In recent years, the mental health of children within school environments has garnered significant attention, with a growing emphasis on ensuring equitable access to psychological support. However, a groundbreaking study from the University of Exeter reveals that current school-based mental health interventions may systematically fail children who speak English as an additional language (EAL). This failure is largely due to the unacknowledged linguistic and cultural barriers embedded in the therapeutic frameworks employed, which are overwhelmingly centered around native English proficiency.
At the core of the issue is the reliance of psychological therapies on strong English language skills, which can severely limit the efficacy of interventions for multilingual pupils. Emotional expression, a fundamental aspect of therapy, often depends on the ability of the individual to articulate nuanced feelings—a task considerably more challenging in a non-native language. The research highlights that many EAL children experience a profound “loss in translation” during therapy sessions, reducing their participation and diminishing the comprehensiveness of mental health support they receive. This linguistic mismatch can inadvertently exacerbate the very issues psychological therapies intend to alleviate.
Moreover, this language barrier is not only confined to therapy sessions but also extends into the family sphere, where parental involvement can be crucial. The study details how the absence of direct translations for key mental health terminology creates significant hurdles in facilitating discussions at home, limiting parental engagement. Parents of EAL pupils, often confronted with complex therapeutic concepts conveyed solely through English texts or communications, may struggle to support or reinforce the interventions, thereby reducing overall treatment adherence and efficacy.
Beyond language, cultural nuances further complicate access and effectiveness of mental health services. Practitioners of educational mental health consistently reported encountering a “shame factor” related to mental health within some ethnic communities, which acts as an additional barrier to seeking help. This stigma can deter families from consenting to their children’s participation in psychological support or from engaging openly in the therapeutic process, thereby deepening the divide between service provision and community needs.
The study reveals that many schools lack adequate translated mental health resources or interpreters trained to maintain the therapeutic alliance, thereby widening the equity gap. Where interpreters were available, practitioners noted that the format of translation often hindered the fluidity and confidentiality essential to psychological support, ultimately obstructing rapport building and honest expression. The broader implication is that linguistic inflexibility within school mental health provision may contribute to systemic disenfranchisement of multilingual pupils.
In responding to these challenges, the researchers emphasize the urgent need for greater linguistic flexibility. This would entail expanding language options for therapy, reducing reliance on written materials inappropriate for some families, and developing innovative strategies to surmount language differences. A multidimensional approach that integrates cultural sensitivity with language accessibility is crucial to optimize therapeutic outcomes for EAL students, ensuring services are genuinely inclusive and effective.
Furthermore, the observational study conducted by the University of Exeter’s Katie Howard and Darren Moore involved interviews with educational mental health practitioners (EMHPs) delivering low-intensity psychological therapies. Their insights shed light on the real-world obstacles encountered when supporting multilingual pupils within school settings—obstacles that often go unreported yet profoundly impact treatment success. The practitioners consistently expressed skepticism about whether traditional English-centric therapy models truly meet the needs of EAL children or if alternative modalities might be necessary.
Importantly, the study’s findings implicate a systemic gap in parental involvement in psychological therapies for EAL pupils. The linguistic hurdles for parents, exacerbated by the heavy use of written communication in English, contribute to lower engagement and higher dropout rates among families for whom English is not the primary language. Given that successful mental health intervention often hinges on family support, this gap represents a critical area for intervention and innovation.
Healthcare practitioners and educators need to consider adopting culturally and linguistically adaptable communication methods—such as oral explanations, visual aids, and the employment of bilingual mental health workers—to bridge this divide. These approaches could empower both children and their families, fostering a more supportive environment conducive to healing and psychological growth.
Crucially, the study also underscores the importance of redefining the parameters of psychological support in ethnolinguistically diverse school communities. Conventional therapy frameworks may require modification or augmentation to integrate cultural competence and multilingualism as central features rather than peripheral accommodations. By acknowledging the complexities of language and culture in mental health provision, schools can better tailor services that resonate with children’s lived realities.
The implications of this research call for policy changes that promote resource allocation toward creating linguistically and culturally inclusive mental health programming in schools. This includes training EMHPs in cultural competence, expanding interpreter services with an emphasis on maintaining therapeutic integrity, and developing community outreach that tackles mental health stigma in diverse populations.
In conclusion, the University of Exeter’s study presents a compelling case for reframing how psychological therapies are administered within educational contexts for children with English as an additional language. The findings demonstrate that linguistic and cultural barriers significantly limit the accessibility and efficacy of current mental health support systems, emphasizing the need for adaptive, flexible, and culturally attuned practices. Only through such transformative approaches can schools hope to provide equitable mental health care that truly meets the needs of all pupils, regardless of their linguistic background.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: School-based mental health support for children with English as an additional language
News Publication Date: 12-Jan-2026
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1743129
References: Howard, K., & Moore, D. (2026). School-based mental health support for children with English as an additional language. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1743129
Keywords: Mental health, Behavioral psychology, Crisis intervention, Cognitive psychology, Developmental psychology, Personality psychology, Human social behavior, Social psychology
