This paper examines the transition from preschool to primary education, with particular attention to contexts in which institutional cooperation between preschools and primary schools is insufficient. It addresses situations characterized by the absence of a shared norms and framework for organizing the transition process and by a lack of established strategies for how educational institutions respond to children entering primary education with markedly heterogeneous levels of school readiness.

Contemporary scholarly literature suggests that such conditions are not exceptional but structurally embedded in the organization of early childhood and primary education systems. The transition from preschool to primary education is characterized by a set of persistent and interrelated challenges, most notably the misalignment of implicit institutional norms governing pedagogical practices, expectations, and forms of accountability across educational sectors. This normative incongruence constrains the adaptive capacity of educational systems and results in a systemic displacement of responsibility onto individual actors—teachers, parents, and children—who are expected to compensate for institutional discontinuities (Then & Pohlmann-Rother, 2024).

Furthermore, the prevalence of pervasive learning imperatives in education more broadly reflects normative pressures that shape curricular priorities and pedagogical practices across multiple levels of the system, yet may not align with local needs or relational dimensions of learning (learning imperatives as system-wide demands on teaching and learning) (Popa, 2024; cf. literature on partnership learning imperatives).

In response, an expanding body of research advocates a range of targeted interventions and programmatic approaches designed to empower children and families (cf. Veerman et al., 2023; Boyland et al., 2024), or foregrounds the strengthening of social and emotional learning (SEL) as a source of resilience facilitating children’s adjustment to school demands (Hosokawa et al., 2024), or support family-school relations (Tobin, 2022). However, these approaches tend to operate at a partial or compensatory level and therefore leave the underlying institutional configurations of educational practice largely intact.

A synthesis of the above-mentioned literature highlights two analytically significant premises. First, transitions between educational levels must be conceptualized as processes of systemic adaptation, in which not only individuals but entire institutional arrangements, professional cultures, and organizational logics are subject to change. Second, such adaptive processes are inherently interactional in nature, unfolding through patterned exchanges among individuals, groups, and systems across institutional boundaries. On this basis, the present paper adopts an interactionist perspective as its primary analytical framework for understanding and addressing.

We are building on the results of our three-year research on the Step-by-Step (SbS) program, with particular emphasis on the concept of Emotional-Cognitive Educational Infrastructure (ECEI) (Denglerová et al., 2024; Denglerová & Šíp, under review). The paper explicates the function of this infrastructure as a key systemic prerequisite for effective educational processes. These findings are subsequently applied to the context of educational transition. The main objective of this paper examines how teachers at the outset of formal schooling can actively shape and mediate the transition from preschool to primary education in ways that promote continuity and coherence, even under empirically documented conditions of institutional misalignment—namely, the absence of shared norms, the fragmented nature of existing strategies, and the pronounced heterogeneity of learners.

ECEI is the central outcome of the aforementioned mixed-methods research study on the SbS program. The quantitative component examined pupils’ self-concept, classroom climate, emotional competencies, and creative and metacognitive skills, and demonstrated statistically significant advantages for pupils in the SbS program compared to those in traditional schools. The qualitative component employed ethnographic methods in two SbS schools, including classroom observations across grades one to five and interviews with key educational stakeholders. Using Situational Analysis (Clarke, 2005; Clarke, Friesse, & Washburn, 2015), we developed the interpretative ECEI model, which explains the program’s educational effectiveness. Subsequent evaluative studies indicate that the model’s explanatory scope extends beyond the SbS context, supporting its use as a theory-driven analytical framework for examining children’s transition from preschool to primary education. The model integrates social–emotional and cognitive dimensions of learning and explains how the intentional construction of ECEI initially slows the learning process as part of a systemic transformation of individual orientations and the learning environment, which subsequently enables an acceleration of learning and improved student outcomes. ECEI consists of four interrelated levels—instrumental, didactic, autonomization, and constructivist. The development of the ECEI levels is inherently sequential and cumulative. The effective establishment of each higher level is structurally dependent on the sufficient consolidation of the preceding one; for instance, the didactic level cannot be meaningfully established in the absence of a robust instrumental foundation. The instrumental and didactic levels are often systemically underestimated due to their indirect relation to curricular content, particularly in outcome-oriented educational contexts. The model demonstrates that the robust establishment of these foundational levels is a prerequisite for transferring responsibility for learning to students, enabling differentiation and individualization, and ultimately supporting effective constructivist instruction. Interpreting the transition process through the analytical framework of ECEI provides a coherent lens for understanding how the transition from preschool to primary education unfolds in practice. As an analytical framework, ECEI enables the interpretation of transition not merely as an individual adjustment process, but as a set of structurally and interactionally mediated conditions that shape learners’ orientation, emotional security, and engagement with learning. On this basis, this analytical framework supports the formulation of targeted, practice-oriented recommendations that actively facilitate the transition under conditions of institutional misalignment and learner heterogeneity.

