ArticlePDF Available

Systemic Social and Emotional Learning: Promoting Educational Success for All Preschool to High School Students

October 2020
American Psychologist 76(7):1128–1142

DOI:10.1037/amp0000701

Authors:

Joseph L. Mahoney

Big Brothers and Big Sisters of America

Roger P. Weissberg

University of Illinois Chicago

Mark T Greenberg

Pennsylvania State University

Linda Dusenbury

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning

Show all 11 authorsHide

Social and emotional learning (SEL) has become more central to education because of demand from educators, parents, students, and business leaders alongside rigorous research showing broad, positive impacts for students and adults. However, all approaches to SEL are not equal. Systemic SEL is an approach to create equitable learning conditions that actively involve all Pre-K to Grade 12 students in learning and practicing social, emotional, and academic competencies. These conditions require aligned policies, resources, and actions at state and district levels that encourage local schools and communities to build the personal and professional capacities of adults to: implement and continuously improve evidence-based programs and practices; create an inclusive culture that fosters caring relationships and youth voice, agency, and character; and support coordinated school-family-community partnerships to enhance student development. Promoting social and emotional competencies—including the abilities to understand and manage emotions, achieve positive goals, show caring and concern for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions—are important for success at school and in life. In this article, we summarize key concepts and evidence for systemic SEL. Next, we explain interrelated Theories of Action and resources developed by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) to implement and continuously improve systemic SEL in schools, districts, and states. We discuss research on nested, interacting settings and processes involved in systemic SEL at proximal (classrooms, schools, families, and communities) and distal (districts, states, national, and international) ecological levels. We conclude with recommendations for future SEL research, practice, and policy.

A framework for conceptualizing systemic social and emotional learning (SEL) in educational settings. See the online article for the color version of this figure.

…

Figures - uploaded by Joseph L. Mahoney

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Joseph L. Mahoney

Content may be subject to copyright.

American Psychologist

Systemic Social and Emotional Learning:

Promoting Educational Success for All

Preschool to High School Students

Joseph L. Mahoney, Roger P. Weissberg, Mark T. Greenberg, Linda Dusenbury, Robert

J. Jagers, Karen Niemi, Melissa Schlinger, Justina Schlund, Timothy P. Shriver, Karen

VanAusdal, and Nicholas Yoder

Online First Publication, October 8, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000701

CITATION

Mahoney, J. L., Weissberg, R. P., Greenberg, M. T., Dusenbury, L., Jagers, R. J., Niemi, K.,

Schlinger, M., Schlund, J., Shriver, T. P., VanAusdal, K., & Yoder, N. (2020, October 8). Systemic

Social and Emotional Learning: Promoting Educational Success for All Preschool to High School

Students. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/

amp0000701

and may not exactly replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please

do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available, upon

publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

Systemic Social and Emotional Learning: Promoting

Educational Success for All Preschool to High School Students

Joseph L. Mahoney

University of Wisconsin-Superior and Collaborative

for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning,

Chicago, Illinois

Mark T. Greenberg

The Pennsylvania State University

Roger P. Weissberg

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, Chicago,

Illinois, and University of Illinois at Chicago

Linda Dusenbury, Robert J. Jagers, Karen Niemi,

Melissa Schlinger, Justina Schlund,

Timothy P. Shriver, Karen VanAusdal, and

Nicholas Yoder

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, Chicago,

Illinois

Social and emotional learning (SEL) has become more central to education because of demand

from educators, parents, students, and business leaders alongside rigorous research showing broad,

positive impacts for students and adults. However, all approaches to SEL are not equal. Systemic SEL is

an approach to create equitable learning conditions that actively involve all Pre-K to Grade 12 students

in learning and practicing social, emotional, and academic competencies. These conditions require

aligned policies, resources, and actions at state and district levels that encourage local schools and

communities to build the personal and professional capacities of adults to: implement and continuously

improve evidence-based programs and practices; create an inclusive culture that fosters caring

relationships and youth voice, agency, and character; and support coordinated school-family-community

partnerships to enhance student development. Promoting social and emotional competencies—including

the abilities to understand and manage emotions, achieve positive goals, show caring and concern for

others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions—are important

for success at school and in life. In this article, we summarize key concepts and evidence for systemic

SEL. Next, we explain interrelated Theories of Action and resources developed by the Collaborative for

Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) to implement and continuously improve systemic SEL

in schools, districts, and states. We discuss research on nested, interacting settings and processes

involved in systemic SEL at proximal (classrooms, schools, families, and communities) and distal (districts,

states, national, and international) ecological levels. We conclude with recommendations for future SEL

research, practice, and policy.

tions to this article: Teresa Borowski, Suzzane M. Bouffard, Beth A.

Herman, Adam Kernan-Schloss, and Kimberly Schonert-Reichl. All co-

authors conceptualized the ideas in this article. Joseph L. Mahoney created

the initial draft with input from Roger P. Weissberg, Mark T. Greenberg,

Robert J. Jagers, Linda Dusenbury, and Nicholas Yoder. Roger P. Weiss-

berg, Robert J. Jagers, Karen Niemi, and Melissa Schlinger acquired

funding to support the research and preparation of this article and reviewed

and edited drafts. Justina Schlund, Timothy P. Shriver, and Karen VanAus-

dal also reviewed and edited manuscript drafts.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Joseph L.

Mahoney, Department of Human Behavior, Justice, and Diversity, Univer-

sity of Wisconsin-Superior, 3106 Swenson Hall, Belknap and Catlin Av-

enue, Superior, WI 54880, or to Roger P. Weissberg, Department of

Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1007 West Harrison Street,

1009 BSB, Chicago, IL 60607. E-mail: jmahone4@uwsuper.edu or

rweissberg@casel.org

American Psychologist

ISSN: 0003-066X http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000701

XJoseph L. Mahoney, Department of Human Behavior, Justice, and

Diversity, University of Wisconsin-Superior, and Collaborative for Aca-

demic, Social, and Emotional Learning, Chicago, Illinois; XRoger P.

Weissberg, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning,

and Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago; XMark

T. Greenberg, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,

The Pennsylvania State University; XLinda Dusenbury, Robert J. Jagers,

Karen Niemi, Melissa Schlinger, XJustina Schlund, XTimothy P.

Shriver, XKaren VanAusdal, and Nicholas Yoder, Collaborative for

Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.

The authors appreciate the support of the following funders of the

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL):

Einhorn Family Charitable Trust, NoVo Foundation, Pure Edge Inc.,

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Wallace Foundation. We also thank

the following collaborators and thought partners for intellectual contribu-

Public Significance Statement

A systemic approach to social and emotional learning (SEL) creates equitable learning conditions that actively involve all Pre-K to

Grade 12 students in developing social, emotional, and academic competencies. Decades of research shows these competencies lead to

beneficial outcomes at school and in life. Creating these conditions requires aligned policies, resources, and actions at state and district

levels to support a coordinated learning process through school-family-community partner-ships to enhance student development.

Social and emotional learning (SEL) involves a coordi-

nated set of evidence-based programs and practices for

enhancing social-emotional-cognitive development, posi-

tive behavior and interpersonal relationships, and academic

performance (Durlak, Domitrovich, Weissberg, & Gullotta,

2015; Jones & Bouffard, 2012; National Commission on

Social, Emotional, & Academic Development, 2018). Prox-

imal goals of SEL are to establish safe and supportive

learning environments and to foster social and emotional

competencies (SECs) including the abilities to understand

and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel

and show caring and concern for others, establish and main-

tain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions

(Weissberg, Durlak, Domitrovich, & Gullotta, 2015). SEL

programming that is well-designed and well-implemented

can help all students and adults acquire and apply the

knowledge, skills, and attitudes to deal effectively with

daily tasks and challenges and achieve success in school,

work, and life (Domitrovich, Durlak, Staley, & Weissberg,

2017; Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger,

2011).

This article elaborates on a systemic approach to SEL

(CASEL, 2020a, 2020b, 2020d; Greenberg et al., 2003;

Oberle, Domitrovich, Meyers, & Weissberg, 2016; Weiss-

berg et al., 2015). Systemic SEL is an approach to create

equitable learning conditions that actively involve all Pre-K

to Grade 12 students in learning and practicing social,

emotional, and academic competencies that are important

for success at school and in life (cf. Berger, Berman, Garcia,

& Deasy, 2019; Darling-Hammond, Flook, Cook-Harvey,

Barron, & Osher, 2019). These conditions require aligned

policies, resources, and actions at state and district levels

that encourage local schools and communities to enhance

the personal and professional capacities of adults to: imple-

ment and continuously improve evidence-based programs

and practices (EBPs); create an inclusive culture that fosters

caring relationships and youth voice, agency, and character;

and support coordinated school-family-community partner-

ships to enhance student development.

Most educators now believe that developing SECs are

foundational for student success and should be a major goal

of education (Hamilton, Doss, & Steiner, 2019). A repre-

sentative national survey of K-12 school principals found

strong support for SEL (Atwell & Bridgeland, 2019). These

school leaders believe SECs are teachable and lead to a

range of positive student outcomes. They also indicate that

SEL implementation is higher in schools where systemic

SEL is supported by the district and by diverse groups of in-

and out-of-school stakeholders. Likewise, parents, students,

employers, and scientists agree that SECs are important for

success at school and in life (e.g., DePaoli, Atwell, Bridge-

land, & Shriver, 2018; Domitrovich et al., 2017; National

Commission on Social, Emotional, & Academic Develop-

ment, 2018; Phi Delta Kappan, 2017).

In addition to practical experience, positive support for

SEL stems from research demonstrating its impact and

related value to public health (Greenberg, Domitrovich,

Weissberg, & Durlak, 2017; National Commission on So-

cial, Emotional, & Academic Development, 2017). Numer-

ous meta-analyses have shown that SEL programs taught by

classroom teachers can promote the development of SECs

(e.g., Durlak et al., 2011; Sklad, Diekstra, De Ritter, & Ben,

2012; Wigelsworth et al., 2016). Fostering these competen-

cies, in turn, facilitates students’ academic performance,

positive behaviors and relationships, and reduces behavior

problems and distress (e.g., Durlak et al., 2011). A recent

meta-analysis found that school-based, universal SEL inter-

ventions led to significant improvement in skills, disposi-

tions, prosocial behavior, and academic performance at

follow-up periods ranging from 56 –195 weeks (Taylor,

Oberle, Durlak, & Weissberg, 2017). Thus, SEL programs

can build the foundational competencies young people need

to help them thrive. However, not all programs and ap-

proaches to SEL are effective. Evidence shows that pro-

grams containing SAFE features promote SECs and a broad

range of beneficial outcomes (Durlak, Weissberg, &

Pachan, 2010). SAFE stands for instructional processes

involving (a) sequenced step-by-step training, (b) active

forms of learning, (c) a focus on social and emotional skill

development, and (d) explicit SEL goals. To enhance to

social, emotional, and academic learning of large numbers

of students, we assert that schools should adopt EBPs that

replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission.

The final article is available, upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

operate systemwide and provide for quality design, imple-

mentation, and sustainability.

