Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
The right to play is crucial for the overall development of children. Several studies highlight the need to have time and space to play, especially at school where children spend much of their time. Unfortunately, in formal education the obsession with academic achievements sidelines and ignores the importance of play. The neglection of play had already reached a critical stage before the pandemic, so data are needed to realize how the right to play in school is presently affected. This paper aims to understand children’s play experience in primary education during the pandemic. It investigates what activities children participated in and what materials were used, and provides insight into the social interactions between peers. Furthermore, children’s quality of life is explored. A group of 370 Portuguese children answered a questionnaire on play and social interactions, alongside with Peds 4.0 TM on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The results showed that recess still emerges as a significant element of children’s daily lives, but COVID-19 has brought limitations on play experiences and peer-interaction. It might also have impacted HRQOL, especially in emotional functioning. Since play, health and well-being are closely connected, play opportunities at school are crucial in helping children to thrive in the pandemic, and should be invested in.
Keywords: children, COVID-19, HRQOL, play, primary education, school, peersChildren’s right to play is stated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in Article 31: “1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts.” [1] (p. 9). Furthermore, in 2013 a General Comment on the Right to Play was compiled, and several links between play and school context were stated, highlighting the importance of educational environments as play promotion settings [2]. Play in schools has been decreasing due to academic pressure; this restriction in play opportunities can constrain children’s opportunities for creativity, exploration, and social development [2].
Alongside the importance of the right to play in schools, we must highlight the significance of play to the overall development of children. Play develops children’s social and emotional skills and their ability to manage stress, and it promotes resilience and flexibility when facing uncertainty [3]. Evidence has shown that play, health, and well-being are closely connected [2,4,5].
When considering play opportunities in schools, recess comes to mind. Recess is one setting that can improve children’s experience, with studies dispelling the ancient ideas that the impact of recess on children’s lives was insignificant [6]. Studies have confirmed that recess also influences children’s academic achievements [7,8], as children’s behaviour, focus, and mood in the classroom improve as a result of recess [9]. Greater levels of attention and productivity are also reported as a result of recess [10]. Another crucial point of play at school is children’s peer interactions: recess can promote healthy relationships amongst children, as well as prevent bullying and social exclusion [7]. Children would rather play with friends than alone [11], and in this setting several competencies such as negotiation, cooperation, problem-solving, perseverance and self-control are developed [10].
Unfortunately, evidence has also shown that the potential of play during recess in schools is often ignored, with schools seldom investing in this. Even before the pandemic, school recess had already been facing challenges; professionals acknowledged the importance of recess, but shared the perception that children nowadays do not know how to play, and that the lack of activities, equipment, materials, and human resources leads, for instance, to moments of social conflict [7].
Fun is a key component when children evaluate their school recess; if children feel limited in their play opportunities, recess is perceived as boring, and therefore the renewal of play opportunities and materials is crucial [11]. Children consider being with friends and playing as their favorite features of recess and consider fighting and bullying as their least favorite [7]. Physically active games seem to be children’s favorite, but more sedentary options are also stated by some children, especially in scenarios where a lack of play opportunities or ideas is prevalent [11]. Both genders express a deep interest in active play. Girls demonstrate a wider range of activities at school recess, whereas boys prefer sports and activities that include intense physical exercise [6,12,13]. Children are also sensitive to the physical layout of the recess space, stating that wide-open spaces are better and that a space free of structures and without overcrowding is better [11]. Regarding spaces, previous research has shown that the sports field is the most used space by children during recess, followed by natural spaces. The most used play materials are balls, (especially by boys) and items brought from home, since schools seldom provide play materials [13].
In 2020, profound changes took place in children’s physical and social environments due to COVID-19, with the pandemic impacting different matters in children’s daily lives [14]. Children were deprived of going to school, one of the most important settings for their overall development. The first case of COVID-19 in Portugal appeared in March 2020, with the government closing primary schools from 16 March until mid-September 2020, opening for a new school year, and closing schools once again in the first months of 2021, totalling 24 weeks of closure [15].
Before the pandemic, children could move around during recess freely and could play with children from all classes. A lack of play materials was overcome by children bringing toys and games from home [13]. In the pandemic, following guidance from the General Directorate of Health and the General Directorate of Education, with some input from families and children, the changes made were as follows: children were organized into “bubbles”; interaction with other groups was avoided, namely, through different schedules for entrance, recess, and lunch; breaks between classes were sometimes reduced; spaces for each group, where children should stay at all times, were defined; circulation paths were established; play material brought from home was forbidden, and the use of items (for instance, play materials), should be carefully managed and for individual use only [16]. Educational institutions were deeply focused on these precautionary measures to combat the spread of the virus, overlooking the need to promote a rich physical environment that would support children’s activities and balance safety, risk-taking, and active play [17]. Children from other locations (e.g., Canada and other European countries) faced similar restrictions, with evidence showing that free movement was constrained at schools, with children confined to particular spaces for the entire week. This also lead to a change in the overall social patterns of children with their peers [18,19]. Experts have provided guidance around safe recess practices, and have also shared ideas to continue providing opportunities to play, e.g., creating bins of play materials to be used by each specific class, assuming a risk-benefit approach regarding active play [8].
