: Student Achievement and Teacher Practice

• 10 Excerpts

173 References

Transitions and the year 7 experience: a report from the 12 to 18 project.

• Highly Influential

The development of a middle school general music curriculum : a synthesis of computer-assisted instruction and music learning theory

Moving from the world of the known to the unknown: the transition from primary to secondary school, negative effects of traditional middle schools on students' motivation, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

How To Do Secondary Research or a Literature Review

• Secondary Research
• Literature Review
• Step 1: Develop topic
• Step 2: Develop your search strategy
• Step 3. Document search strategy and organize results
• Systematic Literature Review Tips
• More Information

Search our FAQ

Make a research appointment.

Schedule a personalized one-on-one research appointment with one of Galvin Library's research specialists.

What is Secondary Research?

Secondary research, also known as a literature review , preliminary research , historical research , background research , desk research , or library research , is research that analyzes or describes prior research. Rather than generating and analyzing new data, secondary research analyzes existing research results to establish the boundaries of knowledge on a topic, to identify trends or new practices, to test mathematical models or train machine learning systems, or to verify facts and figures. Secondary research is also used to justify the need for primary research as well as to justify and support other activities. For example, secondary research may be used to support a proposal to modernize a manufacturing plant, to justify the use of newly a developed treatment for cancer, to strengthen a business proposal, or to validate points made in a speech.

Why Is Secondary Research Important?

Because secondary research is used for so many purposes in so many settings, all professionals will be required to perform it at some point in their careers. For managers and entrepreneurs, regardless of the industry or profession, secondary research is a regular part of worklife, although parts of the research, such as finding the supporting documents, are often delegated to juniors in the organization. For all these reasons, it is essential to learn how to conduct secondary research, even if you are unlikely to ever conduct primary research.

Secondary research is also essential if your main goal is primary research. Research funding is obtained only by using secondary research to show the need for the primary research you want to conduct. In fact, primary research depends on secondary research to prove that it is indeed new and original research and not just a rehash or replication of somebody else’s work.

• Next: Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Dec 21, 2023 3:46 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.iit.edu/litreview

• Skip to main content
• Accessibility help

Information

We use cookies to collect anonymous data to help us improve your site browsing experience.

Click 'Accept all cookies' to agree to all cookies that collect anonymous data. To only allow the cookies that make the site work, click 'Use essential cookies only.' Visit 'Set cookie preferences' to control specific cookies.

Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Primary to secondary school transitions: systematic literature review - key findings

Impact of transitions and the factors that support or hinder a successful transition from primary to secondary school.

Primary-Secondary Transitions: A Systematic Literature Review

This report highlights key findings from a systematic literature review on the primary to secondary transition, undertaken by the University of Dundee. The review aimed to provide insight into the impact of transitions and the factors that support or hinder a successful transition. The document is of particular interest to policy makers and professionals working in education.

Main Findings

The key findings from the systematic literature are discussed in terms of the research questions.

Research Question 1: What does the evidence from the UK and other countries suggest about the impact of the primary to secondary transition on educational outcomes and wellbeing?

Most studies report that the transition from primary to secondary school is associated with a decline in educational attainment . However, there are important methodological limitations of existing research. Researchers note that it is difficult to disentangle the impact of other factors, such as socio-economic background, which are known to impact on attainment.

There is some evidence that pupils actually adjust, at least in wellbeing terms after an initial decline in wellbeing outcomes, relatively quickly to the transition. Nevertheless, the transition can impact negatively on perceived school belongingness.

Due to the research design deployed in most studies, we do not know the long-term impact of the primary-secondary transition, or if these effects are sustained as most studies did not collect data beyond the immediate period of starting secondary school.

Research Question 2: What does the research suggest about the experiences of children and young people during their transition from primary to secondary?

Pupils and parents are primarily concerned with changes in relationships during the transition from primary to secondary school.

Several studies have explored peer-related concerns, finding that whilst this is often a primary concern of pupils, the transition can also have a positive effect on opportunities for establishing new friendships. Concerns relating to teacher relationships are also reported by pupils. Whilst pupils may initially respond positively to the opportunities for new relationships with teachers and peers, the effect does not appear to be long lasting.

There is some evidence that a lack of fit between pupils’ development stage and the school environment may impact on how pupils experience the transition from primary to secondary.

Other studies have reported on academic concerns experienced by children. Some have found that pupils experience the changes around curriculum, homework and assessment positive, whilst others find the volume of homework to be problematic.

Most studies suggest that pupils experience a dip in school engagement and motivation in secondary schools, however it is not clear whether this is due to the transition itself or other developmental changes.

Research Question 3: What are the key factors that make a positive or negative contribution to the primary-secondary transition?

The review found that there are a number of individual, interpersonal and school level factors that can support or hinder the transition from primary to secondary school. Overall, the key factors which make a positive or negative contribution to the primary to secondary transition are those situated within the pupil’s ecological system, such as the pupils themselves, family, teachers, peers, and environmental and school factors.

To date, no research has comprehensively explored all these factors within the same study. It is therefore difficult to determine how and to what extent they support or hinder the primary to secondary transition.

Research Question 4: What does the evidence suggest about the differential impact of transition on children facing additional educational barriers such as poverty or additional support needs?

Overall, there exists little research on the differential impact of transition on children facing additional educational barriers.

However, researchers do suggest that children with additional support needs may experience a more difficult transition. There is also evidence that these pupils, and their families, may benefit from differentiated support during the transition from primary to secondary.

Research Question 5: What does international evidence suggest about the characteristics of educational systems that support or hinder the transitional experience?

Most of the research around the characteristics of educational systems that impact on the transition from primary to secondary school provides inconclusive findings.

Existing literature has explored: age at transition; impact of Independent vs public schools; size of school; the impact of through schools versus schools requiring transition to secondary school; and the effect of one primary school or multiple primary schools feeding into a secondary school.

Regardless of these characteristics, a supportive and safe school environment which involves pupils in the transition process was important for smooth transitions.

Methodology

The review was undertaken in accordance with the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre ( EPPI -Centre, 2010) approach to systematic literature reviews.

We searched multiple databases in the Web of Science ( WoS ) - Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Arts & Humanities Citation Index; Education Resources Information Centre ( ERIC ); from the British Education Index ( BEI ); PsycINFO and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts ( ASSIA ). Key journals in the field such as British Educational Research Journal, and the American Educational Research Journal were scanned,and key and eminent researchers in the field were contacted. Each piece of literature was screened against the inclusion criteria developed when scoping the review. EPPI -Centre weight of evidence ( WoE ) judgments were applied to each of the included studies. After a multiple stage review process, 96 studies were included in this report from the inially identified 4652 studies.

Figure 1: PRISMA flow diagram of study selection

Conclusions & Recommendations

There was robust evidence to indicate a decline in pupils’ educational outcomes after they moved to secondary school, along with declines in motivation, school engagement and attitudes towards some subjects, and an increase in levels of school absence. Similarly, there was evidence of a negative impact on wellbeing, including poorer social and emotional health, and higher levels of depression and anxiety. However, whether this impact was as a result of the transition to secondary school and what proportion of pupils experienced this decline were less clear. Further, the link between educational and wellbeing outcomes is not clear.

Recommendations for policy and practice

• Schools transition practices should support the development of a sense of school belonging; this is important for pupils’ educational and wellbeing outcomes.
• Both primary and secondary schools should support pupils in developing strong peer networks through planned activities.
• Schools should provide opportunities which enable pupils to form secure attachments with a number of professionals in primary and secondary schools.
• Ongoing dialogue is required between primary and secondary schools, as well as within secondary schools, to ensure that there is continuity of pedagogical approach.
• The school curriculum and teachers’ pedagogical approach should encourage problem based learning and learning of emotional and social skills.
• The discourse around primary-secondary transitions at national level should also include a focus on positive outcomes.
• Parents should be involved as equal partners in transition planning and preparation.
• Schools should appropriately tailor their transition processes for pupils with additional support needs and be mindful that transitions can trigger additional support needs for some.

Recommendations for future research

• A longitudinal design, capturing data from P6 to S2 should be used.
• Research questions and data collection instruments should focus on both positive and negative aspects of transition.
• Data should be collected from all stakeholders, and should focus on the transitions of everyone.
• In order to disentangle the impact of different factors on the transition to secondary school, research should explore the transition experience across a range of pupils and various education systems.

How to access background or source data

The full report containing all background detail and analysis can be found online at: www.gov.scot/primary-secondary-transitions-report

There is a problem

Thanks for your feedback

Your feedback helps us to improve this website. Do not give any personal information because we cannot reply to you directly.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Problem Behaviours Of Adolescents Of Secondary Schools: A Review

The present article is a review to understand the major dimensions of problem behaviour amongst the adolescent students of secondary schools in classroom and school situations. Problem behaviours amongst adolescent students affect the goals of effective teaching and learning. It leads to lost class and precious study time and at times leads to expulsion from school. Review of the literature found that problem behaviour of adolescent students studying in secondary schools manifest in the form of aggressive-disruptive behaviour, attention deficit disorders, learning difficulties, and various internalizing disorders including social withdrawal, social isolation etc. Fighting, different forms of violence, bullying, lack of concentration, impulsivity, truancy, lying, stealing, smoking and drinking during school hours, use of drugs and alcohol, sneaking out of school, arguing, teasing and tormenting classmates, interfering with others' works, disrespecting elders and teachers, cheating, disobedience and many more such behaviours are reported from the schools all over the world. Basing on the review, major dimensions of problem behaviours were classified as Problem

Related Papers

International Journal of Scientific Research

jeryda anand

Fariha Iram

Present study was conducted to find the profiles and patterns of emotional and behavioral problems in adolescents from general population who had never been reported or diagnosed. A sample of 300 adolescents from public and private schools of Lahore, (13 to 17 years old, Mean=14.8) participated in the study. Participants completed the self-report standardized questionnaires, Youth Self-Report (YSR: Achenbach, & Rescorla, 2001) in Urdu language. The study revealed that majority of the adolescents was found to have normal behavior but a noticeable number of adolescents show emotional and behavioral problems. About 2 to 15% adolescents were found in clinical range and 3 to 10% in border line range of problems. Findings also suggest that in broadband scales externalizing problems were most prevalent in adolescents i.e. 15% and among DSM oriented problems conduct problem and anxiety problem were found most common in adolescents.

