Open access
Research Article
21 November 2024

Mode of pandemic school instruction associated with distress among military and non-military-connected students

Publication: Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health
Volume 10, Number 5

LAY SUMMARY

LAY SUMMARY

Because they experience unique risk factors, students from military families may have responded differently to remote school instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results from this study show military-connected students were more distressed during this period than students from civilian families. Both groups appeared to fare better when they attended school in person. However, given their unique needs, military-connected students may benefit from specific resources to manage stressors associated with remote instruction.

Abstract

Introduction: Because of their exposure to unique risk factors, military-connected students may have experienced psychological distress related to mode of school instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study considers psychological distress among military and non-military-connected secondary school students during the pandemic and explores associations between remote/hybrid instruction and distress for both groups. Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of 2020–2021 California Healthy Kids Survey data from 409,152 students in Grades 6 to 12 in California. Results: Military-connected students were significantly more likely to be classified as experiencing moderate (OR = 1.14, 95% CI, 1.07–1.21) or high (OR = 1.23, 95% CI, 1.11–1.36) distress compared to non-military peers. Students receiving in-person instruction were less likely to report moderate (OR = 0.77, 95% CI, 0.84–0.92) or high (OR = 0.82, 95% CI, 0.75–0.91) distress. Among only military-connected students, those receiving in-person instruction were less likely to report moderate or high distress. Discussion: Though all students reported elevated distress related to remote instruction, the adverse consequences of remote instruction may be exacerbated among military-connected students, suggesting the need to direct specific resources to these students. More research is needed to understand mechanisms that may account for distress among students receiving remote instruction and particularly among military-connected students.

Résumé

Introduction : À cause de leur exposition à des facteurs de risque particuliers, les élèves liés aux militaires peuvent avoir ressenti de la détresse psychologique en raison du mode d’enseignement scolaire pendant la pandémie de COVID-19. Cette étude évalue la détresse psychologique chez les élèves du secondaire liés ou non aux militaires pendant la pandémie et explore les associations entre l’enseignement à distance, l’enseignement hybride et la détresse dans les deux groupes. Méthodologie : Cette étude est une analyse secondaire tirée des données du California Healthy Kids Survey (sondage auprès des enfants en santé de la Californie) de 2020–2021 auprès de 409,152 élèves de la sixième à la 12e année en Californie. Résultats : Les élèves liés aux militaires étaient beaucoup plus susceptibles d’être classés parmi ceux et celles qui éprouvent une détresse modérée (RC = 1,14, IC à 95 %, 1,07 à 1,21) ou élevée (RC = 1,23, IC à 95 %, 1,11 à 1,36) par rapport à leurs homologues non liés aux militaires. Les élèves qui recevaient un enseignement en personne étaient moins susceptibles de déclarer une détresse modérée (RC = 0,77, IC à 95 %, 0,84 à 0,92) ou élevée (RC = 0,82, C à 95 %, 0,75 à 0,91). Parmi les élèves liés aux militaires seulement, ceux et celles qui recevaient un enseignement en personne étaient moins susceptibles de déclarer une détresse modérée à élevée. Discussion : Même si tous les élèves ont déclaré ressentir une détresse élevée liée à l’enseignement à distance, les conséquences négatives de l’enseignement à distance peuvent être exacerbées chez les élèves liés aux militaires, ce qui laisse supposer la nécessité de prévoir des ressources particulières à leur intention. D’autres recherches devront être réalisées pour comprendre les mécanismes susceptibles d’être responsables de la détresse chez les élèves qui reçoivent un enseignement à distance, notamment ceux et celles qui sont lié(e)s à des militaires.

INTRODUCTION

Though military families have access to numerous resources, including health care and consistent parental employment, military-connected adolescents consistently experience greater behavioural problems and emotional distress compared to their civilian counterparts.17 For example, in California, military-connected students were 43% more likely than civilian peers to report suicidal thoughts, 71% more likely to attempt suicide, 45%−75% more likely to have recently used substances, and 120% more likely to bring a gun to school.8,9 Though well-established, these findings are grounded in data collected before the global COVID-19 pandemic, an event that dramatically shifted the public education landscape. There is a paucity of investigations exploring the well-being of military-connected adolescents in public schools post-pandemic — a notable gap given the mental distress associated with the pandemic among adolescents10 and concerns about the impact of remote schooling on adolescent well-being.11,12

