Building the Next Generation of Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) Programs

To take SEL to the next level, we must consider (1) pedagogy as much as curriculum, (2) the potential role of technology, and (3) the needs of teachers.

Social-emotional learning (SEL) has emerged as an important aspect of K-12 education. In addition to contributing to academic performance, SEL is seen as an important outcome in its own right, contributing to students’ long-term success (Weissberg et al., 2015). A number of packaged SEL curricula exist that have been found to generate small-to-moderate improvements among students in social-emotional competence, positive social behavior, and academic performance (Durlak et al., 2011; Sklad et al., 2012; Taylor et al., 2017).

However, SEL programs are not always implemented as designed (i.e., with high fidelity to the original design; Durlak, 2015). A recent large-scale study of a widely implemented SEL program found that only slightly more than half of all teachers implemented the program in a way that closely resembled the original design (Low et al., 2016), and such low-fidelity implementation has been linked to weaker program effects (Low et al., 2015; Reyes, et al., 2012). In fact, low-fidelity implementation can reduce program impact by as much as one-half (Durlak et al., 2011), and can have negative effects on both staff morale and student engagement (Elias, 2009). In addition, SEL programs can suffer from poor integration into instructional practice, limited scalability and sustainability, and high cost, particularly for teacher training (Jones & Bouffard, 2012). Indeed, cost-benefit analysis has questioned the value of SEL when teacher salaries during training are included as part of program costs (Turner et al., 2020).

Notably, the research on SEL also finds that program effects are smaller for older youth, with effects becoming very small for youth in high school (Durlak et al., 2011; Taylor et al., 2017; Yeager, 2017). Yeager et al. (2017) hypothesized that middle and high school programs often do not meet adolescents’ developmental needs for autonomy and positive social interaction with peers. This could be addressed by a new approach to SEL that provides students with (1) a more active role in their learning, and (2) opportunities to apply new skills in authentic discussions with peers.

Centering the Pedagogy

To build the next generation of social-emotional learning (SEL) programs, we must start with a consideration of pedagogy as much as curriculum, and how that pedagogy could address the needs highlighted by Yeager et al. (2017). Specifically, the next generation of SEL should be based upon a student-centered, active learning pedagogy. Such a pedagogy exists, and is known as cooperative or peer learning.

Peer learning is establishes positive interdependence among students in learning situations, where individual goal attainment promotes the goal attainment of the group and vice versa (Johnson et al., 2008). For example, teachers may require a single finished product from a group (goal interdependence), or offer a reward to the group if everyone achieves above a certain threshold on an assessment (reward interdependence). The lesson plan may require that each member of the group must fulfill a different role (role interdependence) or complete a unique task (task interdependence) for a lesson to be completed successfully. These forms of interdependence can be layered upon one another, increasing the incentive for students to collaborate (Johnson et al., 2008).

In addition, peer learning activities ensure individual accountability such that students have a strong incentive to contribute to the success of the group (Johnson et al., 2008). This can include an end-of-unit test to be taken individually (with the potential for group rewards as discussed above), or something as simple as a random oral quiz by the teacher as he/she supervises the group work during class.

Finally, high-quality peer learning lessons should also include:

· Explicit development of collaborative social skills, which includes (1) identifying and scaffolding a target social skill for the lesson and (2) monitoring and observation by the teacher to identify and reinforce examples of such behavior;

· A high degree of extended interpersonal contact, with the group sitting together or placed in their own voice or video call, along with explicit sharing and mutual disclosure to promote group bonding; and,

· Guided post-lesson reflection and processing of group performance after the lesson is completed, in which the group discusses what they did well, sets targets for improvement in the future, and provides one another with positive reinforcement for behavior that contributed to group success.

A great deal of research demonstrates that when these “essential elements” are established in peer learning lessons, the quality of peer interaction improves (Ginsburg-Block et al., 2006; Roseth et al., 2008). Instead of competing with or ignoring one another, students are more likely to promote the success of one another through mutual assistance, emotional support, and the sharing of ideas and resources. These positive social interactions, in turn, encourage greater social acceptance and more positive peer relations (Johnson & Johnson, 1989, 2005), as well as higher levels of academic achievement (Roseth et al., 2008). These positive peer relations can, in turn, reduce bullying, social stress, tobacco and alcohol use, and emotional problems (Van Ryzin & Roseth, 2018, 2019, 2021).

Peer learning has also been shown to have significant effects on a range of social-emotional skills, including cognitive and affective empathy (Van Ryzin & Roseth, 2019), prosocial behavior (Van Ryzin, Roseth, & Biglan, 2020), critical thinking (Hänze & Berger, 2007; King, 2008), and communication skills (Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Rutherford et al., 1998). Peer learning engages students in active conversations with peers during each lesson, providing an authentic, experiential opportunity to develop social-emotional skills while reinforcing the curriculum. Additionally, peer learning effects are larger for students of color (Van Ryzin, Roseth, & McClure, 2020), enabling schools to reduce racial disparities and create educational equity through their approach to SEL.

