Social emotional literacy (SEL) interventions are widely implemented through schools, with growing evidence for a range of positive child outcomes. Increasingly, such interventions are delivered on online platforms. To date, there is limited evidence about digital SEL interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of children, parents and facilitator of the potential value of addressing SEL via tailored digital intervention. The intervention was designed to help children, in Brazil, to cope during the first COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. The intervention was delivered via a digital platform to groups of three children for 45 min per week for nine. Thirteen children, nine parents and nine facilitators were interviewed following the completion of the intervention. The data was analysed through a codebook thematic approach, which led to three themes: empowerment, participatory aspects of the intervention and digital adaptation. Overall, children’s SEL development was reported to be supported during the COVID-19 pandemic, by the application of new skills outside the sessions. Children reported a number of empowering factors such as being heard and belonging. A range of useful participatory tools were identified including storytelling, games, drawings and videos. Blended SEL interventions involving both face-to-face and web-based facilitation could be developed within a tiered model of universal mental health promotion and targeted prevention. Access to online platforms would increase reach to large numbers of children in LMIC, especially in contexts of disadvantage.
Social emotional literacy (SEL) can be defined as the ability to understand, empathize and express emotions [
Although SEL has long been viewed as central to children’s adaptive development, recent years have seen increasing interest in its preventive functions. SEL skills have, therefore, been incorporated in mental health promotion programmes, predominantly implemented through schools [
More than 80% of the world’s population of children live in LMIC and are exposed to a range of risk factors for poor mental health such as poverty, malnutrition and lack of resources [
In recent years, the use of digital technology has led to the design, implementation and evaluation of tools that can improve children’s learning, cognitively, emotionally, and socially [
Although children in LMIC, especially those living in disadvantage, are often faced with additional barriers to accessing digital technologies, such provision has the potential to compensate for adequate service provision on the ground. Growth in mobile phone usage and internet access in LMIC can enable children with mental health problems to reach support that was previously unavailable to them. Despite the global ‘digital divide’, the gap is closing over time [
In summary, there is a gap in the implementation of SEL interventions in LMIC, but also an opportunity to enhance their accessibility and uptake through digital approaches. This research gap informed the rationale for this study.
The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of children, parents and facilitators of the potential value of addressing social emotional literacy via a digital intervention. Two core research questions underpinned this aim:
1. To what extent did these key stakeholders experience that social emotional literacy needs could be addressed through digitally-mediated interventions?
2. What were the perceived challenges and benefits of a digital adaptation of an existing social emotional literacy intervention?
In Brazil, 32 million children and young people (or 60%) are affected by poverty [
In total, 208 children aged 6–10 years took part in the intervention. These children were invited to apply learning provided by the intervention through the networks of a host non-governmental organization (NGO) based in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and their sponsors, by digital invitation and social media. Following the delivery of the intervention described below, a sample of children who had completed the course (target population n = 120), their parents, and facilitators (volunteer psychologists, total n = 17) were invited to participate in the study. We adopted a purposeful sampling frame in inviting consecutive children and their parents, until the selected children’s sample reached thematic saturation [
We created an intervention based on the broad principles of the school-based approach ‘Zippy’s Friends’ [
The intervention was delivered by a non-governmental organization (NGO) in Brazil by volunteer psychologists (facilitators). This NGO operates through a global network of 33 members to promote children’s mental health. The NGO nationally provides a range of preventive activities, largely in the school environment and in vulnerable contexts, as well as developing teaching capacity. The intervention was tailored, adapted and informed by the theoretical framework, philosophy and principles of a school-based SEL (skills for life) programme delivered face-to-face over the years by the host NGO. The programme included different components for different age groups.
The intervention was also tailored by the NGO provider to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, by adapting its content, to enable children to deal with specific stressors related to the pandemic such as fears of illness and loss, and self-isolation; and its format to a digital mode, to ensure safe delivery. All facilitators received the same one-day training by an experienced NGO trainer member, and three follow-up support sessions throughout the implementation of the intervention. Additionally, all were provided with learning resources and manualized guidelines to ensure fidelity.
Every three participating children were allocated to one small group and one facilitator. Facilitators were not previously familiar with the children, and each was involved with one small group. Their preparation, training and support are described above. All children received the intervention via a personal computer or by smartphone. There were no required specifications of the computers, other than having an accessible webcam device and internet access. The digital platform Whereby (similar to Zoom) was used. As the intervention was implemented during a period of lockdown, all children attended remotely from their home environment. Not all children attended all the sessions, occasionally resulting in some smaller groups.