Public school students during the COVID-19 pandemic

In response to the rapid spread of the novel coronavirus during February and March 2020, school closures were instituted across the United States, affecting 55 million students.12 In the 2020–2021 school year, a large portion of students continued to experience either fully remote or hybrid (e.g., partially in person and partially virtual) instruction.13 In the fall of 2020, 56% of U.S. secondary school students ages 13 to 19 years received fully remote instruction and 24% received hybrid instruction.14
As remote and hybrid instruction continued through the 2020–21 school year and beyond, experts raised concerns about its impact on students’ academic success and well-being,12 as associations between mode of instruction and students were noted.11,14,15 Though findings about hybrid instruction are less clear, adolescents receiving only remote instruction (vs. in person) were more likely to report stress, suicidality, and persistent symptoms of depression.14Moreover, remote schooling is associated with small but meaningful negative effects on mental health, particularly for older children.11 The mechanisms underlying this relationship are, as yet, not well understood, though possibilities include loss of social connection, stress of online learning, and decreased access to mental health services and other resources offered at school.11 Further, these associations exist against a backdrop of significant concern about the mental health of young people during the pandemic more generally.10,16

Military-connected students

Of particular concern is whether students exposed to other adversities, such as poverty, housing instability, racism, and/or lack of connection to school, may be especially likely to experience increased psychological distress in the context of pandemic-related school disruptions.11,14,15 Similar to studies on students experiencing other types of adversity, existing literature on military-connected students indicates they may be at elevated risk for psychological distress in relation to remote or hybrid instruction. A significant and growing body of literature describes unique stressors facing military-connected youth, including 1) exposure to parental or sibling deployment and combat, 2) fear for the well-being of loved ones, 3) increases in parents’ mental health symptomatology, and 4) frequent relocation, leading to school changes on average every 2.9 years.1720 Experiencing these unique stressors is associated with elevated rates of adverse mental health outcomes,17 potentially increasing military-connected students’ susceptibility to pandemic-related stressors.
Frequent moves may also affect military-connected students’ connections to, and experiences within, their schools. Greater mobility is associated with negative perceptions of school climate.21 Frequent moves increase stress, disrupt social relationships, and may weaken connection to students’ school environments.22 However, positive perceptions of school climate, including a sense of safety and connectedness to one’s school, appear to be associated with better mental health outcomes among military-connected students.23 Positive connections to, and experiences within, school may be protective for military-connected youth, potentially buffering the effects of stress experienced in other domains.24 Disruptions in students’ sense of connection to their schools related to military family mobility may exacerbate effects of pandemic-related school disruptions for this population.

Military families during the COVID-19 pandemic

Very little information exists regarding the well-being of military families during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests military families experienced significant disruption, particularly in the initial phase of the pandemic, associated with increased distress and adverse mental health outcomes.25,26 Military parents expressed concerns for the well-being of their children during this period, describing increases in sadness, anxiety, and acting out, and concerns about isolation from peers.26 Qualitative research emphasized the critical importance of school connectedness for military-connected adolescents and the challenges families faced in forging connections in the context of remote schooling.27 Collectively, these findings emphasize the importance of exploring the well-being of military-connected students during the pandemic, as preliminary evidence suggests they may experience adverse outcomes at similar or higher rates than civilian peers.

The current study

Using a large, statewide sample of public secondary school students in California, this investigation examined psychological distress of military-connected and non-military-connected students during the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with primary mode of instruction (e.g., in person, hybrid, or remote). Two hypotheses were explored:
1.
Military-connected students would exhibit greater psychological distress compared to civilian students.
2.
All students engaged in fully remote instruction would exhibit greater psychological distress, compared to hybrid and in-person instruction.

METHODS

Participants

This study analyzed secondary survey data from the 2020–21 administration of the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS), encompassing 421 school districts across California. CHKS is administered every other year to primary and secondary school students; every school district in California is required to conduct the survey to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act, Title IV. Data used for this study qualify as exempt under revised Common Rule Exemption 2. Parental consent is required for participation and detailed procedures are described elsewhere.28 Analyses herein focus on secondary school students, with a final analytical sample of 409,152 students in Grades 6 to 12.

Instrumentation

Dependent variables

Past 30-day psychological distress was measured with 10 items that included 1) was tense and uptight, 2) felt sad and down, 3) was easily irritated, and 4) was scared for no good reason. Response options employed a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 4 (very much true). Cronbach’s α for these items was 0.93. The mean of item responses was calculated (with higher scores corresponding to higher levels of distress). Using quartile estimates of the means, three cut points were established to facilitate interpretation of results. Scores of 1–2.499 were characterized as low distress, scores of 2.5–3.499 represented moderate distress, and scores of 3.5 and higher were considered high distress. Two multinomial logistic regressions were conducted, one with all youth and a second focused on military-connected youth.