It is important to note that SEL can provide a strong

foundation for a public health approach to education that

seeks to improve the general population’s wellbeing

(Greenberg & Abenavoli, 2017; Greenberg et al., 2017).

Schools provide a durable context to carry out interventions

that promote competencies and reduce risks for all students

and, thus, can have a widespread positive affect on public

health. To do so requires an approach that integrates uni-

versal SEL with other tiered services across whole schools

acting in partnership with families and communities and

supported by districts and states.

In this article we reaffirm the importance of a systemic

approach to SEL in the light of current educational objec-

tives and advances in science and practice. This systemic

SEL framework is based largely on 25 years of action

research carried out by the Collaborative for Academic,

Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) with partnering

schools, districts, and states (CASEL, 2020a, 2020b, 2020c,

2020d). CASEL was founded in 1994 with the mission of

helping to make evidence-based SEL an essential part of

preschool to high school education through advancing rig-

orous science, beneficial practice, and sound policy (Elias et

al., 1997). Next, we discuss what systemic is and why it is

important. Then, we describe theories of action needed to

implement EBPs effectively, and continuously improve

them, at different levels of systemic organization. We dis-

cuss the roles of schools, families, and community along

with the key indicators needed to support those processes.

Lastly, we conclude by highlighting challenges to address

and offering recommendations for the future of SEL re-

search, practice, and policy.

Overview of the Systemic SEL Framework

Figure 1 and Table 1 depict the processes by which

systemic SEL develops at school, district, and state lev-

els. The process at each setting begins with four coordi-

nated sets of practices to establish EBPs for children and

adults: (a) Build foundational support and plan by estab-

lishing SEL teams, engaging stakeholders broadly, fos-

tering awareness, and developing a shared vision; (b)

Strengthen adult SEL competencies and capacity by cul-

tivating a community of adults who engage in their own

SEL, build trusting relationships, and collaborate to pro-

mote and consistently model SEL throughout the school;

nated approach across the school, classrooms, homes, and

communities; and (d) Practice continuous improvement

by establishing an ongoing process to collect and use

implementation and outcome data to inform decisions

and drive improvements. The center of Figure 1 shows

the settings involved in directly promoting schoolwide

SEL through partnerships that coordinate efforts among

school, family, and community settings. The right-hand

column shows the short- and long-term student outcomes

expected from systemic evidence-based SEL programs.

Box 1 contains a set of principles that provides guidance

for the successful implementation and improvement of sys-

temic SEL programs and practices. These principles have

been part of the original vision for SEL (e.g., Elias et al.,

Figure 1. A framework for conceptualizing systemic social and emotional learning (SEL) in educational

settings. See the online article for the color version of this figure.

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

tize, and communicate SECs (Jones, Bailey, Brush, & Nel-

son, 2019). They are also based on diverse theoretical

perspectives including theories of systems, social– cognitive

learning, information processing, child development, or be-

havior change (Brackett, Elbertson, & Rivers, 2015). These

perspectives inform what is needed promote outcomes for

different students, which settings to target, and how to

implement, assess, continuously improve, and sustain SEL

approaches. The framework in Figure 1 reflects years of

field testing as part of CASEL’s Collaborating District and

States Initiatives (CASEL, 2017a, 2017b).

Social and Emotional Competence

SEC is the capacity to coordinate cognition, affect, and

behavior that allows individuals to thrive in diverse cultures

and contexts and achieve specific tasks and positive develop-

mental outcomes (see center of Figure 1). CASEL identified

Table 1

Key Areas in Theories of Action to Promote Systemic SEL at the School, District, and State Levels

THEORY OF ACTION

Key area School District State

Build

foundational

support and plan

Establish an SEL team with broad

memberships, foster awareness,

and develop a shared vision;

assess needs and resources to

develop a SEL implementation

plan with clear goals, action

steps, and assigned ownership.

Develop a districtwide shared

plan; engage stakeholders

broadly; create a

communication plan; ensure

alignment of SEL, academics,

and equity in goals and

strategies; align financial and

human resources for

implementation.

Develop a statewide shared vision

that engages diverse

communities; create a policy

agenda and communications to

create conditions for districts

and schools to advance systemic

SEL; create organizational

structures, including federal and

state policy and funding and

human resources to support SEL.

Strengthen adult SEL

competencies

and capacity

Cultivate a community of adults

who engage in their own social

and emotional learning,

collaborate on strategies for

promoting SEL, and model

SEL throughout the school.

Strengthen central office expertise;

provide professional learning

opportunities; strengthen adult

SEL and cultural competence;

promote staff trust, community,

and efficacy.

Build adult expertise at the state

level; provide professional

development; promote adult SEL and

cultural competence; and provide

guidance to create positive school

cultures and climates that are

equitable, and culturally affirming.

Promote SEL for

students

Develop a coordinated approach

for enhancing students’ social

and emotional learning across

the school, classrooms, homes,

and communities.

Develop SEL standards; adopt

evidence-based SEL programs

and practices; foster family and

community partnerships;

integrate SEL across every

interaction and setting.

Provide frameworks

competencies/standards; provide

guidance to integrate and align

SEL with academics and other

priorities; support high-quality

implementation of evidence-based

SEL policies, programs, and

practices; and foster family and

community partnerships.

Practice continuous

improvement

Establish a structured, ongoing

process to collect and use

outcome and implementation

data to inform school-level

decisions and drive

improvements to

implementation.

Plan for improvement; document

implementation and outcomes;

report data and reflect on

results; share conclusions with

stakeholders and take data-

informed action.

Provide implementation guidance

on assessment tools to monitor and

enhance implementation and

student progress; reflect on state-

level outcome and process data

with stakeholders to ensure

effective implementation.

Note. SEL ⫽ social and emotional learning.

1997; Greenberg et al., 2003), its ongoing evolution (e.g.,

Devaney, O’Brien, Resnik, Keister, & Weissberg, 2006;

Weissberg, 2000), and remain central to current thought,

science, and practice in SEL (e.g., CASEL, 2020a, 2020b,

2020d; Durlak et al., 2015; National Commission on Social,

Emotional, & Academic Development, 2018). These prin-

ciples contrast with a narrow view of SEL focused only on

classroom programs and explicit social and emotional skills

instruction.

What Is Systemic SEL and Why Is It Important?

Figure 1 is a framework for conceptualizing a systemic

approach to SEL. To elucidate the framework, Box 2 pro-

vides a practical example of how states, districts, and

schools can work together to coordinate SEL. Although

numerous frameworks exist that promote SECs (Berg et al.,

2017), they offer different ways to organize, name, priori-

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

five core SEC clusters: self-awareness, self-management, so-

cial awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision

making (CASEL, 2013, 2015; Weissberg et al., 2015). The

CASEL 5 emphasize intrapersonal skills and attitudes (i.e.,

self-awareness and self-management), interpersonal skills and

attitudes (i.e., social awareness and relationship skills), and

making ethical and principled choices in personal and social

situations (i.e., responsible decision making). The goal was to

establish a broadly applicable framework that could incorpo-

rate teachable assets that diverse situations and locations, age

ranges, or developmental contexts might prioritize—for exam-

ple, knowing your feelings and values, growth mindsets, cul-

tural identity, sense of purpose, perseverance, goal setting, and

agency might be emphasized as part of self-awareness

and self-management; empathy, compassion, collaboration,

and leadership could be highlighted as part of social awareness

and relationship skills; and problem solving, reflecting on

Box 1: Principles for Systemic Social and Emotional

Learning

• SEL should prepare all young people for long-term success

in college, careers, and life by proactively focusing on the

promotion of positive functioning and prevention of prob-

lems through the development of five core SEL competen-

cies.

• SEL should prepare youth to be active citizens in multicul-

tural societies through caring and genuine relationships

among adults and children that demonstrate concern for

others and emphasize how to apply SEL skills in multicul-

tural societies.

• SEL should follow a developmental, sequential approach

from preschool through high school with the goal of pre-

paring youth to build SECs throughout their lives.

• SEL programming should consider individual differences

and needs and intentionally design equitable, culturally re-

sponsive opportunities for learning.

• SEL instruction should include well-designed, universal,

evidence-based programming provided to all students by

well-supported teachers.

• SEL should occur as a part of an integrated, schoolwide

effort to develop safe, supportive, and engaging learning

environments.

• Family members should collaborate in the planning and

implementation of SEL.

• Community members and organizations should collaborate

in the planning and implementation of SEL.

• The SEL system should be regularly assessed at state,

district, and school levels and continuously improved

through a process of data-driven reflection and action.

• The entire SEL system should be integrated and aligned

with states, districts, and schools working together to ensure

evidence-based policies and practices are encouraged and

supported equitably across the system.

Box 2: Wisconsin’s Approach to Systemic SEL

To build foundational support in Wisconsin, a broad team of

stakeholders created a shared vision of SEL (Wisconsin Depart-

ment of Public Instruction [WDPI], 2020). Wisconsin developed a

comprehensive, developmental SEL framework aligned with ac-

ademics and other priorities including college and career readi-

ness, mental health, school climate, and PBIS. Wisconsin has an

ongoing partnership with CASEL to understand how systemic

SEL influences professional learning, curriculum and instruction,

implementation, and continuous improvement.

To strengthen adult SEL, Wisconsin offers professional learn-

ing through statewide meetings, trainings, and webinars on the

CASEL School Guide to foster systemic SEL at the school level.

An Equity Council convened by the state superintendent devel-

oped Wisconsin’s ESSA plan involving legislators, advocacy

groups, parent and family groups, and higher education represen-

tatives. The Council communicates SEL and equity through the

Advancing Equity through Social and Emotional Learning docu-

ment. Also, the WDPI, RTI Center, and Disproportionality Tech-

nical Assistance Network created the Model to Inform Culturally

Responsible Practice to achieve equity within multilevel systems

of support. WDPI is aligning SEL with this document so districts

and schools understand and communicate the benefits of SEL for

all students, and implement SEL and engage families and com-

munities in culturally relevant ways. Wisconsin’s SEL website

illustrates how districts leverage state resources to implement

systemic SEL locally.

To promote SEL for students, Wisconsin articulated PreK-

Adult learning competencies aligned to the CASEL 5 compe-

tencies. Wisconsin developed implementation resources and

tools for districts and schools including aligning evidence-

based SEL programs with the Wisconsin SEL framework. To

support continuous improvement, Wisconsin shares guidance

and tools for districts and schools to align assessment with the

Wisconsin’s SEL competencies, including surveys of student

and adult skills, teaching practices, and state-specific compe-

tency scales by grade band.

For example, bringing Wisconsin SEL competencies to the

level of a sixth-grade classroom, teachers will know that, in

terms of decision making, students are expected to generate a

variety of solutions and outcomes to a problem with consider-

ation of well-being for oneself and others. To accomplish this,

teachers would incorporate instructional practices to build de-

cision making skills that are part of an evidence-based SEL

program the state shares on its web page. Further, schools and

districts are encouraged to align discipline policies with SEL

implementation such as student engagement in creating expec-

tations for appropriate behavior and consequences, restorative

practices to reduce punitive and exclusionary practices, and

developing a plan to reinforce positive emotional regulation

strategies at home, at school, and in the community. Teachers

can then use data from the Wisconsin Development Tracker,

where teachers can rate students’ competence in decision mak-

ing, and also take an assessment that allows them to reflect on

practices they can use to develop those skills.