The Role of Technology

Given the wave of educational technology that has emerged during the coronavirus pandemic, it is clear that technology should be able to help address SEL implementation issues such as fidelity, scalability, sustainability, and cost. A peer learning technology is currently under development (PeerLearning.net; https://www.peerlearning.net/) that guides and supports teacher and student activities during peer learning lessons, including: (1) assigning and tracking student tasks and roles, (2) click-and-drag management of membership in learning groups, (3) automated distribution of learning materials and task lists based upon each student’s unique role, (4) management of student work products, (5) tracking of group and lesson status and student feedback, (6) support for teacher observations to reinforce group social skills, and (7) guidance for post-lesson group activities, reflection, and group processing. The technology can alleviate the logistical details of delivering complex peer learning lessons, reduce training costs, and ensure that all lessons are delivered with high fidelity. In addition, the technology is easy for teachers and students to use, supporting long-term sustainability. Since peer learning can be used to deliver any content (academic or otherwise), this technology provides an effective way to integrate SEL into every subject at every grade level.

SEL for Teachers

To be truly comprehensive in our approach to SEL, the social-emotional needs of teachers must also be considered. Indeed, a key prerequisite to delivering effective SEL in the classroom is social-emotional competence among teachers (Schonert-Reichl, 2017). Teacher social-emotional competence has been linked to supportive classroom climates, stronger relationships with students, and student social-emotional skill development (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; Merritt et al., 2012). Comparatively speaking, however, there are few SEL programs developed specifically for teachers. The existing options for teacher SEL tend to focus narrowly on practices such as using mindfulness to cope with stress (Jennings, 2016; Iancu et al., 2018; Roeser et al., 2013). This is certainly a valid concern; it was recognized as such before the COVID-19 pandemic (Brunsting et al., 2015; Greenberg et al., 2016) and has only increased in importance since then (Klapproth et al., 2020). In fact, teacher stress has been linked to a variety of negative outcomes, including poor instructional practices, increased emotional exhaustion and burnout, and higher rates of teacher turnover (Greenberg et al., 2016; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2016, 2017).

However, teachers could benefit from a broader approach to SEL that encompasses all five of CASEL’s core competencies (see https://casel.org/sel-framework/). Existing teacher SEL programs address (1) Self-Awareness and (2) Self-Management, but lack a systematic focus on (3) Social Awareness (empathy, appreciating diversity), (4) Relationship Skills (communicating and working collaboratively), and (5) Decision-Making (critical thinking). Notably, teachers that lack the skills needed to build collaborative, supportive relationships with colleagues experience higher levels of stress and burnout (Shah, 2016; Vangrieken et al., 2015), and lack of collaboration among staff can negatively impact teacher job satisfaction and student achievement (Reeves et al., 2017; Ronfeldt et al., 2015). Peer learning, when applied to teacher training, can help to build the key skills that are currently ignored by existing SEL programs. Thus, in addition to on-going development of PeerLearning.net, work is also underway to construct a teacher SEL program that uses the technology to provide teachers with professional development in empathy, communication and collaborative skills, and critical thinking.

Conclusion

Peer learning provides an opportunity to develop social-emotional skills experientially among both teachers and students, and emerging technology (PeerLearning.net) can support a rapid, low-cost, high-fidelity, sustainable implementation. This next-generation approach promises to integrate SEL into every aspect of K-12 education, and will enable teachers to promote both academic learning and social skill development throughout the school year.

References

Brunsting, N.C., Sreckovic, M.A., & Lane, K.L. (2014) Special education teacher burnout: A synthesis of research from 1979 to 2013. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 681–712.

Durlak, J. A. (2015). What everyone should know about implementation. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 395–405). New York: Guilford.

Durlak, J. A. & DuPre, E. P. (2008) Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 327- 350.

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432.

Elias, M. J. (2009). Social-emotional and character development and academics as a dual focus of educational policy. Educational Policy, 23, 831–846.

Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Rohrbeck, C. A., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2006). A meta-analytic review of social, self-concept, and behavioral outcomes of peer-assisted learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 732–749.

Greenberg, M.T., Brown J.L., & Abenavoli, R.M. (2016). Teacher stress and health effects on teachers, students, and schools. Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved from https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/research/2016/07/teacher-stress-and-health.html.

Hänze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17, 29–41.

Iancu, A. E., Rusu, A., Măroiu, C., Păcurar, R., & Maricuțoiu, L. P. (2018). The effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing teacher burnout: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 373–396.

Jennings, P. A. (2016). CARE for teachers: A mindfulness-based approach to promoting teachers’ social and emotional competence and well-being. In Handbook of mindfulness in education (pp. 133–148). Springer, New York, NY.

Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79, 491–525.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2005). New developments in social interdependence theory. Psychology Monographs, 131, 285–358.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Jones, S. M. & Bouffard, S. M. (2012). Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies. Society for Research in Child Development Social Policy Report, 26, 1–33.

King, A. (2008). Structuring peer interaction to promote higher-order thinking and complex learning in cooperating groups. In Gillies R.M., Ashman A.F., Terwel J. (Eds), The teacher’s role in implementing cooperative learning in the classroom. Computer-supported collaborative learning, vol 8 (pp. 73–91). Boston, MA: Springer.

Klapproth, F., Federkeil, L., Heinschke, F., & Jungmann, T. (2020). Teachers’ experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID-19 induced distance teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4, 444–452.

Low, S., Cook, C. R., Smolkowski, K., & Buntain-Ricklefs, J. (2015). Promoting social–emotional competence: An evaluation of the elementary version of Second Step®. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 463–477.

Low, S., Smolkowski, K., & Cook, C. (2016). What constitutes high-quality implementation of SEL programs? A latent class analysis of Second Step® implementation. Prevention Science, 17, 981–991.

Merritt, E. G., Wanless, S. B., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Cameron, C., & Peugh, J. L. (2012). The contribution of teachers’ emotional support to children’s social behaviors and self-regulatory skills in first grade. School Psychology Review, 41, 141–159.

Reeves, P. M., Pun, W. H., & Chung, K. S. (2017). Influence of teacher collaboration on job satisfaction and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 227–236.

Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., Elbertson, N. A., & Salovey, P. (2012). The interaction effects of program training, dosage, and implementation quality on targeted student outcomes for the RULER approach to social and emotional learning. School Psychology Review, 41, 82–99.

Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S. O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J. A. (2015). Teacher collaboration in instructional teams and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 475–514.

Roeser, R. W., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Jha, A., Cullen, M., Wallace, L., Wilensky, R., … & Harrison, J. (2013). Mindfulness training and reductions in teacher stress and burnout: Results from two randomized, waitlist-control field trials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 787–804.

Rutherford Jr, R. B., Mathur, S. R., & Quinn, M. M. (1998). Promoting social communication skills through cooperative learning and direct instruction. Education & Treatment of Children, 21, 354–369.

Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers. The Future of Children, 137–155.

Shah, M. (2012). The importance and benefits of teacher collegiality in schools–A literature review. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1242–1246.

Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2016). Teacher stress and teacher self-efficacy as predictors of engagement, emotional exhaustion, and motivation to leave the teaching profession. Creative Education, 7, 1785–1799.

Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2017). Teacher stress and teacher self-efficacy: Relations and consequences. In T. M. McIntyre, S. E. McIntyre, & D. J. Francis (Eds.), Educator stress: An occupational health perspective (pp. 101–125). Cham: Springer.

Sklad, M., Diekstra, R., Ritter, M. D., Ben, J., & Gravesteijn, C. (2012). Effectiveness of school‐based universal social, emotional, and behavioral programs: Do they enhance students’ development in the area of skill, behavior, and adjustment?. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 892–909.

Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school‐based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta‐analysis of follow‐up effects. Child Development, 88, 1156–1171.

Turner, A. J., Sutton, M., Harrison, M., Hennessey, A., & Humphrey, N. (2020). Cost-effectiveness of a school-based social and emotional learning intervention: evidence from a cluster-randomised controlled trial of the promoting alternative thinking strategies curriculum. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 18, 271–285.

Van Ryzin, M. J. & Roseth, C. J. (2018). Peer influence processes as mediators of effects of a middle school substance use prevention program. Addictive Behaviors, 85, 180–185.

Van Ryzin, M. J. & Roseth, C. J. (2019). Effects of cooperative learning on peer relations, empathy, and bullying in middle school. Aggressive Behavior, 45, 643–651.

Van Ryzin, M. J., Roseth, C. J., & Biglan, A. (2020). Mediators of effects of cooperative learning on prosocial behavior in middle school. International Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 37–52.

Van Ryzin, M. J., Roseth, C. J., & McClure, H. (2020). The effects of cooperative learning on academic outcomes among students of color. The Journal of Educational Research, 113, 283–291.

Van Ryzin, M. J. & Roseth, C. J. (2021). The cascading effects of reducing student stress: Cooperative learning as a means to reduce emotional problems and promote academic engagement. Journal of Early Adolescence, 41, 700–724.

Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40.

Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Domitrovich, C. E., & Gullotta, T. P. (2015). Social and emotional learning: Past, present, and future. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook for social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 3– 19). New York, NY: Guilford.

Yeager, D. S. (2017). Social and emotional learning programs for adolescents. The Future of Children, 73–94.

Yeager, D. S., Dahl, R. E., & Dweck, C. S. (2018). Why interventions to influence adolescent behavior often fail but could succeed. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13, 101–122.