Independent variables

Independent variables included self-reported demographic variables (grade, race/ethnicity, gender, transgender identity, sexual orientation, learning context, and military connection). Grade level was a continuous variable ranging from Grade 6 to 12. Race and ethnicity included American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, white, other race, and Hispanic/Latine ethnicity (any race). Military-connected status was measured with one dichotomous item: “Is your father, mother, or guardian currently in the military (army, navy, Marines, air force, National Guard, or reserves)?” Students reported primary mode of instruction for the past 90 days, including in-school, hybrid (combination of in-person and remote), and fully remote learning.

Data analysis

Analyses were conducted using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC); proc SURVYEYFREQ and SURVEYLOGISTIC were used for all statistical tests. Two models employing multinomial logistic regression examined associations between dependent and independent variables. Models controlled for clustering at the school district level (students were selected to be representative per district). Additionally, a measure of parental education was included in the survey. Because of high levels of missingness, this variable was not included in final models. However, all models were replicated with this item as an additional control variable as a proxy for socio-economic status. The results (not shown) indicated parental education was not a significant predictor in any of the models and did not change the direction or strength of the associations presented here.

RESULTS

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics. Most students were in Grades 7 (33.3%), 9 (26.3%), and 11 (22.8%), consistent with the planned administration of CHKS surveys. Small percentages of students in Grades 6, 8, and 10 reflected latitudes that individual schools districts are afforded in choosing how and when to administer surveys. Racial and ethnic identity was consistent with the population of public school students in California, with 59.4% identifying as Latine. While most students identified as heterosexual, 20.1% indicated a non-heterosexual identity and 1.4% of students described themselves as transgender. Finally, 70.6% of students indicated they received fully remote instruction during the prior 90 days.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics
VariableAll, n (%)Military connected, n (%)Non-military connected, n (%)
Military connected   
 Yes10,457 (2.8)  
 No362,224 (97.2)  
 Missing36,471  
Grade   
 616,209 (4.1)437 (4.2)14,353 (4.0)
 7131,128 (33.3)3,901 (37.4)118,527 (32.8)
 819,875 (5.0)512 (4.9)18,089 (5.0)
 9103,782 (26.3)2,701 (25.9)96,159 (26.6)
 1017,695 (4.5)384 (3.7)16,438 (4.5)
 1189,629 (22.8)2,154 (20.7)83,816 (23.2)
 1215,688 (4.0)331 (3.2)14,587 (4.0)
 Missing15,146  
Race/ethnicity   
 American Indian/Alaskan Native6,914 (1.7)317 (3.0)6,254 (1.7)
 Asian49,563 (12.1)1,160 (11.1)47,038 (13)
 Black15,082 (3.7)724 (6.9)13,649 (3.8)
 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander2,558 (0.6)136 (1.3)2,333 (0.6)
 White81,248 (19.9)2,323 (22.3)77,223 (21.4)
 Other10,574 (2.6)292 (2.8)9,520 (2.6)
 Latine24,2674 (59.4)5,487 (52.6)205,764 (56.9)
 Missing539  
COVID-19 learning context   
 In school380,78 (9.6)1,543 (14.8)33,314 (9.2)
 Remote279,285 (70.6)6,146 (58.8)258,294 (71.3)
 Hybrid78,089 (19.8)2,767 (26.5)70,613 (19.5)
 Missing13,700  
Gender   
 Male186,913 (47.8)5,496 (53.1)170,412 (47.3)
 Female191,367 (48.9)4,304 (41.6)178,253 (49.5)
 Non-binary13,082 (3.3)554 (5.4)11,393 (3.2)
 Missing17,790  
Transgender   
 Yes5,203 (1.4)366 (3.9)4,380 (1.3)
 No357,763 (98.6)9,017 (96.1)335,016 (98.7)
 Missing6,186  
Sexual orientation   
 Heterosexual291,982 (79.9)7,317 (75.1)273,087 (80.3)
 Lesbian/gay8,828 (2.4)368 (3.8)8,065 (2.4)
 Bisexual35,040 (9.6)1,093 (11.2)32,734 (9.6)
 Other10,984 (3.0)435 (4.5)9,943 (2.9)
 Questioning18,537 (5.1)537 (5.5)16,138 (4.8)
 Missing43,781  
Distress   
 Low243,661 (71.3)6,423 (69.1)237,238 (71.3)
 Moderate69,101 (20.2)1,959 (21.1)67,142 (20.2)
 High29,215 (8.5)912 (9.8)28,303 (8.5)
 Missing58,111  