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

one’s own biases, and character could be part of responsible

decision making. As such, the CASEL 5 is a coordinating

model that can accommodate specific malleable and measur-

able competencies in different domains (e.g., academics, civ-

ics, health, and workforce) across the life span. In fact, a

three-dimensional representation would show a third dimen-

sion of development elaborating on more specific competen-

cies that are particularly important for different developmental

periods from early childhood to adulthood.

With reference to SECs as teachable developmental as-

sets, many districts and states use frameworks based on the

CASEL 5 competencies to create preschool to Grade 12

learning standards (Dusenbury, Yoder, Dermody, & Weiss-

berg, 2020). These standards or learning competencies ar-

ticulate what students should know and be able to do with

respect to SEL across different ages and school settings. In

this regard, it is critical that standards be developed from a

developmental perspective and using an equity lens.

Adevelopmental perspective to SEL considers stability

and change in interactions between persons and settings

over time (Denham, 2018). Broad SECs can apply to dif-

ferent ages and grade levels (e.g., the CASEL 5). However,

the abilities and settings involved in integrating thinking,

feeling, and behavior within and across SECs change and

allow students to succeed at important age-differentiated

developmental tasks. For example, social awareness pro-

gresses from following social rules like turn-taking (pre-

school), to understanding appropriate emotional expression

across social settings (elementary school), to comprehend-

ing more complex social situations (middle school), to rec-

ognizing diverse social-cultural perspectives (high school).

Developmental tasks should inform the design of SEL stan-

dards, instruction, and assessment. However, SECs develop

dynamically in social contexts and local community stake-

holders should decide how best to prioritize, teach, and

assess them (Assessment Work Group, 2019).

An equity lens recognizes that SEL takes place in the

context of a socially stratified society. Educational equity

implies that every student has the educational resources he

or she needs when they need it, regardless of race, gender,

ethnicity, language, disability, family background, or family

income (Council of State Chief School Officers, 2017).

Understanding how individuals affect, and are affected by,

systematic inequality requires a critical examination of how

SECs develop according to differences in race, class, gen-

der, setting, culture, country, and social-historical context

(Comer, 2009) followed by cooperative approaches to foster

SECs in culturally responsive ways. For example, Jagers,

Rivas-Drake, and Borowski (2018) described transforma-

tive SEL as, “. . . a process whereby students and teachers

build strong, respectful relationships founded on an appre-

ciation of similarities and differences; learn to critically

examine root causes of inequity; and develop collaborative

solutions to personal, community and social problems.” (p.

3). Likewise, Gregory and Fergus’s (2017) equity-oriented

conceptualization of SECs discusses how such competen-

cies can address educational inequities involving culture,

power, and privilege. For example, self-awareness includes

understanding one’s social position in an inequitable society

and provides a foundation for more effectively addressing

challenges that arise in various contexts. This may help

teachers and other educators understand and act produc-

tively on how their cultural beliefs and biases impact con-

tent, pedagogy, and discipline practices.

Settings That Influence Social and Emotional

Learning

The rings in the center of Figure 1 represent key settings

involved in nurturing and sustaining SECs including class-

rooms, schools, homes, and the community. Relationship-

centered learning environments support SEL and several

interpersonal processes and practices have been identified to

effectively promote SECs across these settings (e.g., CA-

SEL, 2020b; Durlak et al., 2010): (a) trusting relationships

among students, staff, parents, and community members;

(b) a caring, culturally responsive community where stu-

dents are known, respected, and feel safe to learn; (c) adult

encouragement, support and effective modeling of equity,

fairness, and respect for diversity of race, culture, ethnicity,

social class, religion, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and

other factors; (d) consistency in expectations and practices

to promote engaged learning and reduce conduct problems

and anxiety; (e) adults fostering student motivation by con-

necting new learning material to students’ lives, back-

ground, and what they already know; (f) opportunities for

students to engage in challenging, active learning and to

practice skills; (g) regular occasions for students to have a

voice in developing rules and norms, choices about their

classwork, and opportunities for leadership; (h) opportuni-

ties for students to express their ideas and feelings in an

atmosphere that encourages their active participation and is

respectful of their individuality; and (i) restorative, rather

than punitive/exclusionary, practices that recognize miscon-

duct reflects developmental needs that present opportunities

for learning and for skills to be developed.

Universal, Evidence-Based Programming and

Instruction

To promote SECs through systemic SEL, implementing

coordinated, universal EBPs is critical. A universal ap-

proach means that all students and adults in the setting are

engaged in a coordinated learning process. This approach

allows SEL to be integrated with other academic subjects,

reduce the likelihood for stigma because they do not single

out students, and are cost-effective from a public health

perspective (Greenberg et al., 2017). However, as opposed

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

to a “one-size fits all” perspective to SEL, a targeted uni-

versalism approach (Powell, Menendian, & Ake, 2019)

recognizes that different supports are needed for different

students to reach the same desired outcomes. The school

setting permits teachers to know their students well allow-

ing SEL instruction to be personalized and culturally re-

sponsive, and for teachers to prompt and reinforce SECs in

appropriate contexts. It is necessary for universal and tar-

geted (i.e., Tier 2 and Tier 3) approaches to be compatible

and integrated to support the unique needs of individual

students (Bear, Whitcomb, Elias, & Blank, 2015).

Evidence-based. By evidence-based, we refer to pro-

grams and practices that have been rigorously evaluated so

that one has confidence that if they are implemented well

(i.e., with fidelity that is adaptable to local contexts), then

specific, beneficial results are likely to occur. Unfortu-

nately, EBPs are not always designed as systemic interven-

tions, and this can result in piecemeal, fragmented strategies

to enhance students’ positive development across a pre-

school to high school educational system. However, imple-

mentation is likely to be more effective and sustained if

they: (a) integrate SEL across grade levels; (b) take a whole

school approach that infuses SEL into practices and poli-

cies; (c) provide ongoing training and consultation; (d)

engage families and community partners in program selec-

tion, refinement, and improvement and in reinforcing skill

development at home (Brackett, Bailey, Hoffmann, & Sim-

mons, 2019).

Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015,

the U.S. Department of Education (2016) provided guidance

to select and implement educational interventions. ESSA’s

guidance for program selection is embedded in a model of

continuous improvement that includes a tiered system of

criteria for choosing EBPs at four evidence levels. SEL

programs and practices with strong or moderate evidence

(Levels 1 and 2) should be used because they have been

proven effective and are more likely to improve student

outcomes. These criteria have informed the consumer-

report ratings for CASEL’s Program Guides for preschool

to high school students (CASEL, 2013, 2015). These

Guides are freely available (https://casel.org/guide/).

Programming and instruction. By programming we

refer to a developmentally based, comprehensive curricu-

lum focused on creating relationally healthy places for

children and adults. Such a curriculum entails a clear de-

velopmental sequencing of knowledge, attitudes, and skills

organized into units and learning experiences that identify

clear roles, responsibilities, training, and technical assis-

tance for adults involved in instruction. EBPs can be taught

using at least one of the following SEL-enhancement prac-

tices: (a) free-standing lessons designed to enhance stu-

dents’ social and emotional competence explicitly; (b) in-

structional strategies such as cooperative learning and

project-based learning that promote SEL; (c) integration of

SEL into academic areas such as language arts, math, social

studies, or health; and (d) a supportive learning environment

that is culturally responsive and focused on community

building.

What is important for any of the above approaches is that

the SEL instruction is explicit and intentional (e.g., Bandura

& Walters, 1977). Explicit requires a clear understanding of

the competencies, and the instructional methods needed to

improve those skills directly tied to the competencies. How-

ever, it is important to recognize that all children bring their

own levels of SECs to the classroom and are not passive

products of the instruction. Instead, they actively contribute

to the dynamic learning processes. In addition, the best

EBPs establish contexts that allow students to develop SEL

skills as a learning team, build existing relationships with

peers and adults, and practice lessons together in personally

meaningful ways (CASEL, 2013, 2015).

Although the lessons from EBPs can be free standing,

they can also be integrated into instruction embedded in

traditional academic subjects. This may be especially im-

portant in middle and high schools where curricular time is

less flexible than in elementary school. There is likely to be

more generalization and maintenance of SEL skills when

they are also taught along with, or embedded into, other

academic subjects. Therefore, SEL should be intentionally

built into the curriculum, daily work, and everyday interac-

tions of the school.

Kernels of evidence-based practice. Most SEL curri-

cula began as SEL “kernels” of practice that were enlarged

into curricular units as a result of practical experience and

teacher feedback Although research on the effectiveness of

these kernels is needed, one possibility is to utilize

evidence-based elements as kernels of practice (Jones, Bai-

ley, Brush, & Kahn, 2017). Kernels can be taught to all staff

to supplement, but not to supplant, universal, schoolwide

SEL programs. SEL kernels can be done “on the fly” in

hallways, playgrounds, cafeterias, and so forth to reinforce

skills students are learning in the classroom (cf., Jones et al.,

2017; Jones & Bouffard, 2012). Kernels should model and

communicate ways of being that reflect core SECs such as

deep listening, respect, acceptance, use of problem-solving

skills, and caring that can be applied consistently across

schools, families, and community settings.

Theories of Action for Systemic SEL

Figure 1 and Table 1 show four key areas that schools,

districts, and states can engage in to support systemic SEL.

Collectively, these four areas represent a systemic “theory

of action” to guide SEL implementation and sustainability.

These four areas are similar across levels and share common

names: (a) Build foundational support and plan, (b)

Strengthen adult SEL competencies and capacity, (c) Pro-

mote SEL for students, and (d) Practice continuous im-

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

provement. However, the specific activities to promote SEL

will be different in a school, district office, and state board

of education (see Table 1). To learn how to carry out each

of the activities in Table 1, we direct the reader to the

CASEL Guide to Schoolwide SEL, District Resource Center,

and Collaborative States Initiative Resources (CASEL,

2020a, 2020b, 2020d).

From a systemic perspective, it is important to understand

that actions taken at one level affect other levels (e.g.,

Goleman & Senge, 2014). For example, building founda-

tional support for SEL at the district level can be facilitated

and sustained by the state-level provision of guidance and

resources that highlights the importance of SEL to student

success. At the same time, district-level support can provide

the structure and resources needed for schoolwide SEL to be

implemented well, continuously improved, and sustained

over time. Thus, SEL programming is most likely to be

successful when school, district, and state-level priorities

are aligned.

Proximal and Distal Settings

A systemic approach to SEL involves multiple learning

environments (Berger et al., 2019; Darling-Hammond et al.,

2019). The environments can be organized into two main

levels: proximal and distal settings. Proximal settings are

those that children interact with directly through face-to-

face interchanges. Children can directly influence, and be

directly influenced by, what happens in proximal settings.

Moreover, these proximal settings can influence one an-

other, for example, when a classroom teacher provides

parents with SEL activities that can be done at home to

reinforce learning at school. Likewise, parents should be

part of the school SEL team that helps to select and imple-

ment EBPs.

