Specific features of the quality of life of primary school children during distance learning

Aim. To study the impact of distance learning on the quality of life (QoL) indicators of primary school children.

Materials and methods. Primary school children and their parents were surveyed using the international questionnaire Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory PedsQL 4.0TM (block for children 8–12 years old). The research group included 182 children (and the same number of parents) undertaking distance learning. The control group consisted of 234 primary school pupils (and the same number of parents) undertaking traditional offline learning.

Results. All QoL indicators in schoolchildren in the setting of distance learning differed significantly from those undertaking offline education. The greatest decrease in indicators was observed on the scale of physical functioning. The indicators of school functioning in distance learning amounted to 65.89±12.63 points (p = 0.04). Distance learning led to a reduction in social contacts among younger schoolchildren, which was reflected in a decrease in the level of social functioning and a decrease in the corresponding indicators to 66.90±10.18 points. The study of the respondents’ emotional well-being and psychological comfort established that changes in QoL indicators were accompanied by a drop in the QoL emotional component during distance learning by 17.98 points. The parents’ attitude to the QoL of their children during distance learning was characterized by anxiety about the indicator of school functioning. The parents also noted a deterioration in emotional functioning and assessed its decrease even at a lower level (64.36±29.37 points) than their children (70.74±19.32; p = 0.03).

Conclusion. Distance learning affects all aspects of the QoL of younger schoolchildren. The greatest decrease in the indicators of physical, school, and social functioning was observed. The parents’ and their children’s opinions of QoL differed. Thus, primary school pupils suffer from insufficient social contacts, while their parents are concerned about a reduced emotional background.

1. Kolykhmatov VI. The experience of distance learning in a pandemic and forced restrictions. Uchenye Zapiski Universiteta Imeni P.F. Lesgafta. 2020; 8(186):150–6 (In Russ.). doi: 10.34835/issn.2308-1961.2020.8.p156-160

2. Khalikov AA, Musamedova KA, Ibragimova OA. Analysis of distance learning methods and introduction of distance learning in educational institutions. Bulletin of Sientific Conferences. 2017;3–6(19):171–3 (In Russ.).

3. Mikaelyan YuV. Vliyanie komp'yutera na zdorov'e shkol'nika. (In Russ.). URL: https://mcoip.ru/blog/2022/11/05/vliyaniekompyutera-na-zdorove-shkolnika/. (Accessed March 04, 2023).

4. Staselovich GA. Distance education in primary school: problems and opportunities. Kaliningrad Bulletin of Education. 2020.4(8):55–64 (In Russ.).

5. Bazaeva AA. Andreeva EE. The influence of distance learning on the psychoemotional state of students. Bulletin of Psychology and Pedagogy of AltSU. 2020;4:8–17 (In Russ.).

6. Kazakova TYu. Psychological and pedagogical support of distance education of students. Primary Education. 2017;5(1):25–8 (In Russ.). doi: 10.12737/24459

7. Zabolotskikh NV, Vyrodova EYu, Dorosheva AO, Semerdjyan MA, Simonyan NE, Shamaeva MV, Artyushkova AR. The influence of distance learning on the psycho-emotional state of schoolchildren in Krasnodar. Kuban Scientific Medical Bulletin. 2020;27(6):109–22 (In Russ.). doi: 10.25207/1608-6228-2020-27-6-109-122

8. James W. Varney, Michael Seid, Tara Smith Knight, Karen Uzark, Ilona S. Ser. The Pedsql 4.0 Generic core Scales: sensitivity, responsiveness, and impact on clinical decision – making. J. Behav. Med. 2010;25(2):175–93. doi: 10.1023/a:1014836921812

9. Pogozhina IN, Sergeeva MV, Egorova VA. Digital competence and childhood – a unique challenge of the 21st century (analysis of modern research). Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology. 2019;4:80–106 (In Russ.). doi: 10.11621/vsp.2019.04.84

10. Molotkova TL. Distance education: the essence and content. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2015;9(364):108–11 (In Russ.).

11. Bukhalenkova DA, Chichinina EA, Chursina AV, Vereksa AN. Review of studies devoted to the study of the relationship between the use of digital devices and the development of the cognitive sphere in preschoolers. Science for Education Today. 2021;11(3):7–25 (In Russ.). doi: 10.15293/2658-6762.2103.01

12. Pivovarova AM, Gorchkhanova Z.K. The impact of digital technologies on children’s health. Pediatrician Practice. 2021;4:12–20 (In Russ.).

13. Smirnova E.O. The specifics of modern preschool childhood. National Psychological Journal. 2019;2(34):33-40 (In Russ.). doi: 10.11621/npj.2019.0207

14. Kuchma VR, Sedova AS, Stepanova MI, Rapoport IK, Polenova MA, Sokolova SB, Alexandrova IE, Chubarovsky VV. Features of life and well-being of children and adolescents studying remotely during the epidemic of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19). Problems of School and University Medicine and Health. 2020;2:4–24 (In Russ.). doi: 10.47093/2713-069X.2021.2.1.21-31

15. Chakhnashvili ML, Ivanov DV. The impact of digitalization on the health of children and adolescents. Bulletin of New Medical Technologies. 2022;3:56–66 (In Russ.). doi: 10.24412/2075-4094-2022-3-2-2

16. Penyaeva SM. The influence of physical activity on mental activity. Scientific Review. Pedagogical Sciences. 2019;2(1):12–6 (In Russ.).

17. Gordeev KS, Zhidkov AA, Ermolaeva EL, Ilyushina ES, Fedoseeva LA. Combination of mental and physical workload in learning. Modern Scientific Researches and Innovations. 2021;12(128):31 (In Russ.).