The intervention was designed to include nine weekly 45-minute sessions. In contrast with previous face-to-face school-based programmes involving large groups of children, often at classroom level, the digitally adapted intervention targeted small groups of three children and one facilitator (volunteer psychologist). By running the intervention in small groups it was hoped this would maximize opportunities for children to express themselves, practice activities, and interact with each other as well as with the facilitator. Each session focused on a particular theme, in the following sequence: 1–importance of dealing with one’s feelings; 2–sadness; 3–anger; 4–missing favourite situations and dealing with fears; 5–empathy and solidarity with others; 6–communication of feelings; 7–preparing for return to school; 8–facing changes; and 9–love and gratitude.
Up to the fifth session, the aim was for children to identify and articulate their feelings, and to amplify coping skills and internal resources to promote self-care. The next three sessions broadened and generated these skills and strategies in a social context, i.e., being empathic to other people’s feelings, communicating their strategies to both help and receive support, and adapting to external changes within their peer group. In the final session, children revisited their feelings and learning points, and concluded by focusing on positive emotions such as love and gratitude. Each session had a similar structure used in the Zippy’s Friends intervention [
To promote a person-centred focus of analysis that accounted for the existing knowledge base, we utilized the codebook thematic approach, as this is a category-based coding process that prioritizes participant narratives [
The emerging themes and subthemes are summarized in
Themes | Subthemes |
---|---|
1. Empowerment |
Feeling comfortable online |
2. Participatory aspects of intervention |
Stories |
3. Digital adaptation |
Benefits and challenges of online delivery |
Young participants discussed extensively how they felt empowered, especially through the group process. They described enabling factors, which are common to a range of group modalities. All children stated that they felt comfortable with the intervention being offered online. Some parents and facilitators attributed engagement to children already being versed in online formats.
Children reported feeling listened to by both the facilitator and their peers. Their comments included their ability to express difficult emotions and not being judged. In relation to the online platform, they perceived that the facilitators were sensitive to these moments, and that they adapted digital features to promote children listening to each other.
This facilitation and group ethos fostered a sense of inclusion and respect between the children. Consequently, they stated that they developed a sense of belonging, which was a pre-requisite to working through difficult personal issues.
Most children stated that the online format was used sensitively, in a way that still made them feel welcome; thus, despite not being in the same room, they still felt the presence of each other online. Consequently, they were able to display the same respect that they would in a classroom, by listening and taking turns. Parents corroborated that their child was enabled to feel like they belonged in the group, and that this was largely down to the facilitator’s skills in online engagement. Facilitators reported that, although many of the children did not know each other before the programme, they allowed each other time to speak and waited for their turn, even though their interactions were not face-to-face.
All three stakeholder groups claimed that the children were made to feel supported by both their peers and the facilitator throughout the online sessions. In turn, such mutual support encouraged them to share openly with the group and removed any potential barriers to communication related to the remote platform. Children thus gradually took a more active role in the discussions and activities.
Child and adult participants shared their perceptions of whether and how the intervention had positive or negative impact. Having fun together, playing and making friends were key therapeutic components. However, some children remarked that, whilst virtual sessions were enjoyable, given the choice, they would opt for face-to-face interactions.
Although this programme was not designed to regularly involve parents, they were given the option to be present during the sessions. This seemed to result in mixed responses on engaging most children, whilst occasionally inhibiting some. Most facilitators stated that the child’s parents were available should they be needed, but they also respected the child’s privacy.
“
There appeared to be a divide between the parents on their participation. Some parents felt that the intervention was aimed at the child, and they should be given privacy to engage, without feeling uncomfortable. In contrast, other parents actively joined in with the sessions and included themselves in different activities.
When parents were involved during or between sessions, they encouraged children to practice activities at home, and adapt those to their developmental capacity or their home environment.
Interestingly, even if this was not a planned primary therapeutic objective, most children felt that they had used the lessons learnt from the intervention to improve their relationships with their family. Some children covertly adopted new strategies, whilst others communicated with their family what they learnt from the sessions, who then reinforced their application at home. Some children taught their family what they had learnt from the intervention and described how they were then able to help them emotionally. Generalizable skills usually related to emotional regulation and dealing with anger with peers and parents.
Other children were content to practice activities on their own at home, without being prompted or involving other family members.
The intervention normatively included participatory activities, to facilitate children’s engagement during the sessions. These activities required some adaptation to be delivered online. Nonetheless, children and facilitators generally received them positively and commented on the modes, activities and ways they had to be adapted to engage the children to convey therapeutic messages, and encourage them to practice and generate skills beyond the sessions. Activities were used interchangeably at the beginning of each session as warm-up tools, i.e., to promote interaction, sharing and rapport-building with the facilitator. They became more focused as the session progressed, again without losing their participatory functions and fun.