In contrast, distal settings extend beyond a child’s direct

involvement (e.g., the school district, state-level policies,

and national policies), but may substantially influence chil-

dren’s outcomes by impacting the proximal settings (e.g., a

school board may adopt SEL standards that affect classroom

instruction and climate). In addition, because of the dy-

namic nature of these settings, a long-term view of SEL is

required to provide support that is developmentally appro-

priate and sensitive to emerging needs and incorporates

cultural and community standards.

Proximal Settings Involved in Systemic SEL

A major aim of SEL is to nurture equitable and welcom-

ing learning environments where children feel safe to ac-

tively participate in developmentally appropriate education

that is engaging and challenges them to work collabora-

tively to solve complex problems. When we think of prox-

imal learning environments, an image of students in a

school classroom often comes to mind. However, the school

classroom is only one of many proximal settings where

children learn. During the school day, SEL occurs across a

system of interconnected settings (e.g., the classroom,

school bus, hallways, lunchroom, and playground). Beyond

formal schooling, learning also begins and is always taking

place in the home through relationships with caregivers and

other family members. Moreover, multiple community set-

tings including organized out-of-school activities (e.g., af-

terschool and summer programs and community-based or-

ganizations) are replete with opportunities for youth to learn

and practice SECs. Therefore, SEL can and does take place

across multiple contexts, each day, and all year around.

Box 3 describes 10 key indicators of systemic schoolwide

SEL. These are evidence-based strategies developed

through CASEL’s Collaborating District Initiative (CDI;

CASEL, 2020a). The CDI is a partnership with 20 mostly

large, urban school districts that are systemically imple-

menting evidence-based SEL through school, family, and

community partnerships. We direct the reader to Durlak et

al. (2015) for empirical bases supporting the indicators.

Below we discuss these indicators in the context of promot-

ing SEL across different proximal settings.

The school. To be fully effective, SEL programming

should receive schoolwide support. Because the school set-

ting comprises many interrelated contexts— classrooms,

hallways, cafeteria, playground, the school bus—fostering a

healthy school climate, and culture requires active engage-

ment from all staff and students (Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, &

Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2013). Indeed, there is likely to be

more generalization and maintenance of SEL skills when

school staff provide well-coordinated programming. Al-

though classroom teachers and the principal are obvious

sources of support, teachers’ aides, specialists, counselors,

psychologists, social workers, cafeteria staff, custodians,

security guards, secretaries, and other staff can be important

models and supporters of SEL development.

To achieve schoolwide buy-in, a comprehensive ap-

proach to professional development is needed to establish

consistent practices, messages, and a common language

shared by all members of the school community (Meyers,

Domitrovich, Dissi, Trejo, & Greenberg, 2019). This

requires the integration of SEL across various schoolwide

programs, policies, and routines within and across grade

levels (Elias et al., 2015). To continuously improve

schoolwide SEL programming, staff need regular oppor-

tunities to reflect on student data (e.g., SECs, behavioral,

academic, engagement, and climate) and implementation

data for continuous improvement (see Table 1; e.g., Bryk,

Gomez, Grunow, & LeMahieu, 2015). The CASEL Guide

to Schoolwide Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL,

2020b) provides detailed instruction for the process of

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

developing, implementing, and improving schoolwide

SEL programming.

School leadership is vital. The special importance of

school leadership (i.e., administrators) to the success of

schoolwide SEL deserves comment (Allensworth & Hart,

2018; Mahfouz, Greenberg, & Rodriguez, 2019). Research

on successful implementation of SEL programming con-

cludes that school leadership may be the single most im-

portant factor for success (CASEL, 2020b; Devaney et al.,

2006). Leadership influences the quality of SEL implemen-

tation, the durability or sustainability of programming, and

the magnitude of improvement seen in students’ SECs and

related short- and long-term outcomes.

Effective leaders communicate a shared vision of, and

responsibility for, SEL across the school community cou-

pled with high expectations and allocation of resources.

They model the use of SEL language and endorse the use of

SEL practices throughout the building, creating a positive

school climate (Patti, Senge, Madrazo, & Stern, 2015).

Finally, they understand the benefits of parent involvement

(e.g., Epstein, 2018; Sheridan, Smith, Moorman Kim, Be-

retvas, & Park, 2019), and serve as liaisons with families to

help foster supportive relationships, common goals, and a

sense of collaboration. They should also build in expecta-

tions and training for staff to authentically engage parents as

partners (see CASEL [2020b] for guidance on developing

schoolwide SEL leadership).

The classroom. The classroom is a critical setting and

SEL is carried out most effectively in a nurturing and safe

environment characterized by positive, caring relationships

between students and teachers and among classmates. The

ability to create a such a caring environment depends on

adults having strong SEL skills and cultural competence

(e.g., Delpit, 2006; Jennings, Minnici, & Yoder, 2019). To

do so, teachers must be fully committed to SEL to commu-

nicate and model the behaviors such as managing stress and

frustration, showing empathy, cooperating, and handling

conflicts. Indeed, students are more likely to respond em-

pathetically and resolve conflicts peacefully with peers

when they see teachers modeling these behaviors. More-

over, teachers with strong SEL skills are better able to

manage their own job demands, and foster a healthy learn-

ing environment (e.g., Greenberg et al., 2016). Therefore, as

part of the foundation of a SEL system, fostering SECs in

classroom teachers is essential (CASEL, 2017b; Schonert-

Reichl, 2017). To do so, regular opportunities for staff to

develop these skills must be provided through professional

development (Greenberg & Weissberg, 2018) to support

teacher social and emotional development (Jennings et al.,

2019).

Furthermore, the field of learning sciences has shown that

deeper student learning depends on teachers having a deep

knowledge of their students (Darling-Hammond et al.,

2019). Teachers must know their students well to provide

personalized instruction that matches individual experi-

ences, interests, and needs. Given the diversity of learners in

today’s classrooms, culturally responsive instruction is es-

sential for adults to understand and appreciate the unique

strengths and needs of each student. Such instruction af-

firms students’ cultural knowledge and personal experi-

ences as integral assets to the learning process. In this way,

effective SEL emphasizes the creation of a caring, culturally

responsive learning community where students are known,

respected, appreciated, and feel safe to learn. To the degree

these conditions prevail systemically, the foundation for

equitable learning opportunities is strengthened (Gregory &

Fergus, 2017; Jagers, Rivas-Drake, & Williams, 2019).

Finally, it is critical that students have a voice and be

viewed as partners in the educational process, including

the development and improvement of SEL programming.

Box 3: Ten Key Indicators of Schoolwide Systemic

Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL, 2020b)

•Explicit SEL instruction. Students have consistent oppor-

tunities to cultivate, practice, and reflect on SECs that are

developmentally appropriate and culturally responsive.

•SEL integrated with academic instruction. SEL objec-

tives are integrated into the instructional content and teach-

ing strategies for academics and other school activities.

•Youth voice and engagement. Staff elevate a broad range

of student perspectives and experiences by engaging stu-

dents as leaders, problem solvers, and decision-makers.

•Supportive school and classroom climates. Schoolwide

and classroom environments are supportive, culturally re-

sponsive, and focus on building relationships and commu-

nity.

•Focus on adult SEL. Staff have regular opportunities to

cultivate their own SECs, build trusting relationships, and

maintain a strong community.

•Supportive discipline. Discipline policies and practices are

instructive, restorative, developmentally appropriate, and

equitably enforced.

•A continuum of integrated supports. SEL is seamlessly

integrated into a continuum of academic and behavioral

supports, which ensure that all student needs are met.

•Authentic family partnerships. Families and school staff

have regular and meaningful opportunities to build relation-

ships and collaborate to support students’ social, emotional,

and academic development.

•Aligned community partnerships. School staff and com-

munity partners align common language, strategies, and

communication around all SEL-related efforts and initia-

tives.

•Systems for continuous improvement. Implementation

and outcome data are collected and used to continuously

improve all SEL-related systems, practices, and policies

with a focus on equity.

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

Student perspectives are important on aspects ranging

from assessing school culture and climate, to the selec-

tion of EBPs, and the collection and use of SEL data

(DePaoli et al., 2018). Thus, youth should be viewed as

collaborators in the SEL process as opposed to just the

beneficiaries of it.

The family. The family is critical to the success of SEL

because parents are their children’s first teachers and SEL

begins at home. Accordingly, parents and families are vi-

tally important in helping their children develop SECs

(Miller, 2020). Parents and family members can both model

social and emotional skills and intentionally teach them

through parenting practices (Elias, Tobias, & Friedlander,

1999).

As school and family are two dominant contexts in the

lives of children, strong school-family partnerships are crit-

ical (Epstein, 2018; Patrikakou, Weissberg, Redding, &

Walberg, 2005). In such partnerships, teacher-parent com-

munication is meaningful and inclusive, and characterized

by genuine collaboration (Garbacz, Swanger-Gagné, &

Sheridan, 2015). SEL involves a coordinated, aligned ap-

proach where parents and school staff share a vision, goals,

and responsibility for the work. This enables children to

experience coherence in the messages received across set-

tings and to practice SEL skills that are consistently rein-

forced in multiple contexts (Albright & Weissberg, 2010).

Indeed, school-family partnerships that regularly engage

parents in their children’s schooling are linked to positive

outcomes such as improved academic performance, mental

health, increased student engagement, and reduced school

dropout (e.g., Christenson & Reschly, 2010; Garbacz et al.,

2015; Sheridan et al., 2019). To engage parents, it is essen-

tial that the school environment is welcoming to families

during and after school. Parents need meaningful opportu-

nities to have a voice in the planning, decision-making, and

implementation of SEL. This can be fostered by having

regular opportunities for families to learn about SEL and

clearly defined roles for parents to be active collaborators

and participants in SEL activities. To foster this commit-

ment may require schools to reach out to parents in com-

munity settings and remove barriers that make it difficult for

some parents to interface with school staff (e.g., language,

cultural divides, child care, etc.). On the other hand, SEL

programming taught in the school can be intentional about

having students practice skills at home with family mem-

bers.

The local community. The local community refers to

both individuals and organizations surrounding the school

that have established relationships with young people and

support the SECs of young people. It is imperative that

young people practice and apply SEL skills in everyday

situations and be acknowledged for using them across a

variety of settings. Thus, what happens in the school and

family should be synergistically connected with learning

opportunities in the local community. A considerable liter-

ature shows that organized out-of-school and community-

based settings can promote SEL (Devaney & Moroney,

2018; Durlak et al., 2010; Smith et al., 2016) and benefit

young people (Mahoney, Vandell, Simpkins, & Zarrett,

2009).

SEL programming should be coordinated and aligned

between the school day and in out-of-school time (e.g.,

common language of SEL, equitable discipline practices,

etc.). As an example, the Wallace Foundation’s Partnership

for Social and Emotional Learning Initiative (PSELI) in-

volves six communities engaged in systemic SEL to build

capacity and align programs, practices, policies, and con-

tinuous improvement approaches in school and out of

school (Wallace Foundation, 2019).