Adolescence is a period of stress and storm where both boys and girls face many challenges in their lives. Adolescent students spend nearly eight hours in the school for their academic development. Hence school plays a vital role in moulding the personality of each individual. Hence, the present study aims to know and compare the level of student’s problem of adolescent boys and girls and emphasizes the need for life skills by adopting Descriptive Research Design. The researcher will administer Students Problem Inventory developed by Dr. Harkant Badami in 1977 and the reliability coefficient is 0.832.Hence the researcher has selected one boy’s school and one girl’s school for the study. The universe of the study consist of 400 students studying in IX standard and the researcher collected data from 200 students(boys – 100, Girls – 100) by using stratified proportionate sampling method and data will be analyzed and necessary life skills Intervention will be suggested to promote well being of school students.

Dr.Gladys Colaco

Psycho-social problems have been identified as vital among adolescents at particular times when they enter the Pre-University. The various reasons were examination stress, personal and family life events. Psychosocial health problems are one of the hidden public health problems amongst the children and adolescents. Early identification, diagnosis and interventions are very important for preventing further complications. The aim of the study is to assess the psycho-social problems among adolescent students of selected Pre-University colleges. Taking 286 adolescent students from 3 Pre University Colleges of Belthangady Taluk of Dakshina Kannada district were selected through purposive sampling method. A set of structured questionnaire and Y-PSC was adopted to collect data, which were analyzed using SPSS software. Out of 286 adolescent students 25.5% were suffering with psychosocial dysfunction. Female students (17.5%) were more affected, compared to male students (8%). The psycho-soci...

International Research Journal Commerce arts science

Adolescents are highly vulnerable to psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to explore the prevalence and patterns of behavioural and emotional problems in adolescents. It was also aimed to explore associations between socio environmental stressors and maladaptive outcomes. A school based cross-sectional study was conducted between January and July 2008. A stratified random sampling was done. 1150 adolescents in 12 to 18 year age group in grades 7 to 12 in 10 co-educational schools (government run and private) were the subjects of the study. Behavioural and emotional problems were assessed using Youth Self-Report (2001) questionnaire. Family stressors were assessed using a pre-tested 23 item questionnaire. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed. Multiple logistic regression analysis was also done.

Guru Journal of Behavioral and Social Sciences

Increasing independence from adult controls, rapidly occurring physical and psychological changes, exploration of social issues and concerns, increased focus on activities with a peer group and establishment of a basic self identity contribute to adolescent maladjustment. Factors for adolescent maladjustment include economic instability, parental discord, inadequacy of school offerings, lack of understanding of adolescent psychology on the part of parents and school faculties, and inadequate recreational facilities. This study on psycho-social problems of adolescents with 600 higher secondary students will help the parents, teachers, teacher educators and even the public to be familiar with the problems of adolescents. Findings reveal that adolescents at higher secondary level face more problems from educational and emotional aspects.

Publisher ijmra.us UGC Approved

Education plays very important role in making the man well adjusted in the society. Education in real sense , is to humanize humanity and to make life progressive , cultured and civilized. Everyone want to adjust himself with his environment. The modern education has these objectives. But it is also true that every individual do not have the same potentialities to adjust himself and now a days it is a major problem in our educational institution as well as in our society. The study was conducted with 50 male and female students among the secondary level. For this study a general information schedule , questionnaire and a checklist was formed. The study highlighted the common behavioural problems among the students. It has been found from the study that female students and male students have the different maladjustment problems. The study will provide the knowledge about the different types of maladjustment and their relative causes among secondary level students. It will be helpful for the teacher to understand and overcome different related problems .

Abdul Malek Abdul Rahman

The objective of this study is to examine the phenomenon of aggressive behavior among teenagers; the profile of aggressive teenagers in school; pattern and frequency of aggressive behavior among teenagers in school; measuring psychological preferences in aggressive behavior among teenagers. The number of respondents were 14,520 based on gender, Forms, type of school and area. Male and female students ranging from Form 1, 2 and 4 were taken as samples for the study. The location of the study was divided into five zones i.e. the North Zone, East Zone, Central Zone, South Zone, Zone of Sabah and Zone of Sarawak. Three types of schools involved in the study were the secondary school (SMK), boarding school (SBP) and religious secondary school (SMKA).

International Journal of Case Studies in Business, IT, and Education (IJCSBE)

Gururaj Itagi

ABSTRACT High school students are in the stage of Adolescence and it is the time for developing independence. Typically, adolescents exercise their independence by questioning and sometimes by breaking rules. Parents and teachers must play a major role in supporting & influencing the children positively by their ethical & appropriate approaches. Teachers in school as well as parent at home, often wonder how to disciple a child and to mould their behaviour so to bring up the child with virtues. Although some children truly have challenging behaviours regardless of what strategies to try, many children just need to have the adults in their lives make changes in the way they react, respond, or interact with them. It is also a great responsibility of the teacher in school to have positive approach towards students. If not there are possibilities in change of behaviour among students & leads to several problems. For example, frequent episodes of fighting, scholastic backwardness, substance abuse; antisocial or institutional activities, destructive behaviour and change in attitude in students are much more significant than isolated episodes of the same activities. Other warning signs include deterioration of performance at school and running away from home. This research paper’s aim is the teacher-students relationship and its impact on the behaviour of High school students. The objectives are to know the teachers attitudes both positive and negative towards students and its impact to bring positive as well as negative behaviour change in the students. The study has reported that students are often facing emotional problems by the negative approach of the teachers. It is recommended that to create awareness among teachers in the school for the smooth handling the children with the positive approaches. 50 high school students; 25 girls and 25 boys were taken and interview schedule is used. Both the primary and secondary methods are used and the study is descriptive in nature. Keywords: Students, Teachers, Behaviour, Adolescents, School and Relationship

Nimisha Beri

Review of literature will show sparkling light on the path of the researcher to acquaint himself with the current status of the selected field. The researcher will get good chunk of ideas relevant to the chosen topic and how to process further with confident and clear direction. Basically, from the review the researcher will come to know the tools, methods used and findings from the study followed by research gaps. A total of 21 journals were reviewed related to number of adolescence issues across the globe including both qualitative and quantitative. It was found that all the reviews are of equal importance related to adolescence problems, as all the researchers have thoroughly discussed about the problems followed by solutions at various length and breadth.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of High Institute of Public Health

Dr Safaa Rabea Osman

Dhananjoy Debnath

IJAR Indexing

International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR)

SAR Journal - Science and Research

Dáška Porubčanová , Lenka Pasternáková

International Journal of Medical and Biomedical Studies

shubhanshu gupta

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Open access
• Published: 09 February 2023

A qualitative process evaluation of universal free school meal provision in two London secondary schools

• Patricia E. Jessiman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5805-2415 1 ,
• Victoria R. Carlisle 1 ,
• Katie Breheny 1 ,
• Rona Campbell 1 ,
• Russell Jago 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Marcus Robinson 4 ,
• Steve Strong 5 &
• Judi Kidger 1  

BMC Public Health volume  23 , Article number:  300 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

5501 Accesses

3 Citations

34 Altmetric

Metrics details

In the UK, one in five households with children experienced food insecurity in 2022, defined as a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food. Free school meals are a public health intervention aimed at reducing food insecurity amongst children. The provision of universal free school meals (UFSM) to secondary school-aged children is a novel and untested intervention in the UK. This study is a process evaluation of a pilot of UFSM in two secondary schools in England. The aim was to understand the feasibility, acceptability, cost implications and lessons for the implementation of UFSM.

20 parents, 28 students and 8 school staff from two intervention schools participated in online qualitative interviews, as well as 4 staff from non-intervention schools. The Framework Method of thematic analysis was applied. These data were supplemented with student-led observations of school meal times, and school lunch uptake-data and cost information provided by the local authority delivering the pilot.

UFSM in secondary schools is a feasible and acceptable intervention, with coherent goals of increased access to a healthy meal, reduced food insecurity and better nutrition. All participants perceived these goals were met. Acceptability was further enhanced by the perception that UFSM were supporting a greater proportion of low-income families than the national, targeted Free School Meal scheme, as well as being easier to implement. Potential barriers to implementation include limited school kitchen and dining infrastructure, meal quality and choice, and increased queuing times. Participants’ concerns that UFSM may benefit middle- and high- income families not in need were not as prevalent as the perception that UFSM was an effective way to support all families with secondary-aged children experiencing food insecurity.