All youth

Multinomial logistic regression results for all youth are displayed in Table 2. All indicators were significantly associated with levels of psychological distress. Higher grade level was associated with increased odds of moderate and high distress compared to low distress (OR = 1.12 and 1.21, respectively; see Table 2). Males were significantly less likely than females to have moderate or high levels of psychological distress, and transgender youth had higher likelihood of high levels of distress compared to those who reported not being transgender. Compared to Latine youth, American Indian/Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiian, and white youth had higher odds of moderate and high distress versus low distress. Black youth had significantly lower likelihood of moderate or high distress versus low, compared to Latine youth. Results for learning context indicated in-person and hybrid learning were associated with lower odds of moderate or high distress versus low distress, compared to fully remote learning. Military-connected students were significantly more likely to be classified as moderate or high distress compared to non-military-connected youth.
Table 2. Psychological distress and remote learning status (all youth; N = 300,552)
VariableModerate distress versus low, OR (95% CI)High distress versus low, OR (95% CI)
Grade*1.12 (1.12–1.14)1.21 (1.19–1.23)
Gender  
 Female1.001.00
 Male0.34 (0.33–0.35)0.19 (0.18–0.20)
 Non-binary1.13 (1.05–1.23)1.30 (1.19–1.43)
Transgender  
 No1.001.00
 Yes2.01 (1.82–2.22)3.43 (3.05–3.86)
Sexual orientation  
 Straight1.001.00
 Lesbian/gay3.59 (3.38–3.81)6.57 (6.04–7.15)
 Bisexual3.49 (3.36–3.63)4.14 (5.87–6.42)
 Other3.55 (3.35–3.75)5.51 (5.11–5.95)
 Questioning1.48 (1.41–1.56)1.76 (1.65–1.89)
Race/ethnicity  
 Latine1.001.00
 American Indian/Alaskan Native1.26 (1.15–1.38)1.37 (1.22–1.53)
 Asian1.14 (1.08–1.20)1.03 (0.96–1.11)
 Black0.91 (0.85–0.97)0.73 (0.66–0.81)
 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander1.25 (1.10–1.42)1.39 (1.16–1.67)
 White1.18 (1.13–1.25)1.42 (1.31–1.53)
 Other0.86 (0.79–0.93)1.02 (0.90–1.17)
Learning context  
 Hybrid1.001.00
 In school0.77 (0.72–0.82)0.82 (0.75–0.91)
 Remote0.88 (0.84–0.92)0.91 (0.84–0.99)
Military connected  
 No1.001.00
 Yes1.14 (1.07–1.21)1.23 (1.11–1.36)
Note: Bold text indicates a significant relationship.
*
Measured as a continuous variable.

Military-connected youth

In subsequent analysis of military-connected youth (see Table 3), males were less likely than females to report moderate or high distress versus low distress. Sexual minority status continued to be a significant predictor of increased odds of moderate and high distress. Black respondents were significantly less likely to report moderate or high distress versus low distress compared to Latine youth. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander youth had increased odds of moderate distress compared to Latine youth. Finally, in-school learning was associated with decreased odds of moderate and high distress versus low distress compared to fully remote learning. The hybrid learning context was significantly associated only with a decreased likelihood of indicating high versus low distress.
Table 3. Psychological distress and remote learning status (military-connected youth only; N = 7,825)
VariableModerate distress versus low, OR (95% CI)High distress versus low, OR (95% CI)
Grade*1.08 (1.04–1.12)1.11 (1.05–1.18)
Gender  
 Female1.001.00
 Male0.38 (0.33–0.42)0.26 (0.21–0.33)
 Non-binary0.83 (0.53–1.30)1.27 (0.85–1.90)
Transgender  
 No1.001.00
 Yes1.25 (0.88–1.78)2.36 (1.48–3.76)
Sexual orientation  
 Straight1.001.00
 Lesbian/gay2.55 (1.74–3.75)4.69 (3.11–7.07)
 Bisexual2.77 (2.32–3.30)5.20 (4.15–6.52)
 Other2.97 (2.27–3.90)4.81 (3.29–7.03)
 Questioning1.37 (1.02–1.85)1.64 (1.05–2.54)
Race/ethnicity  
 Latine1.001.00
 American Indian/Alaskan Native1.14 (0.83–1.58)1.07 (0.62–1.84)
 Asian1.05 (0.86–1.27)0.91 (0.70–1.19)
 Black0.79 (0.65–0.96)0.69 (0.50–0.97)
 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander1.79 (1.14–2.82)1.46 (0.71–2.98)
 White1.07 (0.92–1.25)1.04 (0.83–1.31)
 Other0.86 (0.61–1.21)0.63 (0.34–1.17)
Learning context  
 Remote1.001.00
 In school0.81 (0.68–0.98)0.65 (0.49–0.85)
 Hybrid0.90 (0.78–1.03)0.78 (0.64–0.96)
Note: Bold text indicates a significant relationship.
*
Measured as a continuous variable.