Service-learning, youth participatory action research, and

project-based learning provide additional examples of

community-linked programming whereby learning opportu-

nities allow young people to work directly with community

members (Celio, Durlak, & Dymnicki, 2011; Elias et al.,

2015; Jagers et al., 2019). These opportunities allow stu-

dents to use and generalize their SEL skills in “real world”

settings that are both personally relevant and can open

opportunities for their future. Examples include serving the

homeless, assisting in senior citizen programs, working with

children who have special needs, mentoring, tutoring, and

organizing community clean ups. These settings allow stu-

dents to practice SEL skills with peers, other than their

classmates, who may be more diverse in terms of experience

and background.

Distal Settings Involved in Systemic SEL

The school district. The school district includes the

broader system of schools and relationships, the district

school board, central office staff, and district level policies

and procedures (Mart, Weissberg, & Kendziora, 2015). A

key insight from CASEL’s (2017b) Collaborating District

Initiative is that SEL ideally should be integrated into every

aspect of the district’s work, from the strategic plan and

budgets to human resources, professional development, and

operations. To be successful, district administrators should

fully support the institutionalization of SEL programming

initiatives (CASEL, 2017b). The four broad areas of district

support for SEL are identified on the left side Figure 1 and

described in Table 1.

The importance of district level support is demonstrated

through findings from the CDI that show that SEL can be

implemented successfully at the district level (American

Institutes for Research, 2015). Moreover, outcomes at the

district level (e.g., positive systemwide climate, commit-

ment to SEL, and clarity of roles and responsibilities for

SEL) and at the student level (e.g., increased attendance,

academic performance, and fewer disciplinary referrals)

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

have been observed across CDI districts. To provide a

comprehensive framework for systemic, districtwide SEL

implementation, CASEL developed the District Resource

Center that includes learnings, resources, tools, and artifacts

from the collaborating districts (CASEL, 2020a).

The state. The involvement of state-level departments,

boards, governors, legislators, and other organizations is

important. State-level policies, guidelines, and practices

provide the conditions in which districts and schools can

implement systemic SEL and help identify SEL as a state-

wide priority. CASEL initiated the Collaborating States

Initiative (CSI) in 2016 (https://casel.org/collaborative-state-

initiative/) to “help state educational agencies create state-

wide conditions that will encourage and equip educators at

the district level to promote integrated, equity-focused, ac-

ademic, social, and emotional learning” (Collaborating

States Initiative, 2018).

CSI participation has grown steadily to well over 30 states

in 2020 (Dusenbury et al., 2020; Yoder, Dusenbury,

Martinez-Black, & Weissberg, 2020). These states share

their visions for state-level SEL, create funding structures

and communication strategies, develop standards and guid-

ance, identify strategies for implementation in the districts

and schools, and align programming with state and federal

requirements. Currently, 18 states have established SEL

standards or competencies, 29 states offer SEL websites,

and 25 states have state-specific guidance designed to sup-

port SEL implementation (Yoder et al., 2020).

The nation. Federal and state policy provides opportu-

nities for SEL at the national level (National Commission

on Social, Emotional, & Academic Development, 2018;

Weissberg & Cascarino, 2013). As ESSA requires state

accountability systems to include indicators for “school

quality and student success” to accompany academic out-

comes, states can now broaden their definition of success to

include SECs (Melnick, Cook-Harvey, & Darling-

Hammond, 2017). Moreover, ESSA provides ways to le-

verage federal funding for evidence-based SEL program-

ming, including Title IV (Grant et al., 2017). In addition,

ESSA can support equity by allowing states flexibility to

advance their equity mission (The Aspen Education & So-

ciety Program and the Council of Chief State School Offi-

cers, 2016). Finally, the executive and legislative branches

are supporting SEL. Congress approved and the president

signed a bill with $123 million in landmark federal funding

for SEL, and the U.S. Department of Education launched

the Center to Improve SEL and School Safety (Yoder et al.,

2020).

The world. A global perspective to SEL recognizes that

through international collaboration we can develop educa-

tional systems and strategies that will improve the lives and

life opportunities of children and adolescents around the

world (e.g., Cefai, Bartolo, Cavioni, & Downes, 2018;

OECD, 2018; Torrente, Alimchandani, & Aber, 2015). In

this effort, the development and assessment of SECs for

children and adults in low- and middle-income countries is

of special importance (e.g., Smart et al., 2019; The World

Bank, 2020). Compared with the dawn of SEL nearly three

decades ago, technological advances now make it possible

for SEL knowledge and resources to be exchanged rapidly

on a broad scale. Thus, regional, national, and international

connections among schools and districts, universities, and

social services are now common supports for SEL. For

example, people from over 180 countries visited CASEL’s

web page at www.casel.org during the last year to attain and

share knowledge on SEL.

Future Policy, Practice, and Research Directions

for Systemic SEL

In this article we have described a systemic approach to

SEL that involves collaboration and synergy across class-

rooms, schools, families, and communities. This approach is

supported by research and practice carried out for over two

decades. Considerable progress has been made in providing

all students with regular opportunities to engage in well-

designed SEL enriched learning environments. At the same

time, much work remains to be done. Many children do not

yet have access to high-quality, supportive learning envi-

ronments rich with consistent SEL opportunities and, thus,

may not reach their fullest potential as healthy and produc-

tive adults. What does the field of SEL need to achieve over

the next decade to change this circumstance?

Future Directions for Policy and Practice

A key issue involves how to implement systemic SEL

with quality as programming expands broadly across

schools, districts, states, and nations. A fully systemic ap-

proach calls for national and international agendas to further

SEL at all levels of research, practice, and policy (National

Commission on Social, Emotional, & Academic Develop-

ment, 2018; OECD, 2018). This will require new national

policies that place SEL alongside academic performance at

the core of education so that it is coordinated and integrated

with existing educational priorities and allotted appropriate

resources for nationwide development and sustainability.

Furthermore, ongoing efforts are needed to support and

integrate statewide and districtwide SEL. This includes

adopting statewide, developmentally appropriate, preschool

through high school (or adult) SEL competencies in all 50

states along with well-developed assessment tools to eval-

uate and enhance progress. Ideally, these assessments will

be tied to SEL implementation plus student and adult com-

petencies, behavior, and academic performance for pur-

poses of informing instructional practice and not for high

stakes accountability (Assessment Work Group, 2019).

Training and capacity building for adult SEL at all levels

of education is required. This should include SEL courses

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

and practicum for all future educators at colleges of educa-

tion, and ongoing, high-quality professional development

for existing educators that is grounded in the most recent

advances from the science and practice of systemic SEL

(Schonert-Reichl, 2017). Finally, it is important to recog-

nize that designing, implementing, evaluating, and contin-

uously improving systemic SEL policies and practices re-

quires a multiyear commitment and ongoing evaluation.

Many schools, districts, and states have begun their SEL

journeys to provide quality education for all students. On-

going evaluation with feedback to multiple stakeholders

about the accomplishments, challenges, and limitations of

implementation efforts are critical to sustain and improve

systemic SEL efforts over time.

Future Directions for Research

The past 25 years have seen an explosion of research in

the development, implementation, and evaluation of SEL

programs and policies. Research has shown that effectively

implemented, evidence-based SEL programs lead to mea-

surable and potentially long-lasting improvements in vari-

ous domains of a child’s life. We advocate for placing SEL

within a larger public health framework of systems trans-

formation for education. This will require multimethod re-

search that uses randomized trials, quasi-experimental de-

signs, the use of both newly created and archival data, and

rich data collection from qualitative approaches. Studies are

needed in several domains. More important, research is

needed at the level of schools and school districts to exam-

ine the effect of comprehensive, transformational ap-

proaches that combine evidence-based programs, policies,

and practices, that partner with families, and are coordinated

with community programs. To adequately address critical

concerns about educational equity, such efforts need to be

adequately resourced and asset-focused, require clear logic

models that specify what locally meaningful academic, so-

cial, and emotional outcomes will be impacted with a focus

on discerning programs, approaches, and practices that cre-

ate equitable learning environments supporting the specific

populations of children and youth in accessing positive

social and academic opportunities and reaching their fullest

potential. Second, studies should examine how to most

effectively fully integrate universal SEL models with ser-

vices at other tiers (indicated and treatment levels for chil-

dren who require more services) so that schools have a

common framework to promote wellbeing and school suc-

cess and to prevent mental health disorders. Third, studies

are needed that focus at the preservice and in-service levels

on the effects of SEL programs and organization change

interventions for educators (for teachers, student support

personnel, and principals/administrators) that support the

culture and climate needed for healthy, caring schools.

Finally, it is critical to examine ways that federal and state

policies can enhance or reduce the quality of SEL imple-

mentation at local levels along with the impact that pro-

gramming has on student social, emotional, behavioral, and

academic growth. To advance the science and practice of

SEL systems transformation, researchers, educators, and

policymakers will need to work together to design and test

comprehensive SEL programs that can substantially im-

prove our communities’ public health. We hope that the

systemic framework and related resources described in this

article provides guidance and support as schools, families,

and communities work together to enhance the life skills

and opportunities for all children and youth.

References

Albright, M. I., & Weissberg, R. P. (2010). School-family partnerships to

promote social and emotional learning. In S. L. Christenson & A. L.

Reschly (Eds.), The handbook of school-family partnerships for promot-

ing student competence (pp. 246 –265). New York, NY: Routledge/

Taylor and Francis Group.

Allensworth, E. M., & Hart, H. (2018). How do principals influence

student achievement? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium

on School Research.

American Institutes for Research. (2015). CASEL/NoVo Collaborating

Districts Initiative: 2014 cross-district outcome evaluation report.

Washington, DC: Author.

Assessment Work Group. (2019). Student social and emotional compe-

tence: The current state of the field and a vision for its future. Chicago,

IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.

Atwell, M. N., & Bridgeland, J. M. (2019). Ready to lead: A 2019 update

of principals’ perspectives on how social and emotional learning can

prepare children and transform schools. Washington, DC: Civic with

Hart Research Associates.

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bear, G. G., Whitcomb, S. A., Elias, M. J., & Blank, J. C. (2015). SEL and

schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports. In J. A.

Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.),

Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp.

453– 467). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Berg, J., Osher, D., Same, M. R., Nolan, E., Benson, E., & Jacobs, N.

(2017). Identifying, defining, and measuring social and emotional com-

petencies: Final report. Washington: DC: American Institutes for Re-

search.

Berger, R., Berman, S., Garcia, J., & Deasy, J. (2019). National Commis-

sion on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development: A practice

agenda in support of how learning happens. Washington, DC: The

Aspen Institute.

Brackett, M. A., Bailey, C. S., Hoffmann, J. D., & Simmons, D. N. (2019).

RULER: A theory-driven, systemic approach to social, emotional, and

academic learning. Educational Psychologist, 54, 144 –161. http://dx.doi

.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1614447

Brackett, M. A., Elbertson, N. A., & Rivers, S. E. (2015). Applying theory

to the development of approaches to SEL. In J. A. Durlak, C. E.

Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of

social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 20 –32). New

York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. (2015). Learning to

improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cam-

bridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

CASEL. (2013). Effective social and emotional learning programs: Pre-

school and elementary school education. Chicago, IL: Author.

authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article is available,

upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/amp0000701

CASEL. (2015). Effective social and emotional learning programs: Middle

and high school education. Chicago, IL: Author.