An important aspect of the intervention was that it drew on storytelling, with hidden meanings to engage children with the content of each session. Most children appeared able to connect with the emotional literacy lessons from these stories. Facilitators recognized the emotional effect and connection that the stories successfully had on the children. Whilst some addressed that a story itself may not have always been appropriate for an individual child, the emotional connection that the child had with it, by relating to their earlier experiences, was still apparent.
Take-home messages were often built around games. Children could identify with those games, which in turn increased their interactions. Many parents observed their children repeating or completing the games outside the sessions, and felt that this gave them opportunities to reinforce therapeutic objectives by joining in with their child.
Interestingly, facilitators observed that children often used games proactively to demonstrate, re-enact or process a topic that made an impression on them.
Children appeared particularly engaged with the emotional elements involved in the arts and crafts activities, and found them to be particularly useful. These were also easy to reproduce at home when experiencing similar emotions. Both parents and facilitators warned that some children’s anxieties about technology or creative skills involved might put them off using them. Consequently, they stressed the importance of direction and support, within and between sessions. Also, remaining flexible if a child found a particular activity difficult to follow.
Overall, parents felt that the children were able to understand and engage with the emotional meanings behind the activities. One parent became aware that one activity affected her child in a way that she evaluated her own parenting. In contrast, a risk was highlighted in some parents misconstruing the purpose of the activities, and/or linking them to other tasks and behaviours. This could result in children perceiving the activities negatively and disengaging from the intervention. A practical implication is the importance of ongoing clarity, communication and consistency between facilitators and parents.
Some facilitators commented on the participatory aspects of the intervention in relation to their own training. Most found the materials and their usage of language well suited to the objectives, which did not usually required any modification. Such training issues are important in easily sharing and rolling out the intervention in the future.
In the third theme, participants explored how the intervention had been adapted for a digital format. The participants considered the challenges of delivering an intervention remotely and how this might compare to face-to-face. From this discussion, the participants were able to suggest several recommendations for how to improve the intervention in the future.
Many children felt that the online platform did not compromise the verbal support offered during the sessions. Nevertheless, some children also experienced that physical aspects of this support were not digitally translatable.
Facilitators generally approached the online aspects with an open mind. However, those who had not previously delivered an intervention remotely initially found this notion alien. Their main concern was whether they could provide the same quality of care online. They were also anxious about the technical aspects, i.e., whether they could master the technology and whether it would work during the session.
After completing the intervention, facilitators had largely changed their views about providing support digitally by discovering it was just as useful as it previously was in person. One facilitator described how they perceived online support as overcoming certain practical barriers of face-to-face sessions, as the online medium was more accessible to many children, who were already well-versed in it.
Most parents shared children’s and facilitators’ impressions of the online benefits. In addition, some parents valued the opportunity of children receiving support while confined at home during the unusual situation of the pandemic. This approach could improve access and use, as being time- and resource-effective.
In relation to different web-based and social media platforms, all children were comfortable with using their mobile phones and social media to socialize with others and engage in activities. Some also interacted with their parents this way, whereas others were discouraged from using them at home. Participating parents reflected these mixed attitudes. Some parents raised how schools were using digital technology to ensure that children continued to receive education remotely during the pandemic. However, some parents actively encouraged their child to stay in touch through technology, whilst others felt that the increased use of technology was a negative influence at the expense of usual human interactions and social learning.
Facilitators described digital technology they had previously used to enhance their skills. They highlighted how the current climate encouraged them to begin applying technology to their practice, by enabling them to continue working remotely. Participants listed different forms of social media, and how they adapted them to suit specific areas of their work.
Despite the largely positive responses to the digital adaptation, all stakeholder groups drew comparisons with face-to-face support. Given the choice, most children favoured the latter option. Reasons for their preference included more intimate and meaningful interactions through the physical presence of others, sharing fun activities, and being able to communicate more openly. When explored further, these reasons largely related to being able to read and share emotions, which was at the core of the intervention objectives.
These views were shared by parents, albeit to a lesser extent.
Facilitators approached the delivery mode from different angles. Some participants stated that face-to-face interactions enabled them to observe more subtle non-verbal postures and behaviours, create a more active group dynamic, and feel more at ease with their role. Nevertheless, others concluded that learning and intervention fidelity were not compromised online. A pragmatic view was that whatever the constraints, digital delivery offered opportunities to reach more children, especially in times of crisis.