This small-scale pilot study suggests that UFSM in secondary schools is feasible and acceptable, but more evidence is required from larger studies on the impact on long-term health, psychosocial and educational outcomes. Future, larger studies should also include detailed economic evaluations so this approach can be compared with other possible interventions.

Peer Review reports

The United Nations defines household food security as a situation in which all those in the household have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food at all times that meets dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life [ 1 ]. The Trussell Trust, a third sector organisation supporting a network of more than 1200 foodbanks across the UK, define household food insecurity as ‘a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food’ [ 2 ]. Food insecurity and child hunger has long been a problem in the UK, and has been a growing political and social concern in the decade running up to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 [ 3 ].

Food insecurity in the UK has worsened during the COVID19 pandemic. One UK study suggests that in April 2020, just after the first lockdown and school closure, only around half of children eligible for free school meals actually received them [ 4 ]. The Food Foundation reported that one in five households with children experienced food insecurity in the six months leading to April 2022 [ 5 ], while the UK Food Standards Agency found a similar proportion of people in the UK (22%) report skipping or reducing meal size because they did not have enough money to buy food [ 6 ].

Experiencing food insecurity in childhood has health and social consequences. Food insecurity is associated with poorer diet quality in children [ 7 ]. In adolescence, nutritional intake influences the onset and timing of puberty, which in turn influences height, muscle and fat mass, and the risk of non-communicable diseases in adulthood [ 8 ]. In a rapid review of child food insecurity, Aceves-Martins et al. found 74 studies that assessed the effects of food insecurity on children and found evidence of impact on physical health status (including chronic conditions), social well-being, mental and emotional health (e.g. externalising and internalising behaviours, aggression, hyperactivity, impaired social skills) and academic outcomes [ 9 ]. There was mixed evidence of the impact on weight status; some studies report food insecurity is associated with obesity while others find no association, or one that is mediated by sex, age, psychosocial or parental characteristics.

Free school meals (FSM) are a public health intervention aimed at reducing food insecurity and increasing nutritional status amongst children. Historically in the UK, FSM have been means-tested, with universal provision of free meals a relatively new and developing policy targeted towards younger children. In 2015 Scotland moved from a means tested system for FSM to a universal system for children in Primary 1–3 (when most students are aged 5–8 years) and more recently the Scottish Government extended universal provision up to Primary 5 [ 10 ]. The Welsh Government recently announced plans to offer FSM to every primary school pupil from September 2022 [ 11 ]. In Northern Ireland, FSM remains a mean-tested benefit for all ages. In England, universal FSM are currently provided for all children in reception up to and including Year Two (4–7 years). Beyond that age, FSM are a targeted benefit. Children of all ages in full time education are eligible for free school meals if their parents/carers are in receipt of state benefits such as Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit although the eligibility threshold is high (gross income must be less than £16,190 per annum for those in receipt of child tax credit and below £7,400 for those in receipt of Universal Credit) [ 12 ]. In England, over one in five (22.5%) of pupils are eligible for FSM [ 13 ].

There is some evidence for the beneficial impact of universal free school meal provision (UFSM) on student health and educational outcomes. In one review of the effectiveness of interventions to mitigate the effects of food insecurity in high income countries, six of fifteen included studies were of school-based food provision, most conducted in the USA. Interventions were effective in improving but not eradicating food insecurity and its effects on health and academic outcomes [ 9 ]. A recent systematic review of UFSM, in which 47 studies were included, found positive associations with increased meal participation rates, improved nutrition and academic performance (where UFSM included lunch rather than breakfast), and improved food security [ 14 ]. A cross-sectional study of 311 students aged 4–11 years in England found that FSM were more likely to contribute to a healthy diet than packed lunches [ 15 ], although a similar study of 4–7 year old pupils in England suggests the inclusion of cakes and sweet puddings as part of the lunch offer may limit the dietary benefit [ 16 ].

This paper is concerned with the implementation of UFSM provision in two secondary schools in a London Borough (local government administrative area). As universal FSM has been limited to younger children, the provision of universal free school meals to secondary school-aged children (aged 11–16) is a novel and untested intervention in the UK. Given the uniqueness of the intervention and the rising concerns about child food insecurity, the local authority applied to the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Interventions Research Studies Teams (PHIRST) initiative for evaluation support [ 17 ]. A protocol for the mixed-method quasi-experimental impact evaluation with embedded process evaluation is available [ 18 ], and findings of the impact study forthcoming.

There is little literature on the feasibility and implementation of UFSM, particularly for older students. A process evaluation of the introduction of UFSM to younger primary pupils in Scotland found that while the policy was implemented successfully, schools and local authorities faced continuing challenges with recruiting and training staff to prepare meals and supervise children effectively, adapting and improving kitchen and dining areas to cope with increased uptake, and engaging parents with the policy, including feedback on quality and menu options. Some senior school managers did not agree that UFSM was the correct policy to support families most in need, which may also have hampered implementation [ 19 ]. Understanding the feasibility of this UFSM pilot may help identify whether similar (or additional) barriers arise in secondary schools which may hinder the acceptability and implementation of any wider roll out [ 20 , 21 ]. It is also important to determine whether UFSM has the potential to be a cost-effective public health intervention. Though the small scale of the current pilot does not allow for a full economic analysis, determining the costs and the acceptability of these costs may influence the adoption of the policy more widely [ 22 ].

This paper reports the results of a process evaluation of the UFSM pilot designed to answer the following research questions:

R1. Is UFSM feasible and acceptable in a UK secondary school context? R2. What are the enablers and barriers to the effective implementation of UFSM in secondary schools? R3. What are the cost implications of implementing UFSM in secondary schools as a means of addressing student hunger?

Pilot schools

The local authority agreed the budget for the pilot in Summer 2019 and delivery commenced in January 2020. The two schools involved were relatively small secondary schools in inner London; School 1 had approximately 400 students at the start of the intervention and School 2, which provides education for students with special educational needs and disabilities, around 100 students. The schools were selected by the local authority prior to the start of the study based on their high level of need (both schools have FSM eligibility above the national average, see Table  1 ) and capacity to deliver the pilot. Characteristics of the two intervention schools at the start of the intervention are shown in Table  1 below.

Study design

We conducted a qualitative process evaluation collecting data through interviews with students, their parent or carers (hereafter ‘parents’), and school staff from two intervention schools delivering UFSM. These data were supplemented by student observations of school lunches during the UFSM pilot, and interviews with school staff from non-intervention schools in the same borough in which UFSM was being delivered. Data were collected between June 2021 and January 2022. As the study was designed during the COVID-19 pandemic, data were collected remotely.

Staff from Children’s Services, Public Health, and Adult Services involved in commissioning UFSM and other aspects of school meal delivery were involved in the development of the study protocol and design of data collection tools. The study team also undertook public involvement work with parents and students to support the development of data collection methods and tools that were relevant, inclusive and accessible. This included consulting with a small group of parents living in the local authority area about the participant information sheets, topic guide and recruitment strategy before data collection began, and conducting two online workshops with school students to co-design the tools to be used in the peer observation element of the study.

Prior to the interviews and observations, participants were sent a participant information sheet (PIS) detailing the aims of the study, and what taking part would involve including the use of data and confidentiality. Ethical approval for the study was awarded by the University of Bristol’s School for Policy Studies Research Ethics Committee in March 2021 (ref. SPSREC/20–21/151). All participants provided written informed consent; student consent forms were co-signed by parents.

Parent interviews

The study aimed to recruit parents across the two intervention schools to participate in an in-depth qualitative interview. Parents were recruited by the school sending out detailed participant information sheets and a pre-interview questionnaire and invited to return the questionnaire and contact details directly to the research team if they wanted to participate. The questionnaire included questions about eligibility for free school meals, food affordability, hunger and meal-skipping for both adult and children in the household using the USDA Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) scoring system [ 23 , 24 ]. In this measure, ‘low food security’ means that the household have to reduce the quality, variety, and desirability of their diets, and ‘very low food security’ means that household members sometimes disrupt eating patterns or reduce food intake because they lack money or other resources for food. A purposive sampling strategy was adopted using: (a) eligibility for FSM under the national scheme; (b) household food security; (c) ethnicity of child.

Interviews were undertaken either online or by telephone. Parents were offered the use of a translator if required (it was not). A topic guide was developed that explored the following areas: background information about the family, experience of food insecurity, school lunch arrangements before and after the introduction of UFSM, uptake (or not) of UFSM, perceptions of UFSM and its impact(s) including unintended consequences, and differential impact of UFSM compared to the national FSM scheme. Interviews lasted 40 min on average (range 28-68 min) and were recorded verbatim on an encrypted digital recorder. Parents were offered a £30 voucher as a thank you for their time and input.

School staff interviews

We aimed to recruit up to six staff from each of the intervention schools. These included members of the senior leadership team; teaching staff (including those with pastoral support responsibilities and/or lunchtime supervision duties as part of their role), and catering staff. We also aimed to recruit up to eight senior leadership staff from non-intervention schools in the same local authority. The topic guide for intervention school staff included questions on demographics of school students and perceptions of school lunch uptake, the national free school meal scheme, lunch arrangements pre- and post- UFSM implementation, concerns about food security amongst students, impact of UFSM, and questions about the implementation, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of UFSM. The topic guide for non-intervention school staff included questions on the feasibility of implementing UFSM in their school and its perceived impact on the school staff, students and families. Questions were included on the acceptability of UFSM, and any preferred alternative approaches to addressing food insecurity which they would consider if funding were available. Again, these took place either online or by telephone and were securely recorded. Catering staff were offered a £30 voucher as they took part in their own time. Costs for school leadership and teaching staff time were reimbursed to the school at £100 per interview.