DISCUSSION

Prior literature suggests military-connected students have elevated levels of risk for psychological distress8,9 compared to civilian peers.29 This raises questions about the impact of COVID-19-related educational changes for military students. Consequently, the authors assessed whether 1) disparities in psychological distress between military-connected and non-military-connected students would be evident in the context of the pandemic, and 2) whether mode of school instruction would be associated with distress among both groups of students. Findings support both hypotheses. Specifically, military-connected students exhibited greater psychological distress than civilian students, and students engaged in fully remote instruction exhibited greater psychological distress than students in hybrid and in-person instruction.
Findings are consistent with results documented before the pandemic.3,5,6 Relative to civilian students, military-connected students in this sample were 14% more likely to self-report moderate psychological distress compared to low distress and 23% more likely to self-report high psychological distress compared to low distress. Though these differences were relatively small, this finding has been very robust across time, age groups, geographic regions, and now both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, these findings are also corroborated using other measures of distress and risky behaviour in schools, including substance use, victimization, weapon-carrying, and gang involvement.2,4,6,30 The consistency of these results suggests this is a meaningful finding that warrants greater attention for the well-being of military-connected youth in schools.
With respect to the second hypothesis, students engaged in hybrid or in-person instruction were less likely to report psychological distress compared to students receiving only remote instruction. This finding held for all respondents and military-connected students, specifically. Among all students, relative to those receiving remote instruction, students attending school in person were 23% less likely to report moderate compared to low distress and 18% less likely to report high compared to low distress. Thus, there appears to be some benefit to hybrid instruction compared to fully remote learning. Students experiencing hybrid instruction were 12% less likely to report moderate, compared to low, distress and 9% less likely to report high compared to low distress. Among the military sub-group, a similar pattern emerged, though not all findings were statistically significant, as the sample was considerably smaller for these analyses. Across these results, findings clearly emphasize students present in school, at least some of the time, were less likely to be distressed. Though the authors cannot speak to mechanisms accounting for these differences, in-person instruction may support development of social connections and access to critical resources, like mental health services.11
Beyond results related to the primary hypotheses, additional findings emerged. Male students in both the full sample and the military-connected sub-sample were considerably less likely to report both moderate and high psychological distress relative to low distress. In addition, differences in psychological distress among sexual minority and transgender students, compared to their heterosexual and cisgender peers, were quite large. For example, compared to heterosexual students, lesbian/gay students were nearly six times as likely to report high psychological distress compared to low psychological distress. Again, a similar pattern emerged for sexual- and gender-minority students within the military-connected only sample, though odds ratios were slightly attenuated in this group. Limited research on LGBTQIA2S+ youth in military-connected families suggests these youth may be at elevated risk of adverse outcomes,31 but more research is needed to understand the potential confluence of risk conferred from sexual- and/or gender-minority status and military connectedness. Differences were also noted by race/ethnicity, such that students who identified as Black or other race/ethnicity reported less distress compared to Latine students, while other racial/ethnic groups reported more distress. Ultimately, with respect to the objectives of this study, it is important to note military connectedness adds meaningful risk of psychological distress over and above these other factors.