CASEL. (2017a). Collaborating states initiative. Chicago, IL: Author.

Retrieved from https://casel.org/collaborative-state-initiative/

CASEL. (2017b). Key insights from the Collaborating Districts Initiative.

Chicago, IL: Author.

CASEL. (2020a). CASEL’s district resource center. Chicago, IL: Author.

Retrieved from https://drc.casel.org/

CASEL. (2020b). The CASEL guide to schoolwide social and emotional

learning. Chicago, IL: Author. Retrieved from https://schoolguide.casel

.org/

CASEL. (2020c). Collaborating districts initiative. Chicago, IL: Author.

Retrieved from https://casel.org/partner-district/

CASEL. (2020d). Collaborating states initiative resources. Chicago, IL:

Author. Retrieved from https://casel.org/csi-resources/

Cefai, C., Bartolo, P. A., Cavioni, V., & Downes, P. (2018). Strengthening

social and emotional education as a core curricular area across the EU.

A review of the international evidence, NESET II report. Luxembourg:

Publications Office of the European Union.

Celio, C. I., Durlak, J., & Dymnicki, A. (2011). A meta-analysis of the

impact of service-learning on students. Journal of Experiential Educa-

tion, 34, 164 –181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/105382591103400205

Christenson, S. L., & Reschly, A. L. (Eds.). (2010). The handbook of

school-family partnerships for promoting student competence (pp. 246 –

265). New York, NY: Routledge.

Collaborating States Initiative. (2018). Innovation in action: How states

and school districts are collaborating to promote academic, social, and

emotional learning. Chicago, IL: CASEL.

Comer, J. P. (2009). What I learned in school: Reflections on race, child

development, and school reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. http://

dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118269404

Council of Chief State School Officers. (2017). Leading for equity: Op-

portunities for State education chiefs. Washington, DC: Author. Re-

trieved from https://ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2018-01/Leading%20

for%20Equity_011618.pdf

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher,

D. (2019). Implications for educational practice of the science of learn-

ing and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24, 97–140.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

Delpit, L. (2006). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the class-

room. New York, NY: Norton.

Denham, S. A. (2018). Keeping SEL developmental: The importance of a

developmental lens for fostering and assessing SEL competencies. Re-

trieved from https://measuringsel.casel.org/frameworks/

DePaoli, J. L., Atwell, M. N., Bridgeland, J. M., & Shriver, T. S. (2018).

Respected: Perspectives from youth on high school and social and

emotional learning. Washington DC: Civic Enterprises and Hart Re-

search Associates for CASEL. Retrieved from https://casel.org/wp-

content/uploads/2018/11/Respected.pdf

Devaney, E., & Moroney, D. A. (Eds.). (2018). Social and emotional

learning in out-of-school time: Foundations and futures. Charlotte, NC:

Information Age Publishing.

Devaney, E., O’Brien, M. U., Resnik, H., Keister, S., & Weissberg, R. P.

(2006). Sustainable schoolwide social and emotional learning: Imple-

mentation guide and toolkit. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic,

Social, and Emotional Learning.

Domitrovich, C. E., Durlak, J. A., Staley, K. C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017).

Social-emotional competence: An essential factor for promoting positive

adjustment and reducing risk in school children. Child Development, 88,

408 – 416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12739

Durlak, J. A., Domitrovich, C. E., Weissberg, R. P., & Gullotta, T. P.

(Eds.). (2015). Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research

and practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

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 interven-

tions. Child Development, 82, 405– 432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j

.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of

after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in

children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology,

45, 294 –309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9300-6

Dusenbury, L., Yoder, N., Dermody, C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2020). An

examination of K-12 SEL learning competencies/standards in 18 states.

Retrieved from https://casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CSI-

Frameworks.pdf

Elias, M. J., Leverett, L., Duffell, J. C., Humphrey, N., Stepany, C., &

Ferrito, J. (2015). Integrated SEL with related prevention and youth

development approaches. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P.

Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional

learning (pp. 33– 49). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Elias, M. J., Tobias, S. E., & Friedlander, B. S. (1999). Emotionally

intelligent parenting: How to raise a self-disciplined, responsible, so-

cially skilled child. New York, NY: Harmony.

Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., & Frey, K. S., Greenberg, M. T.

(1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for edu-

cators. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Pre-

paring educators and improving schools (2nd ed.). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Garbacz, S. A., Swanger-Gagné, M. S., & Sheridan, S. M. (2015). The role

of school-family partnerships for promoting student SEL. In J. A.

Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.),

Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp.

244 –259). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Goleman, D., & Senge, P. (2014). Triple focus: A new approach to

education. Florence, MA: More than Sound.

Grant, S., Hamilton, L. S., Wrabel, S. L., Gomez, C. J., Whitaker, A., &

Leschitz, J. T. (2017). Social and emotional learning interventions under

the Every Student Succeeds Act: Evidence Review. Santa Monica, CA:

RAND Corporation. http://dx.doi.org/10.7249/RR2133

Greenberg, M. T., & Abenavoli, R. (2017). Universal interventions: Fully

exploring their impacts and potential to produce population-level im-

pacts. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10, 40 – 67.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1246632

Greenberg, M. T., Brown, J. L., & Abenavoli, R. M. (2016). Teacher stress

and health. Effects on teachers, students, and schools. University Park:

Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, Pennsylvania State

University.

Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Weissberg, R. P., & Durlak, J. A.

(2017). Social and emotional learning as a public health approach to

education. The Future of Children, 27, 13–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/

foc.2017.0001

Greenberg, M. T., & Weissberg, R. P. (2018). Social and emotional

development matters: Taking action now for future generations. Univer-

sity Park: Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, Pennsylva-

nia State University.

Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks,

L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based preven-

tion and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and

academic learning. American Psychologist, 58, 466 – 474. http://dx.doi

.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466

Gregory, A., & Fergus, E. (2017). Social and emotional learning and equity

in school discipline. The Future of Children, 27, 117–136. http://dx.doi

.org/10.1353/foc.2017.0006

Hamilton, L. S., Doss, C. J., & Steiner, E. D. (2019). Teacher and principal

perspectives on social and emotional learning in America’s schools:

Findings from the American Educator Panels. Santa Monica, CA:

RAND Corporation.

Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Borowski, T. (2018). Equity & social and

emotional learning: A cultural analysis. Retrieved from http://

measuringsel.casel.org/frameworks/

Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Williams, B. (2019). Transformative

social and emotional learning (SEL): Toward SEL in the service of

educational equity and excellence. Educational Psychologist, 54, 162–

184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1623032

Jennings, T., Minnici, A., & Yoder, N. (2019). Creating the working

conditions to enhance teacher social and emotional well-being. In D.

Osher, M. Mayer, R. Jagers, K. Kendziora, & L. Wood (Eds.), Keeping

students safe and helping them thrive (pp. 210 –239). Santa Barbara, CA:

Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

Jones, S. M., Bailey, R., Brush, K., & Kahn, J. (2017). Kernels of practice

for SEL: Low-cost, low-burden strategies. Boston, MA: Harvard Grad-

uate School of Education.

Jones, S. M., Bailey, R., Brush, K., & Nelson, B. (2019). Introduction to

the Taxonomy Project: Tools for selecting and aligning SEL frame-

works. Retrieved from https://measuringsel.casel.org/wp-content/

uploads/2019/02/Frameworks-C.1.pdf

Jones, S. M., & Bouffard, S. M. (2012). Social and emotional learning in

schools: From programs to strategies and commentaries. Social Policy

Report, 26, 1–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2012.tb00073.x

Mahfouz, J., Greenberg, M. T., & Rodriguez, A. (2019). Principals’ social

and emotional competence: A key factor for creating caring schools.

University Park: Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Center, Pennsylvania

State University.

Mahoney, J. L., Vandell, D. L., Simpkins, S. D., & Zarrett, N. R. (2009).

Adolescent out-of-school activities. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg

(Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 228 –

267). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Mart, A. K., Weissberg, R. P., & Kendziora, K. (2015). Systemic support

for SEL in school districts. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P.

Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional

learning (pp. 482– 499). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Melnick, H., Cook-Harvey, C., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Encour-

aging social and emotional learning in the context of new accountability.

Palo Alto, CA: The Learning Policy Institute.

Meyers, D. C., Domitrovich, C. E., Dissi, R., Trejo, J., & Greenberg, M. T.

(2019). Supporting systemic social and emotional learning with a

schoolwide implementation model. Evaluation and Program Planning,

73, 53– 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.11.005

Miller, J. S. (2020). Confident parents, confident kids: Raising emotional

intelligence in ourselves and our kids—From toddlers to teenagers.

Beverly, MA: Fair Winds Press.

National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development.

(2017). The evidence base for how we learn: Supporting students’

social, emotional, and academic development. Washington, DC: The

Aspen Institute. Retrieved from https://www.aspeninstitute.org/publica

tions/evidence-base-learn/

National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development.

(2018). From a nation at risk to a nation of hope: Recommendations

from the National Commission. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.

Retrieved from http://nationathope.org/report-from-the-nation/

Oberle, E., Domitrovich, C. E., Meyers, D. C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2016).

Establishing systemic social and emotional learning approaches in

schools: A framework for schoolwide implementation. Cambridge Jour-

nal of Education, 46, 277–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305764X

.2015.1125450

OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. Paris:

OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www

.oecd.org/education/2030-project/contact/E2030_Position_Paper_(05

.04.2018).pdf

Patrikakou, E. N., Weissberg, R. P., Redding, S., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.).

(2005). School-family partnerships for children’s success. New York,

NY: Teachers College Press.

Patti, J., Senge, P., Madrazo, C., & Stern, R. S. (2015). Developing

socially, emotionally, and cognitively competent school leaders and

learning communities. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weiss-

berg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learn-

ing: Research and practice (pp. 438 – 452). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

Phi Delta Kappan. (2017). The 49th Annual PDK Poll of the Public’s

Attitudes Toward the Public Schools. Arlington, VA: PDK International.

Powell, J. A., Menendian, S., & Ake, W. (2019). Targeted universalism:

Policy & practice. Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society.

Berkeley: University of California. Retrieved from https://belonging

.berkeley.edu/targeteduniversalism

Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers.

The Future of Children, 27, 137–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/foc.2017

.0007

Sheridan, S. M., Smith, T. E., Moorman Kim, E., Beretvas, S. N., & Park,

S. (2019). A meta-analysis of family-school interventions and children’s

social-emotional functioning: Moderators and components of efficacy.

Review of Educational Research, 89, 296 –332. http://dx.doi.org/10

.3102/0034654318825437

Sklad, M., Diekstra, R., De Ritter, M., & Ben, J. (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. http://dx.doi.org/

10.1002/pits.21641

Smart, A., Sinclair, M., Benavot, A., Bernard, J., Chabbott, C., Russell,

S. G., & Williams, J. H. (2019). NISSEM Global Briefs: Educating for

the social, the emotional and the sustainable. Retrieved from https://

www.nissem.org/globalbriefs

Smith, C., McGovern, G., Peck, S. C., Larson, R., Hillaker, B., & Roy, L.

(2016). Preparing youth to thrive: Methodology and findings from the

social and emotional learning challenge. Washington, DC: Forum for

Youth Investment.