Student observation diaries

Structured observations of mealtimes have been undertaken in other studies of universal provision, for example in an evaluation of UFSM for all children in Primary 1 to 3 (ages 5–8 years) in Scotland [ 19 ]. However, COVID-19 restrictions precluded the research team from undertaking direct observations in schools. Instead, we recruited members of the student councils in each participating school to act as co-researchers to undertake structured observations.

The researchers, with the support of school staff, met online with students from both schools to co-design a diary instrument that could be used to record lunchtime observations. Students were asked what aspects of school lunch were important to them and should be considered in the study. Their responses shaped the design of a tool that included questions on the dining hall environment, menu options, student food choices, portion size, perception of quality, serving and eating of meals, and other lunchtime activity. The tool was piloted in both schools. A sample observation diary can be seen in Appendix 1. Students were asked to use the tool to conduct lunchtime observations over five school days. The diary instrument was the same for both schools (staff and students at the SEN school did not request any amendments; however in practice students from School 2 took fewer photos and wrote fewer comments than School 1 students).

Student interviews

In-depth qualitative interviews were undertaken with students from each school. Our intended sampling criteria included eligibility for FSM using national criteria; year group; take-up of UFSM provision; and ethnicity. However, due to disruption to school attendance as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (including school closures, students kept home for isolation, and COVID-related absence) convenience sampling was adopted. Information about the research was shared with all students and parents in each school. Students were asked to let a member of school staff know if they would like to take part, and staff then supported the selection of students from a range of year groups and ethnicities.

The qualitative interviews took place online. Students were offered the opportunity to bring a friend to the interview for support and reduce any power imbalance with the researcher. None chose to, but in one school interviewees were paired at the request of the school to minimise disruption to the school day. In the other school, all interviews were conducted with a single respondent. The topic guide included questions on school lunch arrangements pre- and post UFSM (and reasons for uptake of school lunch or not), pre- and post-school food consumption and snacking, perceptions of UFSM including quality, choice, and lunchtime arrangements, and perceptions of impact of UFSM, including unintended consequences. Students were given a £15 voucher as a thank you for participation. The interviews were securely recorded.

Qualitative analysis

All interview data were transcribed verbatim, and analysed using the Framework Method of thematic analysis using Nvivo software [ 25 , 26 ]. Student, parent and staff datasets were analysed separately. For each set of data, one of the research team developed a draft thematic framework based on the research questions and after reading several transcripts. This draft framework informed an initial coding stage, and the framework was refined by adding subthemes that were identified in further transcripts. A short summary of each subtheme was developed to describe the data that it was designed to capture. This Framework was shared with the whole research team and then further refined until the team were confident that it encompassed all the data in the transcripts, the data within each subtheme were coherent, and there were clear distinctions between subthemes. Consistency and agreement were achieved by at least two researchers comparing the application of subthemes with a small number of transcripts.

We created matrices for each data set in which cells were populated with verbatim and summarised data from the transcripts, showing data from every respondent under each subtheme, thus providing a detailed and accessible overview of the qualitative dataset. A summary of the data under each subtheme was developed to inform the next stage of the analysis, moving up the analytical hierarchy to explore patterns and associations between themes in the data. Themes identified in students, parents and staff were compared and contrasted. Findings were also compared across the two schools, but few differences were apparent; where findings differed, we highlight these in the results section.

We present the qualitative data relating to feasibility using Sekhon et al’s theoretical framework of acceptability [ 27 ]. This was done because acceptability has tended to be conflated with ‘satisfaction’ in healthcare and public health intervention research; the Sekhon framework goes beyond this to include seven components: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, and self-efficacy. Developed to assess both prospective and retrospective acceptability of those involved in both the delivery and receipt of an intervention, it is widely cited in health intervention studies [ 28 ]. Other aspects of feasibility are also addressed in a review of the enablers and barriers to implementation.

School lunch uptake and cost data

The local authority provided data on the number of lunches served per month in the intervention schools from the intervention start date (January 2020) until March 2022. The latest data provided to the research team was for March 2022.

Costs of funding UFSM were also provided by the local authority for the 2020–2021 and 2021–2022 financial years. Intervention schools paid the external catering companies and were refunded by the local authority for the cost of providing UFSM. The cost of each meal reimbursed was fixed at £2.30. The cost of providing UFSM for one child for one academic year was also estimated, assuming a 195-day school year, and 100% uptake and attendance.

In total, 60 respondents took part in an interview, and 59 observation forms were returned by the student observers. The sample included 20 parents of students attending the two intervention schools. Half of this sample had previously been eligible for the national free school meal scheme, and half were experiencing low levels of food security at the time of interview. Of the 12 school staff interviewed, eight were drawn from the intervention schools and four from non-intervention schools (2 from a special school, 1 from a mainstream academy and 1 from an all-girls school)The sample included six members of the senior leadership team (e.g. head or deputy head); four teaching staff and two catering staff. Twenty-eight students were interviewed, from across Years 7–11. Information about the sample of parents, students, and school staff can be seen in Tables  2 and 3 below.

Student co-researchers completed 59 observation forms (Table  4 ). Some of these were completed by individuals, some by groups of students working together. The research team did not receive sufficient data from school staff to determine how many were completed collectively. Each observation therefore represents at least one student’s record of a lunchtime observation. Qualitative data from these observation reports have been merged with student interview data in the presentation of findings.

Is UFSM feasible and acceptable in a UK secondary school context?

Affective attitude.

In the Sekhon framework [ 27 ], affective attitude describes how individuals feel about taking part in the intervention. Staff, students and parents were universal in their support for UFSM, perceiving it as a positive intervention with benefits for all participants. Most parents were keen to see it continue (with some worried about the impact if UFSM was withdrawn), and many hoped that it would be extended to other schools. Many linked UFSM with high-profile news events happening at the time, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the challenge faced by many low-income families in feeding their children, the campaign launched by Manchester United and England footballer Marcus Rashford to address this, and the economic impact of Brexit. The financial saving was reported as a major benefit.

I was paying. I don’t even know how much they would cost here. I think in primary school, two pounds per day, so it’s not a lot when you say, okay, two pounds. But then you have two children and it’s like five days a week, it does add up. And I don’t think I could do home lunch for cheaper…[]… and so, it is it is financially, it’s also very helpful. Y7 Parent School 2

School staff in the intervention schools enjoyed working in a school that participated in UFSM because of the perceived benefits to students, including ensuring access to a meal at lunchtime and reduced financial burden on families. Staff often reported concerns about families and students living with food insecurity, and the introduction of UFSM had reduced their worry about students experiencing hunger. Catering staff in particular gained satisfaction from providing for all students, particularly those in low-income families.

It helps a lot of people out, doesn’t it, and if they’re getting a full meal and full pudding, they’re not going to go home starving. They do get a really good full meal and a full pudding. It’s bigger than a dinner, I would say, wouldn’t you? Portion and everything else. Yeah, it’s a big meal. They get a substantial meal, so I think that all children go home happy. Catering staff, School 1

Staff from non-intervention schools were also supportive of UFSM as a means of supporting the high numbers of children and families struggling with food insecurity.

I only see good things out of it [UFSM] to be honest with you. The area we are based…[]… there is a lot of families that struggle around here…[]…my job is to try to remove barriers to learning and one of the number one things that I have to deal with on a weekly basis is usually sleep and food, the two things most of our student struggle with is sleep and food and when I speak to parents about the issues, some of them are saying to me “I am struggling with money, my son didn’t have dinner tonight or lunch or I couldn’t afford a packed lunch for him or her”. Non-intervention school staff

Most students interviewed were participating in UFSM. Those who did not and took a packed lunch to school did so because they did not think there was enough choice in school and would prefer a greater number of menu options, or preferred to eat home-cooked food. There was some dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of food available in the intervention schools amongst students, though others spoke positively about these aspects. Most students reported that the introduction of UFSM had resulted in increased uptake of school meals in both schools, and many liked that because this meant more of their friends were likely to be in the canteen eating together. Some students also valued the time saved by them, or their parents not having to prepare a packed lunch. All students were supportive of the change to UFSM, primarily because of the money this saved them and their families. This was perceived to be especially useful to those students eligible for the national FSM scheme and those who were not but still struggled to afford meals.

For the people who had free school meals before it’s not a weakness for them anymore because everybody has free school meals so it just makes them feel equal and not like different to everyone just because of what their family have or do not have. Year 9 student School 1

Coherence and perceived effectiveness

The positivity towards taking part in UFSM was in large part attributed to its coherence and perceived effectiveness . Respondents from all groups had a clear understanding of what the introduction of UFSM was intended to achieve; increased access to a healthy meal at lunchtime for all students, reduced food insecurity and better nutrition.

Everybody benefits from it...[]…. Even if it’s just a handful of extra children, it’s a handful of extra children that aren’t hungry. That would impact the complete family, because it is stressful. When you’ve got children that are hungry, it is stressful. Y8 Parent School 1

School staff perceived that these intended outcomes were being met; the vast majority of students in both schools received a free school meal at lunchtime and the proportion of students bringing in a packed lunch was reduced. This is supported by lunch uptake data collected by each school (Table  5 below) showing that the number of lunches served per month almost doubled in two years from the intervention start date in School 1; and also increased in school 2.