Strengths and limitations

This sample included over 400,000 secondary school students, offering a representative picture of public school students across California. Further, CHKS data include extensive demographic information that was used to control for a number of important alternative explanations for observed outcomes. Among these, CHKS includes information on parental education, which is a proxy for socio-economic status (SES). Though this variable is not included in presented models because of missing data, preliminary models included this variable in the spirit of a sensitivity analysis, and the direction and strength of the relationships reported here were replicated in these models. These supplemental findings suggest differences in SES between military and non-military-connected students is not likely to be a reasonable explanation for the disparities in distress observed in these results. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact analyses controlled for school clustering, functionally matching military-connected and non-military-connected students by school.
Several limitations should be noted. First, the CHKS core survey employed here does not include contextual variables related to military service, which may be important in explaining psychological distress of military-connected students. Deployment of a parent or sibling, in particular, has been associated with adverse outcomes for military-connected youth but was not available in this dataset. Relatedly, the survey did not measure contextual factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic that could influence mental health outcomes, including exposure to illness, death, and (for military-connected students) exposure to high-risk deployment of parents. Second, though the CHKS is a biennial survey, it is not possible to link data for individual students across time. Thus, the data presented here are cross-sectional, which limits the ability to consider, for example, how the transition to remote instruction may have impacted students’ psychological distress. While the sample included over 10,000 military-connected youth, the proportion of these youth who were sexual and gender minorities was quite limited. Thus, this study does not have adequate power to stratify within military-connected youth by these important socio-demographic characteristics. The limits due to sparseness and sample size restrictions are evidenced by the wide confidence intervals for some of the associations examined.

Implications and conclusions

These findings have important public health implications, given that most (55%) U.S. students ages 13 to 19 received fully remote education in fall 2020, compared to only 24% receiving hybrid instruction.14 Among this sample, 7 out of every 10 respondents indicated being in fully remote instruction for the 90 days before survey implementation. Echoing findings, reviews on the impact of COVID-19 school closures on adolescent health contend remote learning was associated with “increased anxiety and loneliness in young people and child stress, sadness, frustration, indiscipline, and hyperactivity.”32(p. 415) Though not measured in this study, the risk of growing educational disparities among more and less advantaged students is also a frequent concern raised with respect to remote instruction.32
These concerns about remote instruction may be particularly problematic for military-connected students. Compared to their civilian peers, military-connected students were significantly more likely to be classified as experiencing moderate or high distress. Military-connected youth learning in person reported less distress than their military-connected peers in fully remote instruction. Thus, removing military-connected youth, a group who already report greater exposure to unique stressors and frequent relocations associated with adverse mental health outcomes, from an in-person classroom is likely to further exacerbate distress. These results highlight the need for targeted efforts to enhance school and social connectedness among military-connected students.
These findings also suggest several important future directions for research. First, longitudinal data that offer the opportunity to estimate change at both the population and the sub-group levels are needed, particularly considering that military-connected students were likely already experiencing elevated distress, on average, before the pandemic. These data would also be useful for identifying mechanisms that may account for the cross-sectional relationships observed here. Second, the risk evident among sub-groups in this dataset, including sexual- and gender-minority and military-connected youth, speaks to the need to explore interactions between these experiences and identities to better estimate the impact of overlapping risk categories. Finally, this study does not explore factors that could promote recovery or resilience among military- or non-military-connected youth. Though elevated distress was observed among both groups, particularly among those receiving remote instruction, approximately 70% of students in both groups nevertheless reported relatively low distress. Future research should consider protective factors that may account for this finding.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Dr. Sullivan is also affiliated with the Center for Health Equity and Evaluation Research at Texas A&M University.

REGISTRY AND REGISTRATION NO. OF THE STUDY/TRIAL

N/A

ANIMAL STUDIES

N/A

PEER REVIEW

This manuscript has been peer reviewed.