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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev

.12864

Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A

review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83,

357–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483907

The Aspen Education & Society Program and the Council of Chief State

School Officers. (2016). Advancing equity through ESSA: Strategies for

state leaders. Washington, DC: Author.

The World Bank. (2020). Teach: Helping countries track and improve

teaching quality. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/

education/brief/teach-helping-countries-track-and-improve-teaching-

quality

Torrente, C., Alimchandani, A., & Aber, J. L. (2015). International per-

spectives on SEL. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg,

& T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning:

Research and practice (pp. 566 –587). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Non-regulatory guidance: Using

evidence to strengthen education investments. Washington, DC: Au-

thor.

Wallace Foundation. (2019). Social and emotional learning. Retrieved

from https://www.wallacefoundation.org/how-we-work/our-work/pages/

social-emotional-learning.aspx

Weissberg, R. P. (2000). Improving the lives of millions of school children.

American Psychologist, 55, 1360 –1373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X

.55.11.1360

Weissberg, R. P., & Cascarino, J. (2013). Academic learning ⫹social-

emotional learning ⫽national priority. Phi Delta Kappan, 95, 8 –13.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500203

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 of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp.

3–19). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Oldfield, J., Scott, A., ten Bokkel, I., Tate,

K., & Emery, C. (2016). The impact of trial stage, developer involve-

ment and international transferability on universal social and emotional

learning programme outcomes: A meta-analysis. Cambridge Journal of

Education, 46, 347–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016

.1195791

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2020). Social and emotional

learning. Retrieved from https://dpi.wi.gov/sspw/mental-health/social-

emotional-learning

Yoder, N., Dusenbury, L., Martinez-Black, T., & Weissberg, R. P.

(2020). Redefining state efforts to support social and emotional

learning: From emerging insights into a theory of action. Chicago,

IL: CASEL.

Received January 16, 2020

Revision received June 12, 2020

Accepted June 14, 2020 䡲

A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.

Learn more

Content available from American Psychologist

This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.

EduCardia: a modern technology-powered methodology for the assessment and improvement of social and emotional competencies of students in K12 schools

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2025

The application of Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) methodologies within classrooms has been widely adopted and examined, highlighting its positive impact on the academic, emotional, and social sectors at both the individual and classroom levels. Through this wide applicability, a need is identified to focus more on the development of SEL approaches that support the integration of the various parts of a SEL methodology (e.g., planning, implementation, monitoring, and assessment). Such approaches should not underestimate the value of the SEL assessment. It is necessary to engage both the developers and practitioners of SEL methodologies and provide tools to assist teachers to better interpret the collected data and results and plan targeted SEL activities. Motivated by such needs, we detail the EduCardia SEL methodology that focuses on the provision of a set of guidelines and tools to assess and improve the social and emotional competencies of students in primary and secondary educational levels, by taking advantage of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The EduCardia SEL methodology considers the integration of the various parts of a SEL methodological approach and supports continuous assessment processes, while offering user-friendly interfaces to interpret the produced results. Evaluation results are provided based on the application of the EduCardia SEL methodology in a large set of K12 schools across Greece for a short-term period, considering three different age groups. It is shown that the targeted competencies are improved, while insights are provided by teachers for the applicability and efficiency of the proposed approach.

Identification of Strengths in Sports Talent Identification in the Iranian Education System

Article

Jan 2023

Iran, as a country with a young population and significant sporting potential, requires an efficient and scientific system for identifying and nurturing sports talents. Addressing this issue provides an opportunity to identify strengths, resolve challenges, and develop strategies that could lead to a fundamental transformation in the sports talent identification process. The purpose of this study was to identify the strengths of sports talent identification in the education system of Iran. The research was applied in purpose, and field-based in data collection, utilizing a mixed-methods approach (quantitative and qualitative). The qualitative sample consisted of experts in the field of sports talent identification within the education system, while the quantitative sample comprised over ten thousand physical education teachers across the country. The sample size for the qualitative section was 15 individuals, and in the quantitative section, 384 physical education teachers were selected using the Morgan sampling table, through a convenience sampling method. Data analysis was conducted using the Friedman ranking statistical method, employing SPSS26 software. The results showed that the strengths in the management of sports talent identification within the education system were identified as 23 factors. Among these, early identification of talents, use of various evaluation techniques, collaboration with parents, and attention to holistic development were ranked first to fourth, while continuous assessment was ranked last. The findings indicated that sports talent management within Iran's education system possesses several strengths, the identification and utilization of which could significantly improve the process of talent identification and development. Based on these findings, it is necessary for Iran’s education system to adopt a comprehensive and scientific approach to strengthen and leverage these strengths, with a focus on addressing challenges. This could be a crucial step towards the sustainable development of sports in the country.

A Study to Explore the Awareness of Teacher Educators about Social and Emotional Learning Skills

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Teacher education is designed to enhance educators' skills and abilities, helping them effectively navigate the challenges of a real classroom. Social-emotional learning (SEL) plays a crucial role in this process, as it equips teachers with essential classroom management skills, fosters student well-being, and improves academic performance. This study critically explores the integration of SEL competencies into teacher education, focusing on teacher educators' awareness and the extent to which SEL is embedded in the curriculum. The study was descriptive, and a quantitative research design was used; the research employs a self-developed questionnaire for teacher educators. Data analysis, including frequencies, percentages, and mean values, provides a detailed understanding of the results. The findings are striking: teacher educators primarily highlight self-awareness and social awareness, while other critical SEL skills, self-management, relationship-building, and responsible decision-making, are significantly underrepresented. The study calls for an urgent revision of the teacher education curriculum, recommending the balanced inclusion of all SEL competencies, the creation of targeted professional development programs for educators, and the active involvement of diverse stakeholders in the curriculum development process.

Revitalizing Elementary Education: The Impact of Characteristic Learning Development and P5 Implementation on Mitigating Learning Loss

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

This study analyzes strategies to reconstruct learning experiences in elementary schools, focusing on character development and the Pancasila Student Profile Strengthening Project (P5) to mitigate learning loss. Conducted in Bogor, Jakarta, and Banyumas, this research used a phenomenological approach to explore participants' lived experiences, aligning with the study’s focus on personal insights into learning loss impacts. Purposive sampling selected participants, including teachers, principals, and two students from each of five schools, chosen for their direct engagement in character education and P5 activities. Data were collected via interviews, observations, and documentation, with credibility validated through triangulation. Findings reveal that learning loss impacts are significant and multifaceted, including declines in motivation, increased learning disparities, dropout risks, delays in reading, and decreases in academic performance and character. Effective character development was identified as involving positive reinforcement, a character-centered school culture, teacher modeling, and habitual practices. The P5 project, implemented through a project-based learning model, effectively integrated Pancasila values, fostering essential character traits such as perseverance, hard work, and adaptability alongside academic skills. The results highlight the P5 project's role in addressing learning loss by enhancing both academic and character growth. This approach provides practical insights for schools aiming to strengthen student resilience and adaptability. The study concludes that character development and P5 implementation can effectively reconstruct learning experiences in elementary education, supporting both academic recovery and character formation. These findings offer implications for educators and policymakers seeking comprehensive strategies to address learning loss in Indonesian schools.

The Transition Policy from Kindergarten to Primary Education

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2024

This research aims to comprehensively investigate the implementation of the kindergarten to primary school (PAUD-SD) transition policy in Tumpang District. The research method employed is qualitative with a descriptive approach. Data collection involved interviews, document gathering using recording tools and notebooks, along with references from relevant literature. Data analysis was conducted using the qualitative analysis method by Miles and Huberman, involving data reduction, data presentation, and data verification. To validate data authenticity, a triangulation approach was utilized, engaging various methods and diverse data sources. The research findings indicate that the implementation of the PAUD-SD policy in Tumpang District has been initiated through socialization by the district's education coordinator. This led to an agreement to establish PAUD-SD communication forums in each village, involving collaboration between Kindergarten and Primary School teachers to plan joint programs such as parenting for new student's parents, exchange visits between Primary School and Kindergarten, and a decision not to conduct mid-term or final evaluations for firstgrade students for the initial 6 months. However, the formal work program is awaiting guidance from the Malang Regency Education Office. The impact of this research underscores recommendations for promptly taking concrete actions to ensure that the establishment of the PAUD-SD transition forums in Tumpang District effectively achieves its objectives.

Νέα Δημόσια Διοίκηση και εθνικές αξιολογήσεις στη σχολική εκπαίδευση: Το παράδειγμα χωρών-μελών του ΟΟΣΑ και της ΕΕ

Article

Dec 2024

In this study, the application of national assessments and accountability in school education as techniques and tools of the New Public Management in OECD and EU member countries were examined from a comparative perspective. In particular, the basic principles of New Public Management were presented, the available official resources of the 1988-2023 period were explored and the literature on the topic was thoroughly investigated. Data analysis revealed that states with a strong liberal tradition, such as the Anglo-Saxon countries, conducted national assessment programs and results-based accountability to promote marketization and assess school effectiveness and efficiency. In continental Europe and in the Nordic states, assessment and accountability tools were applied to ensure quality in their educational administration system being characterized by high levels of decentralization. In the Southern European countries with a long-term bureaucratic tradition, accountability issues were mainly prevailing in the educational policy-making process. In summary, at the supranational and international level, New Public Management appeared to have strong influence on educational administration in the period under investigation, and external assessment and accountability have remained as techniques and tools for auditing school organizations

Optimizing Organizational Structure in the Muhammadiyah Student Association at Senior High Schools

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

This research delves into the background provided and aims to uncover effective strategies for managing the Muhammadiyah Student Association in schools, to foster strong relationships between educational institutions and the community. The study employs a qualitative method with a descriptive approach. Data were gathered through descriptive studies, documentation related to student activities and the Muhammadiyah Student Association, and interviews with several informants. These informants included the Trustees of the Muhammadiyah Student Association, the Muhammadiyah Student Association Management Committee, and members of the Muhammadiyah Student Association at Muhammadiyah Mlati High School. Data collection techniques comprised interviews and documentation. The findings indicate that while the management of the Muhammadiyah Student Association at Muhammadiyah Mlati High School has been implemented, it has not yet reached an optimal level. This is attributed to existing weaknesses in the management process and the underutilization of available strengths and opportunities.

AI AND DATA SCIENCE IN EDUCATION: BENEFITS, CHALLENGES, AND THE PATH FORWARD

Article

Dec 2024

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and data science are transforming the educational landscape, offering powerful tools that enhance learning experiences, operational efficiency, and accessibility. This article explores the multifaceted role of AI-driven systems-such as adaptive learning platforms, intelligent tutoring, and automated grading-and the ways data science enables personalized, data-informed learning environments. These technologies allow for the customization of educational content to match individual learning styles and needs, promote early intervention for at-risk students, and streamline resource management in educational institutions. While the potential benefits are significant, the integration of AI and data science in education presents distinct challenges. Key concerns include privacy and data security, the risk of bias in AI algorithms, reduced human interaction impacting social-emotional learning, and the digital divide that limits access for some students. Addressing these issues requires thoughtful, ethical approaches to data governance, bias mitigation, and ensuring equitable access to technology. The article provides a path forward for implementing AI and data science responsibly in education. Recommendations include establishing transparent data policies, designing fair algorithms, and balancing technological tools with human interaction to create an inclusive and adaptive educational environment. This approach promises a future where AI and data science support more effective, personalized, and accessible learning experiences for all students.

