Search

Background: We examine (1) the frequency of financial difficulties in Australian families with young children (0–8 years) in the early and later phases of the pandemic; (2) the extent to which parents' pre‐pandemic socio‐economic disadvantage (SED) predicted financial difficulties; and (3) whether grandparent intergenerational SED further amplified this risk. Method: Data: Australian Temperament Project (ATP; established 1983, N = 2443) and ATP Generation 3 study (ATPG3; established 2012; N = 702), of which 74% (N = 553) completed a COVID‐specific module in the early (May–September 2020) and/or later (October–December 2021) phases of the pandemic. Outcomes: Parent‐reported loss of employment/reduced income, difficulty paying for essentials, and financial strain. Exposures: Pre‐pandemic parent and grandparent education and occupation. Analysis: Logistic regressions, estimated via generalized estimating equations, were used to examine associations between the pre‐pandemic SED of parents and grandparents and their interaction with financial difficulties, adjusting for potential confounders. Results: At both pandemic time points, a third of parents reported adverse financial impacts (early: 34%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 30–38; later: 32%, 95% CI = 28–36). Each standard deviation increase in the parents' pre‐pandemic SED was associated with a 36% increase in the odds of reporting multiple financial difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.04–1.78). There was little evidence of an interaction between the SED of parents and grandparents. Conclusions: Financial impacts related to the COVID‐19 pandemic were common and, irrespective of grandparent SED, disproportionately borne by parents with higher pre‐pandemic SED. Given the well‐established relationship between disadvantage and child health and development, sustained and well‐targeted government supports will be critical to minimizing adverse impacts in years to come. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Many children start school with additional health and developmental needs (AHDN), yet how best to support these children for optimal outcomes in the school setting is a complex challenge. This study aims to determine the views of education experts on what differentiates the most effective primary schools. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with nine senior leaders across the education system responsible for managing or improving practice across a range of schools or school regions in Victoria. Using a positive deviance approach, which investigates strategies already implemented in organizations achieving desired outcomes, the semi‐structured interviews aimed to elicit instances of perceived good practice that already exists within the school system. Interviews were analysed using inductive content analysis. Results: All education experts reported high variability across schools and suggested a number of factors differentiating those that were most effective at supporting children with AHDN. They included the presence of strong teacher support by the school leadership team; explicit and documented processes to guide the practice of teachers and ensure consistency at a whole school level; inclusive relationships and environments; participation and knowledge sharing between medical, allied health and other stakeholders in the care team; and an evidenced‐based approach to allocating resources to programmes and strategies. Conclusion: This exploration of instances of good practice can generate novel insights into a complex problem. Current findings suggest a number of potential opportunities for enhancing practice that can be tested in future research. Improving outcomes for this vulnerable and significant group of children will require collaboration across health and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Children's additional health and developmental needs are often first identified by teachers when they begin school. This study estimates the Grade 3 literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with teacher‐identified additional needs emerging in the first year of school, including the added burden conferred by socioeconomic disadvantage. Methods: Population linked data (n = 42,619) were analysed from the Australian Early Development Census, which include teacher reports on children's health and development at school entry, and the National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy, a direct assessment of reading and numeracy skills at Grade 3. Linear regression analyses were used to estimate associations between emerging needs and learning outcomes, adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. The combined effect of emerging needs and low maternal education (an indicator of socioeconomic disadvantage) on academic outcomes was examined by estimating the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). Results: Emerging health and developmental needs at school entry were associated with lower reading (b = −26.86, 95% CI = −29.19, −24.52) and numeracy (b = −24.39, 95% CI = −26.43, −22.35) outcomes at Grade 3. The combined effect of emerging needs and socioeconomic disadvantage was greater than expected when their individual effects are summed (RERI = 0.38, 95% CI 0.22, 0.55 for reading and RERI = 0.27, 95% CI 0.10, 0.43 for numeracy). Conclusion: In the current study, emerging health and developmental needs identified by teachers at the outset of schooling were associated with poorer literacy and numeracy skills at Grade 3, and family socioeconomic disadvantage appeared to further amplify this effect. Meeting the needs of these children will require timely and coordinated supports across the health and education systems, particularly for those children who are also disadvantaged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]