REFERENCES

1.
Cramm H, McColl MA, Aiken AB, Williams A. The mental health of military-connected children: A scoping review. J Child Fam Stud. 2019;28:1725–35. Epub 2019 Apr 22.
2.
Acion L, Ramirez MR, Jorge RE, Arndt S. Increased risk of alcohol and drug use among children from deployed military families. Addiction. 2013;108(8):1418–25.
3.
Reed SC, Bell JF, Edwards TC. Adolescent well-being in Washington state military families. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(9):1676–82.
4.
Reed SC, Bell JF, Edwards TC. Weapon carrying, physical fighting and gang membership among youth in Washington State military families. Matern Child Health J. 2014;18(8):1863–72.
5.
Cederbaum JA, Gilreath T, Benbenishty R, Astor RA. Well-being and suicidal ideation of secondary school students from military families. J Adolesc Health. 2014 Jun;54(6):672–7. Epub 2013 Nov 17.
6.
Gilreath TD, Astor RA, Cederbaum JA, et al. Prevalence and correlates of victimization and weapon carrying among military- and nonmilitary-connected youth in Southern California. Prev Med (Baltim). 2014;60:21–6.
7.
Gilreath TD, Cederbaum JA, Astor RA, et al. Substance use among military-connected youth: the California Healthy Kids Survey. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(2):150–3.
8.
Gilreath TD, Wrabel SL, Sullivan K, et al. Suicidality among military-connected adolescents in California schools. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;25(1):61–6.
9.
Sullivan K, Capp G, Gilreath TD, et al. Substance abuse and other adverse outcomes for military-connected youth in California. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(10):922–8.
10.
Nearchou F, Flinn C, Niland R, et al. Exploring the impact of COVID-19 on mental health outcomes in children and adolescents: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(22):8475.
11.
Hawrilenko M, Kroshus E, Tandon P, Christakis D. The association between school closures and child mental health during COVID-19 + supplemental content. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(9):2124092.
12.
Almeida M, Challa M, Ribeiro M, et al. Editorial perspective: the mental health impact of school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2022 May;63(5):608–12. Epub 2021 Nov 11.
13.
MCH Strategic Data. COVID-19 impact: school districts status updates for spring 2021, current as of 4/12/2021, compiled from public school districts [Internet]. Sweet Springs (MO): MCH Strategic Data; 2021 [cited July 2021]. Available from: https://www.mchdata.com/covid19/schoolclosings
14.
Hertz MF, Kilmer G, Verlenden J, et al. Adolescent mental health, connectedness, and mode of school instruction during COVID-19. J Adolesc Health. 2022;70(1):57–63.
15.
Perkins KN, Carey K, Lincoln E, et al. School connectedness still matters: the association of school connectedness and mental health during remote learning due to COVID-19. J Prim Prev. 2021;42:641–8.
16.
Creswell C, Shum A, Pearcey S, et al. Young people’s mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2021;5(8):535–7.
17.
Sullivan KS, Hawkins SA, Gilreath TD, Castro CA. Mental health outcomes associated with risk and resilience among military-connected youth. Fam Process. 2021 Jun;60(2):507–22. Epub 2020 Sep 27.
18.
Esqueda MC, Astor RA, De Pedro KMT. A call to duty: educational policy and school reform addressing the needs of children from military families. Educ Res. 2012;41(2):65–70.
19.
Lucier-Greer M, Arnold AL, Mancini JA, et al. Influences of cumulative risk and protective factors on the adjustment of adolescents in military families. Fam Relat. 2015;64(3):363–77.
20.
MacDermid Wadsworth SM, Cardin JF, Christ S, et al. Accumulation of risk and promotive factors among young children in US military families. Am J Community Psychol. 2016;57(1–2):190–202.
21.
Capp G, Sullivan K. Does high school mobility negatively influence perceptions of school climate? Soc Work Res. 2020;44(1):73–8.
22.
Bradshaw CP, Sudhinaraset M, Mmari K, et al. School transitions among military adolescents: a qualitative study of stress and coping. Sch Psychol Q. 2010;39(1):84–105.
23.
De Pedro KT, Astor RA, Gilreath TD, et al. School climate, deployment, and mental health among students in military-connected schools. Youth Soc. 2015;50(1):93–115.
24.
Astor RA, De Pedro KT, Gilreath TD, et al. The promotional role of school and community contexts for military students. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2013;16(3):233–44.
25.
Jackson HM, Wynn G, Morganstein JC, et al. Military mental health and COVID-19. J Mil Veteran Fam Health. 2020;6(2):21–7.
26.
Urbieta DA, Akin JL, Hamilton WM, et al. We’re stronger together: a collaboration to support military families during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mil Med. 2021;186(12 Suppl 2):23–34.
27.
Thomas JS, Trimillos A, Allsbrook-Huisman S. Military Adolescent Pandemic Study 2021: MAPS21. J Sch Health. 2022 Nov;92(11):1051–61. Epub 2022 Aug 2.
28.
Austin G, Bates S, Duerr M. Guidebook to the California Healthy Kids Survey part II: survey content — core module. 2013–14 ed. [Internet]. San Francisco, CA: WestEd; 2013 [cited 2024 Sep]. Available from: https://data.calschls.org/resources/chks_guidebook_2_coremodules.pdf
29.
Bradshaw CP, Sudhinaraset M, Mmari K, et al. School transitions among military adolescents: a qualitative study of stress and coping. Sch Psychology Q. 2010;39(1):84–105.
30.
Sullivan K, Capp G, Gilreath TD, et al. Substance abuse and other adverse outcomes for military-connected youth in California: results from a large-scale normative population survey. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(10):922–8.
31.
de Pedro KT, Shim-Pelayo H. Prevalence of substance use among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth in military families: findings from the California Healthy Kids Survey. 2018;53(8):1372–6.
32.
Chaabane S, Doraiswamy S, Chaabna K, et al. The impact of COVID-19 school closure on child and adolescent health: a rapid systematic review. Children (Basel). 2021;8(5):415.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health
Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health
Volume 10Number 5November 2024
Pages: 163 - 172