The pandemic has also made an impact within research, with studies now focusing on collecting data on several matters that might have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, sleep and general behavior at home for small children [20], parental experience regarding pandemic restrictions and its impact on their children’s movement [21], and children’s independent mobility and physical activity [18], among others. Regarding play experiences in quarantine and restrictive environments, there is ongoing work suggesting that the right to play is impacted by restrictive environments, due to changes in access to play opportunities [22]. To our knowledge, research on education and COVID-19 mainly focuses on online learning processes, home-schooling, and inequalities, so data are needed on other elements; namely, children’s right to play in school. National (e.g., Portuguese General Directorate of Health and Portuguese Paediatric Society) and international institutions (e.g., UNESCO, International Play Association, and Right to Play) have requested that the right to play be considered, even in the pandemic [23,24,25]. The role of play in children’s coping and resilience mechanisms in uncertain and traumatic times is undeniable [26], and school’s recess as a place for children’s healing should not be overlooked [8]. This is particularly important since feelings of anxiety and depression among children are on the rise [27]. Actions to support children’s mental health, children’s play, and health promotion strategies are needed [18,27].
For this matter, data on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) could help professionals to adequately identify the activities and materials available at recess that promote HRQOL. Evidence confirms that children’s experiences in recess could be an indicator of HRQOL among school-aged children; more vigorous physical activities and the use of sports equipment relate to physical HRQOL, specific play-based movement relates to physical and emotional HRQOL, and playing on hard-surfaced areas relates to all HRQOL dimensions [6].
This paper aims to identify children’s play experiences in primary education during the pandemic, seeking to determine what activities children participated in, what materials were used, and what social interactions between peers are like today. Furthermore, links between the children’s quality of life and play activities at school are explored.
The present study is an exploratory survey [28,29].
It was carried out in Lisbon Municipality, where the population survey carried out in 2011 showed that children’s population (0–14 years) increased by 9.4%. In 2020, the population of children in Lisbon represented 16.8% of the city’s inhabitants [30]. The data were collected in primary schools, from the parishes identified as having a high-density rate of children. The research was approved by the Ethical Committee of the University of Minho (CEICSH 080/2019). Informed consent was obtained from all participants by a form that was delivered by teachers to children’s legal guardians, usually parents.
The study involved 370 Portuguese children; 194 girls (52.4%) and 176 boys (47.6%), with a medium age of 8.65 years old (±0.794). Of these children, 190 were in the 3rd grade (51.4%) and 180 were in the 4th grade (48.6%). Their average number of siblings was 1.86 (±1.452).
Schools were selected by convenience (belonging to the same district and previously visited, to see if the attendance conditions were similar). The participants had to be, as inclusion criteria, attending primary school and in the 3rd or 4th grade. In Portugal, primary education is from 5–6 years, until around 10 years of age. Children attend school for a full day and usually have three periods of recess: two shorter periods in the morning and in the afternoon, and a longer period during lunch break.
To address the children’s interactions and the use of school recess, we used a questionnaire entitled: “Children’s activities and interactions in recess” [31]. The questionnaire combined closed and open questions in 5 sections: (1) subject characterization; (2) opinions about recess; (3) activities and materials used; (4) adults’ presence during recess, and (5) peer interactions. There was no mention of the COVID-19 pandemic in the questions.
To collect data on children’s health-related quality of life (HRQOL), we used the Portuguese version 4.0 of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL 4.0 TM ) for children aged 8–12 years old [32,33]. The questionnaire had a total of 23 items answered against a 5-point Likert-type scale. The options were as follows: 0 = never a problem; 1 = almost never a problem; 2 = sometimes a problem; 3 = often a problem; 4 = almost always a problem. The scores were calculated following the instructions given by the author, ending up with a global health quality score, a psychosocial health score, a physical health score, and scores on 4 separate dimensions (physical, emotional, social, and school). The closest the score was to 100, the better the score. In the present study, the questionnaire’s internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.827).
Both questionnaires were self-answered by children in late-October/early-November 2020, in the school context.
Children’s answers regarding their play experience, social interactions, and health-related quality of life in school during the pandemic were analyzed by descriptive statistics [34,35], with IBM SPSS Statistics (version 26, USA).
For the open-ended questions, data were coded [36] and categorized in a posteriori theme, with the support of NVivo software (QSR, Melbourne, Australia). In the results section, the themes are presented for each question, alongside the frequency of each one. The findings are illustrated with children’s quotes, and identified by gender and age.
Children’s play experiences in school during the pandemic can be seen in Table 1 .