The application of the ECEI model extends beyond providing guidance for teachers in complex transition contexts, as it enables institution-level change by explicating the mechanisms through which pedagogical practices reshape learning environments and learner trajectories. As a theoretically and empirically grounded analytical framework, the model supports teachers in critically revisiting entrenched assumptions about teaching and learning. Mechanism 1: Structural stabilization and psychological safety. At the instrumental level, ECEI operates through the negotiation and enforcement of rules, the structuring of space and time, and the ritualization of key instructional sequences. These processes enable teachers and students to co-construct a stable framework that provides orientation, predictability, and psychological safety, thereby creating conditions for respecting learner heterogeneity during transition. Mechanism 2: Dialogical mediation and didactic transformation. At the didactic level, ECEI functions through dialogical practices such as teaching through questioning, reflection and self-reflection, and activating forms of learning. These practices support the transformation of curricular content, reciprocal learning, learner autonomization, instructional differentiation, and the development of collaborative and metacognitive skills in heterogeneous classrooms. Mechanism 3: Differentiation through ordered interaction. The integration of structural order and dialogical interaction enhances teachers’ capacity to respond to learner heterogeneity by stabilizing interactional patterns and diversifying learning formats, thereby enabling more effective differentiation and individualization of instruction in line with inclusive education. Mechanism 4: Productive deceleration and long-term acceleration. Initial deceleration is conceptualized as a productive investment in building a safe learning environment and a functional learning community. Once consolidated, these conditions enable accelerated learning processes and higher-quality learning outcomes, while alleviating teachers’ anxiety that often sustains practices misaligned with learners’ transitional needs.

Boylan, F., Barblett, L., Lavina, L., & Ruscoe, A. (2024). Transforming transitions to primary school: Using children’s funds of knowledge and identity. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2023.2291354 Clarke, A. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postomodern turn. Thousands Oak, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Clarke, A., Friesse, C. & Washburn, R. (2015). Situational analysis in practice: Mapping research with grounded theory. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast Press. Hosokawa, R., [et al.]. (2024). Enhancing social-emotional skills in early childhood: intervention study on the effectiveness of social and emotional learning. BMC Psychology, Article. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02280-w Denglerová et al. (2024). Benefits of the Start Together program. Research report. Available at: www.zacitspolu.eu/wp/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/vyzkumna-zprava_benefity-zas_2024.pdf Denglerová, D. & Šíp, R. (under review). Emotional-Cognitive Educational Infrastructure: social interaction as a core component of emotional-cognitive development. Educational Psychologist. Taylor & Francis. Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2004). Starting school: Effective transitions. Routledge. Popa, S. (2024). Reflections on curriculum and learning imperatives in a changing world. Prospects. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-024-09689-6 Then, D., & Pohlmann-Rother, S. (2024). Adaptivity in the inclusive transition to school. Frontiers in Education, 8:1304918. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1304918 Tobin, E. (2022). Family–school connectivity during transition to primary school. Irish Educational Studies (Taylor & Francis). https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2022.2054451 Veerman, E., Karssen, M., Volman, M., & Gaikhorst, L. (2023). The contribution of two funds of identity interventions to well-being related student outcomes in primary education. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 38, 100680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2022.100680