School census data compiled by the local authority also indicates that, in both schools, the proportion of students eligible for FSM who accessed a free school meal increased. In November 2019, just before the start of the pilot, 55% of FSM students in School 1 took a school lunch and 74% of FSM students in School 2. In November 2021, this had increased to 78% and 79% respectively.

Staff perceived that students who had changed from packed or bought-offsite lunches to UFSM were more likely to be consuming healthier and more nutritious food. Staff also reported the increased uptake of school lunch resulted in more students eating together, often with school staff, bringing an opportunity to gain social skills and develop healthy eating habits.

I think the pupils are socialising better at lunchtime as well. Particularly in the lunch hall it’s a calmer environment. We’ve been able to really embed a few other life skills around eating, hygiene, being able to actually access food with a knife and fork and being able to eat correctly. Role-modelling that from staff and those things have been really important…[]… they’re gonna have to start making their own food choices soon so you know, the sooner we can get them used to that this is right way to eat, that there’s some portion control as well, you know I think that’ll be beneficial longer term. School 2 Staff

Students and teaching staff also perceived that student behaviour and engagement had improved in the afternoons, attributing this to increased uptake of meals and fewer students going hungry or eating low-quality packed lunches.

Implementing UFSM brought some burden for participants, school staff and students in particular (parents were unlikely to report any burdens). Some students in both the interviews and observations reported burden in terms of increased queuing times and the canteen running out of some meal options before they had chance to eat.

Our year, are the last year to get lunch. Sometimes there is no main option because everything’s finished and sometimes you cannot find cake or custard that you wanted. …[]… I was last for a bit and then I got a sandwich which was in a box. But yeah, they ran out. I’m not coming in last but the times I have been last I have noticed that, definitely. Year 8 student School 1.

School 2, in anticipation of increased uptake as a result of UFSM, required an upgrade to the kitchen equipment and electrical supply.

We’d anticipated about 10 to 20 percent increase in lunches so we had to get a second fridge freezer, the dishwasher was breaking all the time, so we realised that we were damaging staff backs. The local authority came in and worked with us on that …[]… all those little things, the technical side of things had to be done before we kind of went live. School 2 staff.

Catering staff reported that workload increased with the implementation of UFSM, due to increased uptake and also, in one school, a change to the FSM offer to include two courses (main meal and dessert) instead of main meal and drink (drinks other than water were withdrawn from the free meal offer because of concerns about the health and climate implications of bottled drinks). This required more resource to prepare dessert for all students. Caterers increased numbers of staff to cope.

My boss has taken on another member of staff because we’re busier. But yes, no it all seems to have run quite smoothly really. Now we’re fully staffed, now we’ve got the extra staff, it’s okay on the preparation of getting everything done. Catering staff School 2

Other preparatory work for school staff included informing parents about the introduction of UFSM, usually by letter or email, and encouraging parents to participate in UFSM. Participating schools needed to ensure that eligible families still applied to receive FSM, in order for the school to reclaim this money and also because the proportion of FSM-eligible students on roll has influence over other funding schools receive. Schools requested that all families completed a ‘Healthy Meals Allowance’ form, which also captured FSM eligibility information. While some staff reported that this initial communication work was resource-intensive it was not seen as barrier to the feasibility of UFSM. Once up and running, school staff reported that the ongoing management of lunches was easier for UFSM than for the national means-tested FSM scheme. The burden of dealing with students without lunch money, students borrowing from and/or bullying each other for food and money, had significantly lessened.

It’s really great when it’s there for all of them because they forget to bring their cards into school…[]…that just being there irradicates all of the nonsense of scrabbling around. I used to lend out so many pounds. I used to come in with my pocket full of one pound coins because you’d have hungry children at lunchtime being like “Oh I forgot! I forgot to get a pound from my mum this morning,” so I’d be like giving it out and checking it in, so you know, it does save time. School 1 staff

Ethicality and opportunity cost

UFSM also appeared to correspond with the values and beliefs of most respondents (‘ ethicality’). Students and their parents often referred to the equity of UFSM, with all students having access to the same lunch offer, at the same (no) cost. This was perceived to be especially useful to those students eligible for the national FSM scheme and those who were not but still struggled to afford meals.

For this, for everybody having free school dinner I think it is good. Firstly, it is balanced for everybody, everybody is equal and secondly you don’t have to struggle. Year 7 Student School 2 I think it’s a really nice equaliser really and it’s nice that they’re all getting it. Y8 Parent School 1

Some staff also reported satisfaction that the funding for UFSM had come from business rather than general taxation.

I think the most impressive thing was the way that the local authority gained the funding to do this and that was by slapping taxes and tariffs on big building projects within the Borough. Staff School 2

Some parents and school staff (including in non-intervention schools) had reservations about the universality of the scheme, incurring financial benefits for mid-to-high income families who may not need them. This was perceived as less of a ‘risk’ in the intervention schools where a high proportion of children were believed to come from low-income families, many of whom would struggle to make ends meet even if they did not meet the eligibility threshold for the national FSM scheme. Nevertheless, concerns about ‘undeserving’ families benefiting and the potential waste of finite financial resources represented a challenge to the ethics and values of some participants (an opportunity cost in the Sekhon et al. acceptability framework [ 27 ]).

Other potential costs identified by school staff were concerns about the impact on catering companies if UFSM was implemented more widely. These centred around the potential impact on the profit margins of providers and knock-on impact of the quality of food if the funding provided to caterers for UFSM was insufficient. Catering staff also reported that continuing to sell snack food and drinks enabled their profit margins to be maintained. One respondent from a non-intervention school had introduced compulsory dining, with students restricted to the school premises at lunchtimes and barred from bring in packed lunches. All families paid for lunch unless they were eligible for FSM. Compulsory dining is unusual in UK secondary schools and was introduced to provide the school caterer with increased (and fixed) demand in an effort to increase the quality of meals, and to improve nutrition.

Compulsory dining increases quality because the caterers know exactly what the uptake’s going to be… []… So, it just means that they can plan much more effectively to what they’re delivering….Actually the driver is purely and simply about nutrition. From my perspective is I can’t control what the children eat before school and after school but when we have such a high percentage of the students on free school meals, at least I know that they’re not just getting a load of rubbish or trying to save up that money in any way, shape or form. Non-intervention school staff

Self-efficacy

The final construct in Sekhon et al’s model of acceptability [ 27 ] is self-efficacy , participants’ capacity to participate in the intervention. UFSM was perceived to be more accessible than the national FSM scheme, both because many families may struggle financially but miss the threshold of eligibility for FSM, and difficulties applying for the scheme.

It’s absolutely brilliant and even for parents who are working ‘cause I’ve been a working parent and struggled to pay. You know it’s not easy, there’s so much on bills and you know I’ve struggled to pay so I know it helps everybody. Y7 parent School 1 One thing I’ve noticed in general is that there’s certain benefits that my son’s entitled that I’ve had to apply for. I know I’m a relatively well-educated person. English is my first language and it’s not straight forward. I remember when I was going through the application process that if I had problems with literacy or English was not my first language, it would be really hard and I think there’s probably a correlation between literacy and the need for free school meals so I could see that being a challenge for somebody. Y8 Parent School 2.

Enablers and barriers to the effective implementation of UFSM in secondary schools

The implementation of UFSM in this pilot began just as the COVID-19 pandemic was building momentum in the UK. The pilot began in January 2020, and schools were closed as a mitigation measure two months later. Repeated closures, student absences, and Year group ‘bubbling’ all prevented the implementation proceeding as intended. Staff were unable to fully understand how UFSM was being experienced, and amend the implementation as a result.

You know it is a shame that the pandemic kind of hit when it did because we didn’t see the consistent build-up of take-up, of enjoyment. You know there’s a big chunk missing in terms of our own understanding of how it all went. So really consistent period of check-in with the pupils I think would have been really key. School 1 Staff

The perceived quality of the food on offer, and the choice of menu options, was a barrier to take up for some children and parents. This was not a consequence of the introduction of UFSM, and more apparent in School 2.

We’ve had a few concerns [prior to UFSM] around you know chicken that tastes fishy. …[]… it’s the off cuts of chicken that are then smushed together to create almost a chicken breast style piece….By increasing the amount we spent, which was only able to come through the local authority agreeing to that, because obviously they’re covering the universal free school meals so we wanted to up the quality as part of this process and that was the agreement we could engage in. School 2 Staff

Most parents were happy with the quality of food provided under UFSM despite some initial reservations that the pilot may have caused the cost-per-meal paid to caterers to decrease and quality of provision to decline. However, parents of children with special educational needs (School 2) were more likely to report concerns about the quality of food on offer, and the choices available, often related to their children’s sensory needs or reduced ability to make ‘sensible’ choices or communicate their unhappiness with the food. Students interviewed who were not participating in UFSM stated the choice of the food on offer as the reason; many preferred home-cooked food or had particular likes and dislikes that were better catered for by continuing to bring a packed lunch.

Student perceptions of school lunches collated in the peer diaries were broadly positive about the quality of food, but less so on the quantity. Most responses indicated that the menu options available, and enjoyment of food were ‘ok or good’ in both schools. Photos returned to the research team by student researchers indicate that few students chose the ‘healthy’ menu options available, such as side vegetables and salads. Comments on the returned dairies indicate that having a wide range of options is important to students.