Implementing online social-emotional learning programs for K-12 leaders: A focus on professional development for teachers

Article

Jan 2025

Emily Mulvihill

The purpose of the basic qualitative study was to explore the perceptions of K-12 online teachers to understand leadership support needed for teachers who are implementing social-emotional learning (SEL) curricula. A basic qualitative study was used for the research design. Participants were recruited through LinkedIn, a social media site, and the target size of the sample size was 15 K-12 online teachers living in the United States. Fifteen participants could not be located using LinkedIn, so snowball sampling was employed. Snowball sampling allowed for recruitment of research participants by asking the current participants to assist in identifying other potential subjects. An open-ended questionnaire was provided to participants who voluntarily participated in the study. A follow-up focus group was conducted with five members who participated in the questionnaire. Focus group participants contextualized the questionnaire responses by expounding on experiences and giving responses in further depth. Findings of the research were shared with teachers, administrators, and other educational stakeholders. In order for SEL to be implemented effectively in an online K-12 setting, professional development is critical.

Advancing Social-Emotional Learning in Elementary Education: Exploring Implementation, Inclusivity, and Long-Term Impact

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Social-emotional learning (SEL) has become a crucial component of student development, increasingly recognized for its positive impacts on both academic success and life outcomes. However, challenges remain in effectively implementing SEL programs across diverse educational settings, particularly in addressing the needs of marginalized and minoritized students. This study explores the integration of AI tools in the literature review process to examine current practices, effectiveness, and gaps in SEL programs. A literature review was conducted using various artificial intelligence applications, including Elicit AI, ChatGPT, and Google Scholar. Relevant articles were identified based on thematic focus and retrieved from credible academic sources. These articles were analyzed for thematic clusters using ChatGPT, and a word cloud was generated to identify supporting keywords. The analysis revealed several key factors critical to successful SEL program implementation: teacher competency, developmentally appropriate skill-building, and nuanced measurement techniques. The study also highlighted the need for more inclusive SEL programs that cater to the diverse needs of marginalized students. Evidence showed that SEL programs have a positive return on investment, contributing to both academic performance and long-term success.

Principals' Social and Emotional Competence: A Key Factor for Creating Caring Schools

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2019

This policy brief, created by The Pennsylvania State University, is one of a series of briefs that addresses the future needs and challenges for research, practice, and policy on social and emotional learning (SEL). SEL is defined as the process through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions. This is the second series of briefs that address SEL, made possible through support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The first set synthesized current SEL research on early support for parent engagement and its effects on child outcomes; SEL in infancy/toddlerhood, the preschool years, the elementary school period, and middle-high school timeframes; and how SEL influences teacher well-being, health equity, and school climate. Learn more at prevention.psu.edu/publications/type/534. Executive Summary School principals have substantial impacts on many aspects of their schools, including school climate and culture, teacher well-being and retention, and students' school success. As such, the personal and professional development of principals is a key element in creating a caring school in which adults and children feel welcomed, cared for, and challenged. It is now recognized that principals experience substantial job-related stress which can compromise their personal well-being as well as their leadership. Surprisingly, the social and emotional development and well-being of principals has received little attention. This brief provides a conceptual model of the Prosocial School Leader, which has two components. The first is the principal's own social and emotional competence (SEC) and the ability to handle stress and model caring and culturally competent behaviors with staff and students. The second component is an enhanced model of leadership in which principals are the prosocial leaders whose responsibility is to ensure that all staff, students, parents, and community members feel safe, cared for, respected, and valued. Principals' SECs, well-being, and leadership form the foundation that influences the effective implementation of social and emotional learning (SEL), school climate, teacher functioning and well-being, family and community partnerships, and downstream student outcomes. This brief reviews the research on principal stress, coping, and positive school leadership. However, the research is currently thin, especially on how principals' professional development, preparation programs, and certification standards can be strengthened to improve principal well-being and school outcomes. We review various strategies to enhance effective leadership by supporting principals to deepen their social and emotional competencies, all of which set the foundation for student success. We conclude with a series of recommendations on research, programs, and policies to build this field and improve the lives of principals for effective prosocial leadership.

Teacher and Principal Perspectives on Social and Emotional Learning in America's Schools: Findings from the American Educator Panels

Book

Full-text available

Jan 2019

Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2019

This article draws out the implications for school and classroom practices of an emerging consensus about the science of learning and development, outlined in a recent synthesis of the research. Situating the review in a developmental systems framework, we synthesize evidence from the learning sciences and several branches of educational research regarding well-vetted strategies that support the kinds of relationships and learning opportunities needed to promote children’s well-being, healthy development, and transferable learning. In addition, we review research regarding practices that can help educators respond to individual variability, address adversity, and support resilience, such that schools can enable all children to find positive pathways to adulthood.

Strengthening Social and Emotional Education as a Core Curriculum Area across the EU. A review of the international evidence

Technical Report

Full-text available

Feb 2018

This NESET research report is focused on how social and emotional education may be strengthened in core curricula across the EU. It includes a review of the most recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies on the effectiveness of social and emotional education and proposes a multilevel framework on how it may be implemented in schools as a whole school approach. Other chapters are related to social and emotional competences, assessment, quality implementation, and case studies from EU countries. It concludes with a set of recommendations for policy makers and school leaders on how schools may strengthen the integration of social and emotional education as a core component of curricula across the EU. The report has been cited in the recent European Commission Proposal for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning (January 2018). It may be accessed at http://nesetweb.eu/en/network-publishes-report-on-strengthening-social-and-emotional-education-as-a-core-curricular-area-across-the-eu/

Social and Emotional Learning and Equity in School Discipline

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2017

Beginning as early as preschool, race and gender are intertwined with the way US schools mete out discipline. In particular, black students and male students are much more likely than others to be suspended or expelled-punishments that we know can hold them back academically. These disparities, and the damage they can cause, have driven recent reforms, including some that incorporate social and emotional learning (SEL) practices. Anne Gregory and Edward Fergus review federal and state mandates to cut down on punishments that remove students from school, and they show how some districts are embracing SEL in their efforts to do so. Yet even in these districts, large disparities in discipline persist. The authors suggest two reasons current discipline reforms that embrace SEL practices may hold limited promise for reducing discipline disparities. The first is that prevailing “colorblind” notions of SEL don’t consider power, privilege, and cultural difference-thus ignoring how individual beliefs and structural biases can lead educators to react harshly to behaviors that fall outside a white cultural frame of reference. The second is that most SEL models are centered on students, but not on the adults who interact with them. Yet research shows that educators’ own social and emotional competencies strongly influence students’ motivation to learn and the school climate in general. Gregory and Fergus describe how one school district is striving to orient its discipline policies around a conception of SEL that stresses equity and promotes both adults’ and students’ SEL competencies. Although such reforms hold promise, they are still in the early stages, and the authors call for rigorous empirical work to test whether such efforts can substantially reduce or eradicate racial and gender disparities in discipline.

What I Learned in School: Reflections on Race, Child Development, and School Reform

Book

Sep 2009

James P. Comer

Transformative Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): Toward SEL in Service of Educational Equity and Excellence

Article

Jul 2019

This article seeks to develop transformative social and emotional learning (SEL), a form of SEL intended to promote equity and excellence among children, young people, and adults. We focus on issues of race/ethnicity as a first step toward addressing the broader range of extant inequities. Transformative SEL is anchored in the notion of justice-oriented citizenship, and we discuss issues of culture, identity, agency, belonging, and engagement as relevant expressions of the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning 5 core competencies. We also point to programs and practices that hold promise for cultivating these competencies and the importance of adult professional development in making these efforts maximally effective for diverse children and youth. We conclude by offering a few next steps to further advance transformative SEL research and practice.

RULER: A Theory-Driven, Systemic Approach to Social, Emotional, and Academic Learning

Article

Jun 2019

Social and emotional learning (SEL) is the process of integrating cognition, emotion, and behavior in our lives. In school settings, it involves systemic practices to incorporate SEL into leading, teaching, learning such that adults and children build self- and social awareness, learn to manage their own and other’s emotions and behavior, make responsible decisions, and build positive relationships. Here, we describe RULER, a systemic evidence-based approach to SEL, including its Theory of Change, and key theories that are foundational to the approach. RULER’s implementation model also is described, which involves training for school leaders, educators, and staff; integrating SEL into the curriculum across grade levels; infusing SEL into schoolwide practices and policies; and engaging families and the broader community. RULER’s current and expected outcomes for children and adults are reviewed, including both proximal (e.g., more developed emotion skills and enhanced classroom climate) and distal (e.g., reduced teacher stress and burnout and greater academic performance) outcomes. RULER’s future directions also are discussed.

A Meta-Analysis of Family-School Interventions and Children’s Social-Emotional Functioning: Moderators and Components of Efficacy

Article

Jan 2019

This meta-analysis examined the effects of family-school interventions on children’s social-behavioral competence and mental health. One hundred and seventeen group design studies yielding 592 effect sizes constituted the current sample. Random effects models were estimated when calculating each pooled effect size estimate, and mixed effects models were calculated for each moderator analysis. The analyses yielded significant effects of family-school interventions on children’s social-behavioral competence and mental health (δ¯.s = 0.332 and 0.391, respectively). Effects on children’s mental health were moderated by race/ethnicity (effects were larger for African American students) and locale (effects were smaller in urban settings relative to nonurban/rural settings). Components found to be significantly related to positive outcomes included both interpersonal, relational processes (i.e., communication, collaboration, and parent-teacher relationship) and tangible, structural elements (i.e., home-based involvement, behavioral supports). These findings indicate the benefits of family-school interventions and have implications for tailoring interventions to family characteristics and communities.

Supporting Systemic Social and Emotional Learning with a Schoolwide Implementation Model

Article

Nov 2018
EVAL PROGRAM PLANN

A strong body of research indicates that evidence-based programs designed to promote social and emotional learning (SEL) can lead to positive developmental outcomes for children and youth. Although these evidence-based programs have demonstrated benefits for students, it is also well-established that programs must be implemented with quality and sustained to maximize positive outcomes. To support schools in implementing SEL that is integrated into all aspects of a school community, the CASEL School Guide implementation model was developed to guide school leadership teams in establishing a vision; selecting, implementing, and sustaining evidence-based programs; and integrating SEL schoolwide. The School Guide model is based on CASEL's School Theory of Action which includes planning, implementing, and monitoring schoolwide SEL. This paper describes findings about the feasibility and degree of implementation of this model as carried out by 14 school leadership teams who were supported by SEL coaches. The participating schools implemented an evidence-based SEL program as the foundation of their efforts to promote schoolwide SEL. Findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing this model in urban schools that primarily serve students of color, as all teams successfully carried out the implementation model and demonstrated increased levels of capacity related to supporting schoolwide SEL.

Systemic Social and Emotional Learning: Promoting Educational Success for All Preschool to High School Students

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

A response to constructive criticism of Social and Emotional Learning