“
The exploration of perceived impact, previous experience of interventions, and alternative models of delivery led to stakeholder views on needs for additional supports, for the intervention as a whole and for individual children. Children may have had recognized needs that required further help or specialist services or, as in the case of the parent below, needs became apparent because of the SEL intervention.
Similarly, some parents recognized the importance of being actively involved to generate positive outcomes at home, or to address their own emotional issues. The COVID-19 pandemic was an example of collective and ongoing trauma exposure.
This study explored the views of children, their parents, and facilitators on their experiences of a digitally adapted SEL intervention during the first COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Brazil. Participants’ perspectives related to the empowering components, participatory tools, benefits and challenges of online delivery, perceived impact outside the sessions, and recommendations on its future use. Children articulated a detailed understanding of what the intervention involved. They were described by adults as often being pro-active in co-facilitating activities during the sessions, and applying new strategies at home. Crucially, children appeared to generate strategies outside the sessions, during the prolonged stress-inducing period of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indeed, children described a range of empowering factors such as being listened to and not being judged. They particularly elicited group processes like respect, inclusion, sharing and belonging, which were transferrable to a small online group through sensitive and skilled facilitation. These factors have been found to predict both engagement and positive outcomes through different programmes [
The digital adaptation was an important aspect of the intervention, being responsive to global change and public health need. Children’s digital literacy skills were useful in such an adaptation, as they were well-versed in digital technology, and a range of media at home and school. Facilitators initially held some reservations on the transferability of the SEL approach, but were largely more positive after its implementation, because they implemented all participatory tools and activities (stories, games, drawing and videos) as originally planned. The development of similar interventions and staff training should thus ensure the combination of technical confidence and programme fidelity.
Although parent involvement was not built in this intervention, it seemed to occur
Overall, and despite the positive responses to the digital adaptation and the small group size of three children per facilitator, children and facilitators still favoured face-to-face interaction, because of the advantages of sustained eye and emotional contact, following non-verbal clues, and more spontaneous interactions. These findings are not necessarily mutually exclusive, instead they highlight the potential for combined, engaging and resource-effective approaches. Face-to-face and digital elements could thus be complemented for different levels of needs. For example, SEL activities could be introduced universally online, whilst children with more complex needs such as emotional dysregulation may require direct facilitation, for example, at schools, community or care settings.
These findings need to be interpreted in the context of certain limitations. The study was conducted under the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, although many lessons can be adapted post-pandemic. The sample carried certain characteristics, notably having access to NGO networks, volunteering to receive the intervention, and capacity to use a digital platform (laptop, tablet, or mobile phone). Consequently, modified approaches, engagement strategies and digital infrastructure should be designed for disadvantaged groups of children. The study captured stakeholders’ perspectives, especially children’s voices. A quantitative approach is also required to measure outcomes such as in children’s emotional regulation, coping strategies and wellbeing, in line with the objectives of a SEL intervention [
Evolving approaches under the implementation science framework can increase our understanding of processes underpinning such interventions [
The intervention was provided during an unprecedented global crisis, when schools had closed, and children were confined at home. Using digital technology, it equipped children with strategies and coping skills, thus bridged an educational and service gap during this challenging period. Lessons arising from this study can inform future mental health promotion and responsive programmes beyond these unique circumstances.
Indeed, the body of available evidence indicates that children can build coping strategies, social skills, and resilience through a range of SEL interventions [
A blended facilitated approach could maximize staff capacity, whilst maintaining some direct contact with children. Skilled facilitation and building alliance with the facilitator are strong predictors of child and youth engagement and outcomes, both in face-to-face and digital formats of delivery [
In conclusion, these findings can inform the design and implementation of interventions at different levels. Similar approaches can be included in the school curriculum, as part of mental health promotion, as well in community-based preventive activities. Digital modules can ‘boost’ targeted interventions, in self-help or facilitated formats. Young participants can overcome geographical barriers by sharing experiences and learning across regional, national and even national youth networks. Specific attention and digital support should be given to groups who cannot easily access other resources, predominantly in LMIC and disadvantaged communities.
Parallel awareness initiatives maybe required in these contexts for children, parents, schools and communities to embrace the importance of SEL skills in relation to learning and resilience across different life domains. The involvement of youth, community and religious groups, as well as NGOs, in partnership with schools and agencies on the ground can help overcome such challenges and enhance children’s engagement. The objectives, content and activities of the intervention could be adapted to address different types of literacy such as multicultural, recreational or functional literacy; and other stressful conditions such as bullying, community violence or immigration.