I say good because the lunch people give you an option on salad which is healthy and you don’t always have to have a hot lunch, you can have a sandwich instead. Year 9 Student School 1

The data returned by student co-researchers during lunchtime observations included perceptions of food options, queueing times and portion size using a simple fixed-option response scale. We report this data in Table  6 below. The diary is an unvalidated tool, and the small sample of respondents who completed it makes the data unsuitable for quantitative analysis but is presented here in descriptive form only. It does provide, both in its development with students (who determined the questions to be included) and in the responses, some indication of satisfaction levels with aspects of the school lunch that mattered most to students. In School 1 many diary entries (see Table  6 )

indicated satisfaction with the portion size, but eight (of thirty-seven responses) suggested it was too small. Portion size was a greater concern for students in school 2 where nine of twenty responses indicated dissatisfaction with the amount of food provided. Some responses also indicate that students do not think that the school lunch was big enough to provide energy for the rest of the school day. In school 1 some students (11 of 37 responses) were buying additional snack items bought in school during break or lunchtime. This may have reintroduced some inequity in access to food as not all students may be able to afford to purchase snacks. Dissatisfaction with the amount of food provided was not a result of the introduction of UFSM; nevertheless it was a potential barrier to participation (preferring packed lunches) or in other cases, encouraged students to buy snacks.

The student observations also revealed that while both schools provided ‘healthier’ menu options such as salads and side portions of vegetables, these were not popular amongst the students.

COVID-19 mitigation measures may have enabled the smooth introduction of UFSM by changing how students accessed the canteen at lunchtime. Efforts to keep students within Year Group bubbles meant that lunchtimes were staggered in both schools, reducing the number of students queuing for food and sitting in the canteen at any one time. This meant queuing times and demand for seats was reduced despite the increased proportion of students accessing school meals. However, students also noted that those accessing lunch at later sittings were more likely to face reduced choice as some menu options had already run out.

Communication to parents about UFSM at the launch of the pilot was important and required a lot of staff effort in both schools. Having members of the senior leadership team driving this process was a key enabler.

She (Principal) really wanted it to work. Like she will pick and choose what she gets very involved in herself, because she’s a busy woman and all that, but she really was on this one and just nagging people and chasing it and chasing it and chasing it. School 2 Staff

Age was both an enabler and barrier; staff perceived that uptake of UFSM school meals was immediate for students joining the school in Y7. When presented to new students and their families, UFSM was seen as ‘standard’ and did not require change. Staff perceived that for parents of older students who had been at the school for longer, there was some degree of inertia and resistance to change.

Parents had just – I guess there’s a conscious decision there not to engage and our year seven’s coming through with the offer in place, apart from those with significant sensory needs are going straight onto school dinners. School 2 staff

Finally, the provision of funds for School 2 to improve its kitchen area made it easier for the school to implement UFSM.

What are the cost implications of UFSM?

UFSM cost the local authority £93,773 for the two participating schools in the 2020/2021 financial year, excluding infrastructure and staff costs. Costs for the 2021–20,221 are not reported due to the significant changes in uptake due to COVID-19 school closures. The estimated cost of providing UFSM for a child not eligible for FSM would be £449 per school year, assuming 100% uptake and attendance. Staff largely thought that UFSM was a good use of financial resources, and believed that the fundamental determinant of continuing UFSM provision was funding. It was seen as a small cost, with a potentially large impact. The opportunity costs of UFSM included extending lunchtime into lesson time, and more staff being required to supervise the lunch break.

I think it’s a start, definitely. I think there’s certainly more that can be done, but again it all revolves around money and the money that schools are given to do these things, but it’s an absolute brilliant initiative that should be continued. Staff School 1

Universal vs. targeted provision

Staff and parent respondents had varied views about whether the cost of providing universal free school meals was a reasonable use of public funds. For some respondents, the cost of UFSM could be considered as another resource necessary for students to learn, and was an effective means of support for all children and young people. The cost of UFSM was perceived to be minimal when compared to other national expenditure:

What has been shown is that it’s not a priority, not that it’s not feasible….[]…But when you talk about the education budget, the NHS budget, social care budget, the amount we’re paying on warheads, its miniscule. It’s absolutely minuscule to do it for everyone, let alone just for the people who need it. So, from that perspective, this is a choice we need to make as a country and about whether we’re willing to do it. School 1 staff

Those with concerns about universality worried about the overall cost, and also that benefits would accrue to wealthier families who did not need them. However most respondents with these concerns also recognised that means-tested free school meal provision would result in a cohort of families who missed the threshold for eligibility, or did not apply, and were left struggling with food insecurity. One staff respondent suggested that if UFSM was implemented more widely, wealthier families could be given an option to decline the benefit as a means of saving costs to the taxpayer. Most were willing to countenance ‘wasting’ benefits on families with higher incomes.

One of the concerns I had was, because it’s a sort of blanket scheme where everyone gets a free meal, it feels like some people will be benefiting from it, who don’t necessarily need to, us included. Which feels like not a great use of resources but overall if you have to balance that with kids who live with food insecurity, it’s probably worthwhile. If it guarantees that those kids get a good meal, it’s probably okay to ‘waste’ some money on people who don’t need it. Y8 Parent School 1 If we reverted to FSM, there would be more students who fall through cracks and do not claim FSM. I think there is no way of making them fully accessible. Like there’s no way of making those administrative systems really accessible genuinely to absolutely everybody, so yeah there would definitely be kids not getting fed. School 1 staff

There were also school staff who perceived that the cost of UFSM would only be justifiable if there was a strong evidence base for the impact on long-term health and educational outcomes for children and young people. Some of these respondents suggested alternative approaches to addressing food insecurity amongst secondary school pupils, such as giving schools funds that they could use to target families most in need, including those just missing the threshold for FSM. This would in effect lower the eligibility threshold for FSM but implementation would vary across schools.

Breakfast or lunch?

Some staff respondents had a preference for free breakfasts rather than lunches. Many noted that schools were already providing free or subsidised breakfasts because this was another meal that those students living in food- insecure households were likely to miss or skip. Some suggested that government funding should be provided for breakfast provision, rather than expecting schools to find the money from existing funds. Providing a free meal earlier in the day may bring optimal benefit as more children were coming to school hungry and would find it difficult to wait until lunchtime to eat. There was also a perception that some parents would find it more acceptable to miss breakfast, but would still ensure their children had access to lunch.

I think it’s breakfast that they really miss out on. Like I think a lot of kids their whole life is just too chaotic, so I think for a lot of kids like they would eat a lunch one way or another anyway, like they’re not that dysfunctional – their families are not that dysfunctional; but I think a lot of kid’s families dysfunctional enough that they don’t eat breakfast, ‘cause just like again, it’s not blame – like you’ve got super busy parents… School 1 staff

Other school staff preferred lunch provision as a means of addressing hunger and food insecurity both because more students would benefit (many may not arrive in school on time to access breakfast; lunchtimes had a more ‘captive audience’), and that the nutritional value of lunch provision was higher than breakfast.

Definitely lunch. I think lunch is more important you know, it’s a bigger meal, you have more of a variety at lunch, it’s not just beans on toast. You have the meat, you have the vegetables, you have more of a range of food so I think lunch would be more important. School 2 staff.

This study examined feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and cost implications of the introduction of universal free school meals in two London secondary schools using qualitative data collected from school staff, students, and parents. The findings suggest that UFSM is both a feasible and acceptable intervention for this age group. Staff, students and parents in the intervention schools were supportive of UFSM, broadly because of the coherence of the intervention. Indeed, there was also support from those staff interviewed from non-intervention schools. Increased access to a healthy meal, reduced food insecurity and better nutrition were clearly understood as the goals of the intervention. This clarity is in stark contrast to a previous study of the implementation UFSM in Scotland, where school staff were less supportive of the policy because of its perceived lack of coherence [ 29 ], or it not being considered the best way of supporting families most in need [ 19 ]. UFSM was also perceived as an effective intervention, particularly in increasing uptake of school meals and reducing the financial burden on families. The study has also demonstrated the feasibility of UFSM, albeit on a small scale. Both schools successfully implemented the initiative.

The acceptability of UFSM amongst parents was increased by their perception that the intervention supported low-income families not previously eligible for FSM but still with living with food insecurity. This has been seen in other studies of UFSM [ 30 ]. Cohen et al’s systematic review of UFSM found evidence for an increased uptake of meals for both students eligible for FSM, and those not [ 14 ]. Improving uptake for those previously eligible for FSM suggests that UFSM may be successfully addressing concerns about stigma and challenges with awareness of and/or applying for the FSM. Increased uptake amongst those previously not eligible for FSM suggest that UFSM is also supporting those families living with food insecurity but above the threshold for FSM. Increasing overall uptake of school lunch may confer the potential benefits of school meals, including better nutritional value (compared to packed lunch) and potential social and educational impacts on all students, not just those who are living with food insecurity. Students and parents in the current study were keen on the equity of the policy, providing the same access to school meals for all families.