History

Received: 15 December 2023
Revision received: 18 April 2024
Accepted: 18 April 2024
Published in print: November 2024
Published online: 21 November 2024

Key Words:

  1. California
  2. COVID-19
  3. military-connected students
  4. military family
  5. pandemic
  6. remote instruction
  7. remote learning
  8. secondary school

Mots-clés : 

  1. Californie
  2. COVID-19
  3. élèves liés aux militaires
  4. famille de militaires
  5. pandémie
  6. enseignement à distance
  7. apprentissage à distance
  8. école secondaire

Authors

Affiliations

Kathrine S. Sullivan
Biography: Kathrine S. Sullivan, PhD, is Associate Professor at New York University’s Silver School of Social Work. Sullivan’s primary research interest is on the impact of trauma in vulnerable family systems, with a particular focus on the families of military service members and families involved with the child welfare system. Sullivan’s work exploring the impact of trauma and stress on families has been funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Silver School of Social Work, New York University, New York, New York, United States
Tamika D. Gilreath
Biography: Tamika D. Gilreath, PhD, is Professor in the Center for Health Equity and Evaluation Research in the Department of Health Behavior at Texas A&M University’s School of Public Health. Her research examines differences in behavioural health outcomes for military-connected youth compared to their civilian counterparts and the co-occurrence of behavioural health risks (e.g., substance use, mental health, sexual risk) among vulnerable adolescent populations.
Center for Health Equity and Evaluation Research, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States
Adam E. Barry
Biography: Adam E. Barry, PhD, is a health behaviour social scientist, with specific training and expertise in alcohol use, alcohol-induced impairment, and intoxication. His research has been funded by entities such as the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, American Automobile Association Foundation for Traffic Safety, and Texas Department of Transportation. He currently serves as Department Head for the Department of Health Behavior in the School of Public Health at Texas A&M University.
Center for Health Equity and Evaluation Research, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States
Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth
Biography: Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth, PhD, is a faculty member in the Department of Human Development and Family Science at Purdue University, where she co-founded and directs the Military Family Research Institute and serves as Director Emerita of the Center for Families. MacDermid Wadsworth holds an MBA in management and MS and PhD degrees in human development and family studies from the Pennsylvania State University. Her primary research interest is the relationship between work conditions and family life, with special focus on military families.
Department of Human Development and Family Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States

Notes

Correspondence should be addressed to Kathrine Sullivan at New York University, Silver School of Social Work, 1 Washington Square North, New York, New York, United States, 10003. E-mail: [email protected].

Contributors

Conceptualization: KS Sullivan, TD Gilreath, AE Barry, and SM Wadsworth
Methodology: KS Sullivan, TD Gilreath, AE Barry, and SM Wadsworth
Formal Analysis: KS Sullivan and TD Gilreath
Investigation: TD Gilreath
Data Curation: TD Gilreath
Writing — Original Draft: KS Sullivan, TD Gilreath, AE Barry, and SM Wadsworth
Writing — Review & Editing: KS Sullivan, TD Gilreath, AE Barry, and SM Wadsworth

Competing Interests

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Funding

No funding was received for this article.

Ethics Approval

Ethics approval was not required for this article.

Informed Consent

N/A

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

VIEW ALL METRICS
VIEW ALL METRICS

Related Content

Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Format





Download article citation data for:
SullivanKathrine S., GilreathTamika D., BarryAdam E., and WadsworthShelley MacDermid
Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health 2024 10:5, 163-172

View Options

View options

PDF

View PDF

EPUB

View EPUB

Restore your content access

Enter your email address to restore your content access:

Note: This functionality works only for purchases done as a guest. If you already have an account, log in to access the content to which you are entitled.

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media

About Cookies On This Site

We use cookies to improve user experience on our website and measure the impact of our content.

Learn more

×