There were some burdens and barriers to implementation, including increased queuing times. This was mitigated in the current study by staggered lunch breaks introduced as a COVID-19 prevention measure, and it is also a common means of reducing queuing times and managing space in schools with restrictive dining areas where UFSM has been implemented for younger children [ 31 ]. Other burdens identified in this study include infrastructure and staffing changes. These were successfully addressed in the current pilot in small secondary schools but may be more challenging for larger schools. Evaluation of the implementation of UFSM for primary-aged children in Scotland revealed that infrastructure improvements and increased staffing of kitchen and dining halls was also necessary for successful implementation [ 19 ]. These set-up burdens and costs may be short-term; further research is required to determine if the long-term gains outweigh the costs. It is feasible that catering companies may benefit from the economies of scale as a result of UFSM. School staff perceive that in the longer term UFSM is easier and less burdensome to administer than the FSM scheme.

Some of the perceived benefits of UFSM, such as increased uptake, improved nutrition and social skill development may also be achieved through the compulsory dining model described by one of the respondents in this study. We do not have data on the acceptability of this model (which is not the norm in UK secondary schools), though it is unlikely to achieve the same perceived financial benefits for low income families, or lower the reported burden of managing students at lunchtime under the standard FSM model reported by staff in UFSM intervention schools.

Catering to the dietary needs and preferences of all students, as well as managing portion sizes, were the main challenge to the acceptability of UFSM; both parents and students raised concerns about the lunch offer, particular for those children with special educational needs. The perceived quality of the school lunch offer may not be a direct consequence of UFSM but would need to be addressed to optimise the beneficial impacts for students and families. Involving students in menu planning may increase the acceptability of the lunch offer, reduce food waste, and encourage the inclusion of healthier options including side vegetables and salads that students are more likely to choose. Observation data shows that students rarely chose the ‘healthy’ option; if the nutritional benefits of UFSM are to be maximised the intervention may need to be supplemented with other school-wide activities to promote healthy eating that includes staff, students and parents. This may include the provision of better guidance and policies for schools on improving the nutritional quality of school meals [ 32 ].

Some staff participants in the current study had a preference for the provision of universal free breakfasts rather than lunches, to enable hungry students to eat earlier in the school day. There were also respondents who thought that lunch provision was likely to reach a greater proportion of students, and provide a better nutritional gain than breakfast. This latter view is supported by the Cohen et al. review which found that the association between UFSM and improvements in diet quality and academic performance were strong when lunch was included, but more mixed when only universal free breakfasts were on offer [ 14 ].

There remain concerns about the benefits of universal provision, as opposed to other ways of supporting food insecure families. While most respondents were in favour of UFSM, there were a small proportion who were conflicted between the desire to reduce food insecurity, and limiting the costs to the taxpayer. These respondents did not want to ‘waste’ public money on wealthier students and families who were not food insecure. Estimating the cost of FSM as £2.50 per student/school day, the UK Child Poverty Action Group suggest that the cost of rolling out UFSM nationwide, in addition to the schemes that already exist across the four nations, would be £1.8bn per year [ 33 ]. Universal provision of welfare has declined in the UK, but devolution in Scotland and Wales has seen a return to the approach, particularly welfare provision in relation to children [ 33 ]. Morelli and Seaman used data derived from the 2002 British Household Panel Study (BHPS) to examine the potential impact of a proposal to extend UFSM to all children in Scotland through the unsuccessful Free School Meals Bill in 2002. Their analysis found that targeted FSM was failing to support the lowest-income families because many did not meet the eligibility threshold for support or were not in receipt of the qualifying benefits, despite being eligible. Furthermore, in their model inequality was reduced as universality increased, providing FSM meals to all families in the lowest nine income deciles; only provision of FSM to the top income decile increased inequality across households. They suggest that the concern about UFSM benefiting middle and high income families and increasing inequality may be overstated; while universal provision does benefit the middle classes, this is offset by the advantages of reduced administration costs, reduction in stigma, and improved perception of FSM (as more middle-income families use them)[ 34 ]. There is growing public support for UFSM in the UK. A nationally representative poll of 10, 069 UK adults in November 2020 (during the height of the pandemic) found that 51% agreed with the statement “ school meals should be free for all students so that poor students are not stigmatised ” [ 35 ], though it is unclear if respondents were asked specifically about older, secondary school-aged students.

This is the first study of the implementation of universal free school lunch provision in secondary schools in the UK. It benefits from the inclusion of stakeholders from both intervention and non-interventions schools, and in particular, from the inclusion of the perception of students, both in qualitative interviews and as co-researchers conducting observations of their lunchtimes. It is limited by the small-scale pilot involving only two relatively small secondary schools within a single London borough. The participant sample was further restricted by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including school closures and the study team relying on school staff to recruit and select parent and student respondents; this may have had a gatekeeping effect, introducing some bias. The lunchtime observation diaries enabled students to participate as co-researchers and the capture of observations that were salient to students but are a previously untested method using an unvalidated tool. The data available on costs of the pilot was limited and excluded staffing and infrastructure costs. It would also have been useful to speak to a larger number of non-intervention school staff.

Wider adoption and implementation of UFSM in secondary schools may only be achieved if there is a stronger evidence base for the impact on long-term health and educational outcomes. This is supported by a study of the implementation of UFSM in Scotland which recommends that building the evidence base for the impact of UFSM on outcomes that are meaningful to education stakeholders is necessary for the long-term success of UFSM [ 28 ]. We would add that evidence of long-term impact on all health, psychosocial and education outcomes is liable to appeal to practice and policy stakeholders across a range of domains, as well as assuaging the concerns of some that benefits were ‘wasted’ on higher-income families. Measuring these long-term outcomes would also support a more detailed cost-effectiveness analysis.

This process evaluation of universal free school meal provision in two UK secondary schools finds evidence of acceptability and feasibility amongst students, parents and school staff involved in the pilot as well as school staff in non-intervention schools. Perceived benefits of UFSM include increased access to a healthy meal, reduced food insecurity and better nutrition for students, as well as the social benefits derived from communal eating. UFSM is also perceived as successfully supporting families experiencing food insecurity but not eligible for means-tested free school meals. Barriers to implementation, including school infrastructure that limits the number of students who can eat at any one time, and demands on catering staff, also seen in other studies of UFSM, were largely overcome. Although not a consequence of introducing UFSM, parent and student concerns over menu choice and quality will need to be addressed if the intervention is to achieve optimal uptake and nutritional benefits for students. Future studies of UFSM in UK secondary schools should include a larger and more diverse sample of schools, and include long-term all health, education and psychosocial outcomes so that the impact and cost effectiveness of the approach can be determined and compared with other interventions.

Availability of qualitative data and materials

Anonymised qualitative transcripts used during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Free School Meals

National Institute for Health Research

Public Health Interventions Research Studies Teams

Universal Free School Meals

United States Department of Agriculture

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome Declaration on World Food Security. https://www.fao.org/3/w3613e/w3613e00.htm . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Bramley G, Treanor M, Sosenko F, Littlewood M. State of Hunger: Building the evidence on poverty, destitution, and food insecurity in the UK. https://www.trusselltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/05/State-of-Hunger-2021-Report-Final.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Bhattacharya A, Shepherd J. Measuring and mitigating child hunger in the UK. https://www.smf.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Measuring-mitigating-child-hunger-Dec-20.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Parnham JC, Laverty AA, Majeed A, Vamos EP. Half of children entitled to free school meals did not have access to the scheme during COVID-19 lockdown in the UK.Public Health. 2020 Oct;187:161–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.08.019 .

The Food Foundation. Food Insecurity Tracking Round 10. https://www.foodfoundation.org.uk/initiatives/food-insecurity-tracking . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Pattifer K, Patel M. Food Standards Agency Board Meeting – 15 June 2022: Household Food Insecurity. https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/FSA%2022-06-09%20-%20Household%20Food%20Insecurity.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Landry MJ, van den Berg AE, Asigbee FM, Vandyousefi S, Ghaddar R, Davis JN. Child-report of food insecurity is associated with diet quality in children. Nutrients. 2019 Jul 12;11(7):1574.

Norris SA, Frongillo EA, Black MM, Dong Y, Fall C, Lampl M, Liese AD, Naguib M, Prentice A, Rochat T, Stephensen CB. Nutrition in adolescent growth and development. The Lancet. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11071574 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aceves Martins M, Cruickshank M, Fraser C, Brazzelli MG. Child food insecurity in the UK: a rapid review.Public Health Research. 2018 Nov 30.

Scottish Government. Free School Meals. https://www.gov.scot/news/free-school-meals-1/ . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Welsh Government. Universal Free School Meals Roll-out to Commence in September. https://gov.wales/universal-free-school-meals-roll-out-commence-september#:~ :text=As%20part%20of%20the%20Co,free%20school%20meal%20by%202024. Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

UK Government. Apply for free school meals. https://www.gov.uk/apply-free-school-meals . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

UK Government. Schools, pupils and their characteristics. https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-pupils-and-their-characteristics . Accessed 20 Sept 2022

Cohen JF, Hecht AA, McLoughlin GM, Turner L, Schwartz MB. Universal school meals and associations with student participation, attendance, academic performance, diet quality, food security, and body mass index: a systematic review. Nutrients. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13030911 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Stevens L, Nelson M. The contribution of school meals and packed lunch to food consumption and nutrient intakes in UK primary school children from a low income population. J Hum Nutr Dietetics. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-277X.2010.01148.x .

Article   Google Scholar  

Spence S, Matthews JN, McSweeney L, Rowland MK, Orango P, Adamson AJ. Implementation of Universal Infant Free School Meals: a pilot study in NE England exploring the impact on Key Stage 1 pupil’s dietary intake. Public Health Nutr. 2021;24(10):3167–75.

https://phirst.nihr.ac.uk/

National Institute for Health Research. Proposal for evaluating the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham’s (LBHF) Universal Free School Meals (UFSM) provision in two secondary school. https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR133203 . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Eadie D, Ford A, Stead M, Chambers S, Boydell N, Moore L, Anderson A. Process evaluation of the implementation of Universal Free School Meals (UFSM) for P1 to P3: Research with Schools and Local Authorities. http://www.healthscotland.scot/media/1309/universal-free-school-meals-main-report_march-2016.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

O’Cathain A, Hoddinott P, Lewin S, Thomas KJ, Young B, Adamson J, Jansen YJ, Mills N, Moore G, Donovan JL. Maximising the impact of qualitative research in feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials: guidance for researchers. Pilot and Feasibility Studies. 2015 Dec;1(1):1–3.

Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, Boyd KA, Craig N, French DP, McIntosh E, Petticrew M. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance. bmj. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2061

Wanless D. Securing good health for the whole population. https://www.southampton.gov.uk/moderngov/documents/s19272/prevention-appx%201%20wanless%20summary.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Bickel G, Nord M, Price C, Hamilton W, Cook J. Measuring Food security in the United States: Guide to measuring Household Food Security revised 200. United States Department of Agriculture. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/FSGuide.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Food Security in the U.S. Survey Tools. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/survey-tools/#household . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Dec;13(1):1–8.

Ritchie J, Lewis J, Nicholls CM, Ormston R, editors. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage; 2013.

Google Scholar  

Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis JJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Dec;17(1):1–3.

Klaic M, Kapp S, Hudson P, et al. Implementability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a conceptual framework. Implement Sci. 2022;17:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01171-7 .

Chambers S, Boydell N, Ford A, Eadie D. Learning from the implementation of Universal Free School Meals in Scotland using Normalisation Process Theory: Lessons for policymakers to engage multiple stakeholders. Food Policy. 2020 Aug 1;95:101936.

Ford A, Eadie D, Stead M. Process evaluation of the implementation of Universal Free School Meals: Research with parents. http://www.healthscotland.scot/media/1134/process-evaluation-of-the-implementation-of-universal-free-school-meals-research-with-parents-oct15.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Baines E, Blatchford P. School break and lunch times and young people’s social lives: A follow-up national study. Final Report to the Nuffield Foundation (Ref EDU/42402). 2019 May. https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Final-report-School-break-and-lunch-times-and-young-peoples-lives-A-follow-up-national-study.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Parnham JC, Chang K, Rauber F, Levy RB, Millett C, Laverty AA, von Hinke S, Vamos EP. The ultra-processed food content of school meals and packed lunches in the United Kingdom. Nutrients. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14142961 .

Patrick R, Anstey K, Lee T, Power M. Fixing Lunch: The case for expanding free school meals. https://cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/policypost/Fixing_Lunch.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Morelli CJ, Seaman PT. Universal versus targeted benefits: the distributional effects of free school meals. Environ Plann C Gov Policy. 2005 Aug;23(4):583–98.

Sweetland J, Lasko-Skinner R. Food in a Pandemic. https://demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Food-in-a-Pandemic.pdf . Accessed 02 Aug 2020.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participants who took part in this study.

This study/project is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Intervention Responsive Studies Team (PHIRST/NIHR131567). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

RJ is partly funded by the by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West).

Funders had no involvement in data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the paper.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Patricia E. Jessiman, Victoria R. Carlisle, Katie Breheny, Rona Campbell, Russell Jago & Judi Kidger

Centre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Russell Jago

Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), The National Institute for Health Research, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, BS1 2NT, Bristol, UK

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, Hammersmith , UK

Marcus Robinson

Public co-applicant, PHIRST Insight, Hampshire, UK

Steve Strong

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

PJ, JK, RC, RJ contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by PJ and VC. The first draft of the manuscript was written by PJ and all authors commented and revised previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia E. Jessiman .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethical approval for the study was awarded by the University of Bristol’s School for Policy Studies Research Ethics Committee in March 2021 (ref. SPSREC/20–21/151), and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent; student consent forms were co-signed by parents.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Patricia E. Jessiman and Victoria R. Carlisle are co-first author.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Jessiman, P.E., Carlisle, V.R., Breheny, K. et al. A qualitative process evaluation of universal free school meal provision in two London secondary schools. BMC Public Health 23 , 300 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15082-3

Download citation

Received : 05 October 2022

Accepted : 18 January 2023

Published : 09 February 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15082-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Food insecurity
• School Meals
• Qualitative
• Process evaluation
• Adolescence

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Watch CBS News

Florida school district pulls dictionaries and encyclopedias as part of "inappropriate" content review

By Li Cohen

January 12, 2024 / 12:35 PM EST / CBS News

One school district in Florida is looking to extend the state's book ban to an unexpected genre: dictionaries. According to a list obtained and published by the nonprofit PEN America, the Escambia County school district has included five dictionaries, eight encyclopedias and "The Guinness Book of World Records," in its list of more than 1,600 books that could soon be banned. 

The list of books  was initially obtained by the Florida Freedom to Read Project, a nonprofit that was started in 2021 when Florida started to initiate book bans in schools across the state. The district has a list of books that have been formally challenged on its website as well, which shows that several books have already been restricted and removed, including Alice Sebold's "Lucky," Sapphire's "Push," and Kyle Luckoff's "When Aidan Became a Brother," a picture book that tells the story of a young transgender boy and his new role as a big brother.

According to PEN America, the list consists of more than 1,600 books "banned pending investigation in December 2023." Among titles on the list are: John T. Alexander's "Catherine the Great: Life and Legend," "Speak: The Graphic Novel," Carl Hiaasen's "Hoot," and Anne Frank's "Diary of a Young Girl." 

Also on the list are "Merriam-Webster's Elementary Dictionary," "The Bible Book," "The World Book Encyclopedia of People and Places," "Guinness Book of World Records, 2000," "Webster's Dictionary and Thesaurus for Students," and "The American Heritage Children's Dictionary." 

CBS News reached out to the Escambia school district for comment, but did not hear back prior to publication. In a statement to The Messenger , a spokesperson for the district said that the books "have not been banned or removed from the school district." 

"Rather, they have simply been pulled for further review to ensure compliance with the new legislation," the spokesperson said. "To suggest otherwise is disingenuous and counterproductive." 

The Messenger obtained a spreadsheet of the books under review. The list, which shows that fewer than 70 have so far been analyzed, indicates that the books are being reviewed for their compliance to HB 1069 – a bill approved by Gov. Ron DeSantis last year that, along with requiring schools to teach that "reproductive roles are binary, stable and unchangeable" and limiting education regarding sexual health, also bans schools from having books that depict or describe "sexual conduct" or "is inappropriate for the grade level and age group for which the material is used." 

According to a training presentation that was obtained by the Florida Freedom to Read Project and shared with CBS News, sexual conduct includes sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality and sexual battery, among other things. "Sexually oriented material," which is also banned, includes any depiction of sexual activity, uncovered human genitals, the presentation says. 

Any book that is deemed questionable based on this law "must be removed within 5 school days of receipt of the objection," and cannot be returned to shelves until it is reviewed, the bill says. 

In August, Escambia Superintendent Keith Leonard told the Pensacola News Journal that the district was making " great strides " to adhere to HB 1069, which went into effect last July. According to the training presentation, the district started reviewing books last July and hopes to have all pulled books reviewed with a formal decision by May 2024. 

"Florida's new censorship landscape under laws like HB 1069 is robbing students of all kinds of important books and resources, such as those on major topics like the Holocaust, and shockingly, the Dictionary," Kasey Meehan, program director of PEN America's Freedom to Read program, said. "This is a massive overextension of the language of the law, which mandates against 'sexual conduct,' and the school must return the titles immediately." 

Stephana Ferrell, director of research and insight at the Florida Freedom to Read Project, told CBS News that within the last five months, fewer than 100 titles have been reviewed by the district. 

"We applaud them for doing their due diligence to read and discuss every book before making a decision to permanently ban it from schools, but they need more dedicated, trained staff to help support this effort," Ferrell said. "Most of these books, though pulled temporarily as the district has stated, will never be accessible in the school library for most current secondary students."

Ferrell added that the guidance from the state's Department of Education is "irresponsible." 

"What's happening in Escambia is ridiculous, but it is also happening in many other districts to varying degrees," Ferrell said. "The language in the law is bad. ... [The Florida Department of Education] are the ones with the power to fix this. Until then, districts will continue to 'err on the side of caution' as they have been told to do at the expense of our children's education." 

PEN America has joined publisher Penguin Random House, authors and parents in filing a lawsuit against the district over its removals. On Wednesday, a judge ruled that the lawsuit can move forward, saying it has standing under the First Amendment, the Associated Press reported. 

• Banned Books

Li Cohen is a senior social media producer at CBS News. She previously wrote for amNewYork and The Seminole Tribune. She mainly covers climate, environmental and weather news.

More from CBS News

Israeli strike on Gaza school kills almost 40 people, officials say

Rare "highly toxic" viper found in Ohio

Clarence Thomas discloses trips with GOP donor as justices file new reports

4 simple ways for seniors to consolidate debt